ETHICAL ISSUES IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

ECTS: 2

Participants: All postgraduate students of the Doctoral Programme of Education.

Purpose: This course aims to deepen students’ understanding concerning the ethical issues related to the designing, conducting and reporting of a research. The specific focus is ethical problems that are related especially to the research done in the field of education.

Contents timetable: Lectures 12h.

Timetable: Rauno Huttunen 6h

Heikki Silvennoinen 4h

Janne Lepola 2h

Perfomance: No exam – lecture diary or essay, by email to

rauno.huttunen@utu.fi

WHAT IS RESEARCH ETHICS?

Research ethics involves all ethical issues conserning the scientific research from choosing the research object to social consequences of research. Research ethics deal with all forms unethical action in research including the design, conducting and reporting of research, involving human experimentation, animal experimentation, scientific misconduct such as fraud, fabrication of data, plagiarism, violation of regulation of research, using medical patent unethically… etc.

WHAT IS RESEARCH ETHICS?

The first formal agreement on research ethics is so called Nürnberger Code in 1947. It concerns medical research put it in ten points such:

The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.

The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

No experiment should be conducted where there is a prior reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur.

The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.

The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons.

During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.

During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

Tuskegee syphilis experiment

The Tuskegee syphilis experiment was an infamous clinical study conducted between 1932 and 1972 in Tuskegee, Alabama by the U.S. Public Health Service Research. The purpose of study was to examine the natural progression of untreated syphilis in rural black men. Those men thought they were receiving free health care from the U.S. government. Almost all ten points of Nürnberger Code were violated.

Declaration of Helsinki The Declaration of Helsinki is a set of ethical principles regarding

human experimentation developed for the medical community by the World Medical Association (WMA). It is widely regarded as the cornerstone document of human research ethics.

The Declaration was originally adopted in June 1964 in Helsinki, Finland, and has since undergone six revisions , the most recent at the General Assembly in October 2008.

The fundamental principle is respect for the individual (Article 8), their right to self determination and the right to make informed decisions (Articles 20, 21 and 22) regarding participation in research, both initially and during the course of the research. The investigator's duty is solely to the patient (Articles 2, 3 and 10) or volunteer (Articles 16, 18), and while there is always a need for research (Article 6), the subject's welfare must always take precedence over the interests of science and society (Article 5), and ethical considerations must always take precedence over laws and regulations (Article 9).

http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/index.html

Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity

The National Advisory Board on Research Ethics is an expert body nominated by the Ministry of Education. The Board was founded in 1991 to address ethical questions relating to scientific research and to advance research ethics. The responsibilities of the Board include promoting discussion and informing the public about research ethics in Finland as well as taking initiatives and responding to proposals made on matters concerning research ethics.

FABRI’s instruction concerning the good scientific practice are available in Finnish, Swedish and English:

http://www.tenk.fi/sites/tenk.fi/files/Hyva_Tieteellinen_ENG.pdf

Good scientific practice accroding to FABRI

1. Researchers follow modes of action endorsed by the research community, that is, integrity, meticulousness and accuracy in conducting research, in recording and presenting results, and in judging research and its results;

2. …apply ethically sustainable data-collection, research and evaluation methods conforming to scientific criteria, and practise openness intrinsic to scientific knowledge in publishing their findings; and

3. …take due account of other researchers’ work and achievements, respecting their work and giving due credit and weight to their achievements in carrying out their own research and publishing its results.

Good scientific practice accroding to FABRI

4 . It is in keeping of good scientific practice that research is planned, conducted and reported in detail and according to the standards set for scientific knowledge;

5. … questions relating to the status, rights, co-authorship, liabilities and obligations of the members of a research team, right to research results and the preservation of material are determined and recorded in a manner acceptable to all parties before the research project starts or a researcher is recruited to the team;

6. …the sources of financing and other associations relevant to the conduct of research are made known to those participating in the research and reported when the findings are published; and

7. … good administrative practice and good personnel and financial management practices are observed.

Misconduct and fraud in science (FABRI)

Misconduct in science is manifested as gross negligence and irresponsibility especially in the conduct of research. Other examples of misconduct in science include understatement of other researchers’ contribution to a publication and negligence in referring to earlier findings; careless, and hence misleading, reporting of research findings and the methods used; negligence in recording and preserving results; publication of the same results several times as new; and misleading the research community about one’s own research.

Misconduct and fraud in science (FABRI)

Misconduct in science is manifested as gross negligence and irresponsibility especially in the conduct of research. Other examples of misconduct in science include understatement of other researchers’ contribution to a publication and negligence in referring to earlier findings; careless, and hence misleading, reporting of research findings and the methods used; negligence in recording and preserving results; publication of the same results several times as new; and misleading the research community about one’s own research.

Misconduct and fraud in science (FABRI)

Fraud in science means deceiving the research community and often also decision-makers. It is to give false information or present false results to the research community or to let them for instance in a publication, in a paper presented at a scientific conference, in a manuscript submitted for publication or in a grant application. Different manifestations of fraud are illustrated below in four categories: fabrication, misrepresentation, plagiarism and misappropriation (betrayal).

Misconduct and fraud in science (FABRI)

Fabrication is to present fabricated data to the research community. Fabricated data have not been obtained in the manner or by the methods described in the report. Presenting fabricated results in a research report is also fabrication.

Misrepresentation (falsification) means intentionally altering or presenting original findings in a way which distorts the result. Misrepresentation means scientifically unjustified alteration or selection of results. It is also misrepresentation to leave results or data relevant to conclusions.

Misconduct and fraud in science (FABRI)

Plagiarism is to present someone else’s research plan, manuscript, article or text, or parts thereof, as one’s own.

Misappropriation (betrayal) means that a researcher illicitly presents or uses in his/her own name an original research idea, plan or finding disclosed to him/her in confidence.

The CUDOS set of Mertonian Scientific Norms

Robert K. Merton has formulated ethos of science into four thesis:

Communalism – the common ownership of scientific discoveries, according to which scientists give up intellectual property in exchange for recognition and esteem.

Universalism – according to which claims to truth are evaluated in terms of universal or impersonal criteria, and not on the basis of race, class, gender, religion, or nationality;

Disinterestedness – according to which scientists are rewarded for acting in ways that outwardly appear to be selfless;

Organized skepticism – all ideas must be tested and are subject to rigorous, structured community scrutiny

WHAT IS ETHICS?

“The field of ethics (or moral philosophy) involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior. Philosophers today usually divide ethical theories into three general subject areas: metaethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics.” (http://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/) Descriptive ethics is also a filed of ethics.

Metaethics is value neutral study and classification of ethical theories and other normative ethical systems.

Normative ethics (ethical theories) is the branch of philosophical ethics that investigates the set of questions that arise when considering how one ought to act, morally speaking.

Applied ethics is normative examination of particular issues in private and public life that are matters of moral judgment. Researcher’s ethics is one branch of applied ethics.

Descriptive ethics (comparative ethics; empirical ethics) is empirical study of people’s actual moral beliefs, intuitions, behaviour and reasoning.

WHAT IS ETHICS?

Four Major Ethical Theories

UTILITARISM

ETHICS OF DUTY

VIRTUE EHTICS

THEORY OF MORAL SENTIMENTS/ ETHICS OF CARE

UTILITARIANISSM

Utilitarianism was created by Jeremy Bentham abd John Stuart Mill. Bentham created utilitarismi at the same time when Kant created his ethics of duty. Utilitarism represents opposition to the ethics of duty. There exists no moral laws and such ”un-natural” entities like moral goodness or badness. In utilitarianism act is moral when it results utility or happiness. Outcomes are primary and motive secundary (except in rule-utilitarism).

UTILITARIANISM by Jeremy Bentham

Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do… By the principle of utility is meant that principle which approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever according to the tendency it appears to have to augment or diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in question: or, what is the same thing in other words to promote or to oppose that happiness. I say of every action whatsoever, and therefore not only of every action of a private individual, but of every measure of government.

UTILITARIANISM by Jeremy Bentham

By utility is meant that property in any object, whereby it tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness, (all this in the present case comes to the same thing) or (what comes again to the same thing) to prevent the happening of mischief, pain, evil, or unhappiness to the party whose interest is considered: if that party be the community in general, then the happiness of the community: if a particular individual, then the happiness of that individual.

UTILITARIANISM by Jeremy Bentham

An action then may be said to be conformable to then principle of utility, or, for shortness sake, to utility, (meaning with respect to the community at large) when the tendency it has to augment the happiness of the community is greater than any it has to diminish it.

An Introduction to the Principle of Morals and Legislation

UTILITARIANISM by Jeremy Bentham

Suffering

Pain

Misery

Common Un-wealth

Utility

Happiness

Absence of

Pain

Common Wealth

UTILITARIANISM by John Stuart Mill

Few human creatures would consent to be changed into any of the lower animals, for a promise of the fullest allowance of a beast's pleasures; no intelligent human being would consent to be a fool, no instructed person would be an ignoramus, no person of feeling and conscience would be selfish and base, even though they should be persuaded that the fool, the dunce, or the rascal is better satisfied with his lot than they are with theirs… A being of higher faculties requires more to make him happy, is capable probably of more acute suffering, and is certainly accessible to it at more points, than one of an inferior type; but in spite of these liabilities, he can never really wish to sink into what he feels to be a lower grade of existence… It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question…

R. M. Hare’s and Peter Singer’s preference utilitarianism

Unlike Bentham’s utilitarianism, which emphasizes on maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain, preference utilitarianism promotes actions that facilitates greatest amounts of preferences of those beings involved. The beings involved may be rational, but this is not necessary. Since what is good and right depends solely on individual preferences, there can be nothing that is in itself good or bad: for preference utilitarians, the source of both morality and ethics in general is subjective preference. Preference utilitarianism therefore can be distinguished by its acknowledgement that every person's experience of satisfaction is unique

UTILITARIANISM and research ethics

- Utilitarian point (in Benthamian sense) in research ethics focus on outcome of research and how research contributes Utility, Happiness, Absence of Pain and Common Wealth

- Utilitarian research ethics might follow the principle “the greatest good for the greatest number”. In his book Animal Liberation Peter Singer applies this principle also to animal and demand ceasing the animal testing

Ethics of DUTY by I. Kant

- Immanuel Kant’s presuppose the freedom of will. Kant concludes that although natural necessity covers all happenings in the world, human beings possess an inherent transcendental freedom. The causality of freedom exists alongside the causality of nature. The human being is simultaneously a member of two kingdoms: the kingdom of necessity (natural causality in the sensible world) and the kingdom of freedom (causality of freedom in the intelligible world). The causality of freedom simply means that a human being has the capacity to begin a process in the world just by the power of his or her will.

Kant’s Humanism in a Nutshell

Kant’s Humanism in a Nutshell

According to Kant, people have two kinds of imperatives: hypothetical and categorical imperatives. A hypothetical imperative is a rule of action in the pursuit of a particular goal. A hypothetical imperative dictates “if you want X do Y”. Kant claims that reason also produces the absolute maxim of moral action, the categorical imperative. A categorical imperative is unconditional. It simply says “do X”. This law applies to all rational beings, not only human beings. Again there is no proof or deduction involved in this law. It is exclusively a “fact of Reason”.

Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals

1. Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law (p. 50).

2. Act as if the maxim of your action were to become through your will a universal law of nature (p. 50).

3. Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end (p. 57).

Kant, I. (1996). The Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Criticism of Kant

The Finnish philosopher Terho Pursiainen (1990) claims in his book The Disease Called Caring that if we construct our society solely by following the maxims of Kant or Rawls’s theory of justice, we end up with a formally just society without a heart. Nobody wants to live in such society.

Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen of 1793

Déclaration des droits de l'Homme et du citoyen The French people, convinced that forgetfulness and contempts of the natural rights of man are the sole causes of the miseries of the world, have resolved to set forth in a solemn declaration these sacred and inalienable rights, in order that all the citizens, being able to compare unceasingly the acts of the government with the aim of every social institution, may never allow themselves to be oppressed and debased by tyranny; and in order that the people may always have before their eyes the foundations of their liberty and their welfare, the magistrate the rule of his duties, the legislator the purpose of his commission.

1. The aim of society is the common welfare. Government is instituted in order to guarantee to man the enjoyment of his natural and imprescriptible rights.

2. These rights are equality, liberty, security, and property.

3. All men are equal by nature and before the law.

4. Law is the free and solemn expression of the general will; it is the same for all, whether it protects or punishes; it can command only what is just and useful to society; it can forbid only what is injurious to it….

Universal Declaration of Human Rights by United Nation in 1948

1§. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

2§. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

3§. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

4§. No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

5§. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

6§. Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law…

UN Convention on the Rights of the Child

1§. Everyone under the age of 18 has all the rights in the Convention…

3§. The best interests of the child must be a top priority in all things that affect children.

4§. Governments must do all they can to make sure every child can enjoy their rights.

5§. Governments must respect the rights and responsibilities of parents and carers to direct and guide their child as they grow up, so that they enjoy their rights properly.

6§. Every child has the right to life. Governments must do all they can to ensure that children survive and develop to their full potential.

7§. Every child has the right to a legal name and nationality, as well as the right to know and, as far as possible, to be cared for by their parents…http://www.unicef.org.uk/Documents/Publication-pdfs/betterlifeleaflet2012_press.pdf

Kohlberg’s Kantian theory of moral development

Ethics of duty and research ethics

FABRI’s instructions and recommendation are mainly based on Kantian style duty ethics. FABRI makes recommendation in a form of ethical duties; researchers have such and such duties to follow. There some elements of care ethics, utilitarianism and virtue ethics. Researchers should feel some compassion, should possess some ethical virtues and should consider outcomes researcher example keeping in mind well being of informants etc..

FABRI’s research ethics seems to rely on Kantian moral realism, but it is of course matter of interpretation. FABRI’s recommendation are result of actual ethical discourse (elements of discourse ethics and theory of justice) and thus moral realism is not needed but it cannot be directly ruled out.

Teacher’s Aristotelian VIRTUE ETHICS by Kakkori & Huttunen

Happiness (eudaimon) is the highest good of human being. In order to be good, a human must have been properly educated and trained, and must subsequently continue to follow virtuous habits of life and to do nothing bad whether voluntarily or involuntarily. A human being can be neither good nor happy nor have virtues without education. Also one needs phronesis (practical wisdom) in order to know how to act virtuously.

Teacher must reflect in his or hers virtues. She or he must make an effort to improve his personal characters according to such virtues like social wisdom, liberality, friendliness, dignity, even temper, just etc. For Aristotle the Great Spirit is a person who possesses all the major virtues. It would be too demanding to require that a teacher be a person who possesses Greatness of Spirit. We all should strive toward Greatness of Spirit, but in reality only a few of us will ever achieve it.

http://journals.sfu.ca/paideusis/index.php/paideusis/index

Teacher’s Aristotelian VIRTUE ETHICS by Kakkori & Huttunen

According to Aristotle, we must educate citizens to be virtuous. Without virtues social life in the polis is impossible. Virtues are human properties or human action dispositions which facilitate the human telos, the purpose of human being. The telos of a man is to live a “life worth living” (eudaimon). A life worth living means living a good life - a life lived according to virtues. In order to achieve a good life, man must belong to a polis and receive an education, because without education man cannot achieve phronesis (practical wisdom). A person who possesses phronesis always acts according to virtues and knows what the proper mode of action is in any given social situation.

Some Aristotelian VIRTUES

Flattery Friendliness Surliness

Vanity Greatness of Spirit Smallness of Spirit

Rascality Wisdom Simplenes

Subservience Dignity Stubbornness

Shamelessness Modesty Diffidence

Rashness Courage Cowardice

Boastfulness Sincerity Self-depreciation

Luxuriousness Hardiness Endurance

VIRTUOUS researcher in Aristotelian sense

Virtuous researcher is friendliness and does not undermines bully informants, colleagues, readers etc.. Researcher needs social wisdom and ability to read micropolitical context of research. ”Nerd” like researcher will do many kind of harm to research. ”Good bedside” manners are needed in different phases of research. Virtuous researcher needs also dignity. Stubborness and subservience will not only detroy ethical quality of research but also scientific quality. Sincerity is essential part of virtuous researcher. Boastfulnes and shamelessness might lead into fabrication and other forms of fraud. Self-depreciation and diffidence could be as fatal. Some courage is needed in research, example when seeing fraud or other kind of scientific misconduct. Some hardiness is also needed when researcher encountering ethical dilemmas. Research project might be ethical challenging but one should not give up right away. Most of the time there is ethically sustainable solution if effort is made to find it.

David Hume: Ethics of Moral Sentiments

A Treatise of Human Nature:

-“Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them” (p. 283)

-”…we naturally sympathize with others in the sentiments they entertain of us. Thus self-interest is the original motive to the establishment of justice: but a sympathy with public interest is the source of the moral approbation, which attends that virtue.“ (p. 337)

Enquiry Concerning the Principle of Morals:

- Hume slightly modifies his ethical theory. Instead of “sympathy” Hume writes now of “humanity” which is the basic sentiment that all men have in common and which gives a public character to moral attitudes.

Adam Smith: Theory of Moral Sentiments (TMS)

According to Smith man's has natural inclinations towards self-interest but he has also capacity for sympathy. Sympathy belongs to the humans. “The greatest ruffian, the most hardened violator of the laws of society, is not altogether without it [sympathy].” (TMS i.1.1.5.). Our capacity for sympathy comes from our ability for fellow-feeling. When we see beggar with wounds we feel uneasy sensation in the correspondent part of our own bodies. In Smith’s terminology sympathy refers our fellow-feeling with any passion whatever. Unlike Hume, Adam Smith didn’t believe such thing as “moral sense” (TMS vii 3.3.15). Instead of moral sense Smith speaks about sense of propriety (TMS i.1.3.-4.). Sense of propriety, causes us to develop an ability to put ourselves in others’ positions. Sense of propriety is related to Smith’s idea of the impartial spectator. Smith claims that moral point of view is the moral sentiment of impartial spectator. If we are engaged in moral conflict our instant moral feelings might be more or less biased. We learn to imagine what kind of moral feelings would the impartial spectator feel. The voice of the impartial spectator is a voice of conscience (TMS iii.1.3.).

Gilligan: Ethics of CARE

- Gilligan’s main criticism is that Kohlberg constructs what he considers “the highest stage of moral development” from a male viewpoint and thus it is not neutral and impartial at all. Gilligan claims that the Kohlberg’s Kantian ethic of justice is only one aspect of moral maturity because Kohlberg rejects the side of moral feelings and sentiments. Gilligan develops a theory of the ethic of care. Its highest phase is a stage on which an adult human being recognizes the dual context of justice and care.

- “A feminine ethic of care is an ethic of the relational world as that world appears within a patriarchal social order.”

- Gilligan: In a Different Voice, 1982

Ethics of CARE (Juujärvi)

- Ethics of justice and ethics of care forms two opposite voices

- Ethic of care springs from the presupposition that individuals are connected with rather than separated from each other, inevitably giving rise to the responsibility for caring others.

- Ethic of care represents the morality of the powerless and the underprivileged, in terms of gender, class and race…The explication of the ethic of care helps to visualize new practices in female-dominated care work or teaching work.

The Ethic of Care and Its Development (pp. 2-7)

http://ethesis.helsinki.fi/julkaisut/val/sosps/vk/juujarvi/

Gilligan’s dual context of morality

Level of morality Kohlberg Gilligan’s addition

1. Infant andself-centeredlevel

Pre-conventional- How can I avoid punishment?- What's in it for me?

Care for self- Who cares for me?

2. Level of denying of egocentrism because of the pressure of community

Conventional- I want to be a good girl/boy- Laws and agreements must be obeyed at any cost

Caring for others- What I should do for others?- I must consider the well being of others

3. Level of cognitive and emotional moral maturity

Post-conventional- Laws are contracts; sometimes you have to break them in order to preserve higher moral demands and retain your self-respect

Caring for others and self - Care becomes the self chosen principle- I actively take care of others and myself and avoid violence

Dual context of morality of ethical researcher?

- Researcher also needs some compassion and caring. It is not enough that researcher just follow all ethical duties that example FABRI has recommended. Researcher that possess Kolhbergian post-conventional level of morality but she or he is unable to feel compassion and caring, then that kind of researcher follow relevant ethical maxims but she or he is unable to see importance caring both oneself (well being of researcher) and others (informants, readers of research, people that benefits or gain harm from research etc.). If researcher sacrifice his or hers own mental and physical health when doing socially important research, that is not ethically sustainable research and vice versa (if researcher does not care the well being of others…).

Researher’s virtues & duties according to Juhani Pietarinen

“When we want to know whether some action is carried out well and right, we can follow instructions by Aristotle. He urged to ask first, what is the proper task or purpose of action. Then we should evaluate what kinds of properties or skills is required for the good action. Those skills Aristotle called as virtues (arete) and he divided them into virtues of thought and virtues of character: Virtues of thought concerns acquiring of knowledge and virtues of character concerns other personal properties than intellectual thinking. Then what special tasks research activity has? I conclude that its basic task is the creation of reliable information…What ethical demands should we state for 1) acquiring scientific professionality; 2) producing information, 3) transmiting information; 4) using information and 5) collegial action & loyality”

Pietarinen: Eettiset perusvaatimukset tutkimustyössä, In Karjalainen, Launis, Pelokonem & Pietarinen (eds.) TUTKIJAN EETTISET VALINNAT

Ethical demands/virtues for acquiring and keeping scientific professionality

1.Demand/virtues of intellectual interest: Researcher should be authentically interest in for acquiring new scientific information

2.Demand/virtues of conscientiousness: Researcher should carefully familiarize oneself with his or hers field for the sake reliability of information.

3.Demand/virtues of honesty: Researcher shall not practice fraud

Ethical demands/virtues for producing scientific information

4. Demand/virtues of eliminating danger: Researcher should refrain such kind of research which could cause unreasonable harm. Party that suffers harm could be informants, other researcher, other people, nature, constructed environment etc.

Ethical demands/virtues for transmitting information

5. Demand/virtues of scientific publication: When transmitting information demands of good scientific practice and honesty must be preserved.

Ethical demands/virtues concerning the use of information

6. Demand/virtues of social responsibility: Researcher should care for how scientific information is used.

Ethical demands/virtues concerning the collegial action & loyality 7. Demand/virtues related to the

progressing scientific practice: Researcher should make his contribute science and possibilities for scientific practice. Researcher should participate scientific policy and public discussion concerning the science (its funding, use, public image etc.)

Ethical demands/virtues concerning the collegial action & loyality

8. Demand/virtues related to collegial respect and recognition: Researcher should other researchers and not try to diminish them. This does not mean covering up frauds and scientific misconduct.

Ethical issues concerning collec-tion and use of research data

- when collecting and use research data privacy and anonymity of informants must be preserved

- habeas corpus; state or university shall not violate person's right to his own body

Ethical issues concerning collec-tion and use of research data

Right to privacy means among other things:

- right to solitude- right intimacy- right to anonymity- right to reserve social integrity

Keeping register on persons

- anonymity must be preserved

- laws concerning such register must be followed (in Finland Henkilötietolaki:

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/1999/19990523)- persons must have access to his personal data

- self-determination (right to control how one's life is presented in

research report)

- permission must be asked from informats (why register is needed; research plan; how data is stored; how anonymity is guaranteed; how confidentiality is guaranteed; dealing sensitive - criminal history, sexual orientation, health, political orientation, ethnic origin, party or trade union memberships etc. - issues is illegal without permission)

Ethical issues concerning collection of research data

- When doing interviews researcher must remain in his role and not to take role of police or social worker

- if researcher encounter child abuse (person under 18 years) or serious crime, researcher must contact social office (lastensuojeluilmoitus) or police (report of an offence; rikosilmoitus)

- educational scientist must always consider the interest of child

Ethical issues concerning collection and use of research data

- confidentiality – keeping data in secret; unless case of child abuse or serious crime

- When data consist sensitive material is better to ask written contract on professional confidentiality from all who handle data

Ethical issues concerning collection and use of research data

- When informants are children (or mentally disabled) parent’s (caretakers) written permission is needed

- Also children’s own permission must be asked – teacher or parent shall not for children to participate research

Informing the informants

- Regardless the data collection method, informants should have all the basic information on the research

- Informants have right to know how data is used (who and when) and if data is not destroyed after publication how is it stored

- Data can be stored if informants have give permission and data is anonymised

Informing the informants

Informing consists information on:-responsible researcher

-the aim of research

-the method data collection

-how confidentiality is secured

-how data is used and how long

-other forms that are used to collect information on informants

Anonymising qualitative data

- All direct identicators (name, address, phone number, mail etc.) must be removed

- Names should be modified into pseudonyms or codes

- Removing sensitive data should be considered; kidney cancer -> serious illness

Ethical issues in qualitative research

- According to Steinar Kvale an interview is a moral endeavour

- Interview situation is discreet and the dignity of informants must be recognized

- researchers have the obligation to anticipate the possible outcomes of an interview and to weigh both benefits and potential harm; example interviewing victims of school bullying

- When interview has dealed sensitive or traumatic issues a follow up phone call or visit may be appropriate

- Interview should be equated with confidentiality, informed consent and privacy

Ethical issues in qualitative research

- According to Steinar Kvale an interview is a moral endeavour

- Interview situation is discreet and the dignity of informants must be recognized

- researchers have the obligation to anticipate the possible outcomes of an interview and to weigh both benefits and potential harm; example interviewing victims of school bullying

- When interview has dealed sensitive or traumatic issues a follow up phone call or visit may be appropriate

- Interview should be equated with confidentiality, informed consent and privacy

Ethical relationship between interviewer and informant - Aspects of utilitarism, duty ethics (justice) and

virtue ethics and care ethics are relevant

- Reciprocal relations of recognition; dialogical relationship

- Interviewer shall not manipulate or indoctrinate informants; leading questions are form of manipulation

- Authentic voice of informants should be preserved

- At the end of interview interviewer should ask is there anything else that informant wants say

Ethical relationship between interviewer and informant

- Interviewer should try to create a trustful atmosphere (ethos; reciprocal recognition)

- Good interviewer possess should virtues like friendliness, open-minded, social wisdom, honesty and political correctness (tacitfulness)

- Informant should not be treated only as an object of scientific research

- Interviewer should be truly and honestly interested in what the informant wants tell and reveal