Ethics social research pdf

It will consider and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of applying ethical standards in the workplace. Finanally, the author will share personal or professional experiences that where appropriate.

Importance of Ethics in Business Business ethics is a form of applied ethics that examines ethical principles and moral or ethical problems that arise in the business environment Warren, It applies to all aspects of business conduct and is relevant to the conduct of individuals and business organizations as a whole. Its part of Applied Ethics, a field of ethics that deals with ethical questions in many areas such as medical, technical, legal and business.

As a corporate practice and a career specialization, the field is primarily normative. In academia, it takes an illustrative approache. The category of descriptive ethics is the easiest to understand - it involves describing how people behave and what sorts of moral standards they claim to follow.

Business ethics 4 The category of normative ethics involves creating or evaluating moral standards Vranceanu, Thus, it is an attempt to figure out what people should do or whether their current moral behavior is reasonable. Traditionally, most of the field of moral philosophy has involved normative ethics — many philosophers endevor to explain what in their considered opiiinionnn people should do and why Alzola, In practice, there are six core ethical values.

In addition to these core ethical values, scholars have eastablissshed six fundamental moral principles. The first moral principle is the the Golden Rule which states that do unto others as you would like them do unto you. The forth principle is the Utilitarian Principle that says to take the action that achieves the highest or greater value.

The fifth key ethical principle is the Risk Aversion Principle that states that ethical people should take the action that produces the least harm or the least potential cost. In the main, Busiss ethics holds that an action is permissible, required, or wrong if and only if it is an action that a person of good character would or would not characteristically perform under the circumstances Alzola, Thus, what is right and what is wrong in virtue ethics is defined by reference to people and their traits, which are their basic moral concepts Alzola, Business ethics 5 Leaders, Managers and all employees of businesses are expected to be virtuos people.

It is then expected of them to understand these principles and apply them first in setting the missions and goals, then in their execution of the tasks Alzola, Power and politics issues emerge from the use of power or politics to enforce decisions or changes in projects.

Illegal actions issues include fraud, corruption, blackmailing, and bribery. Role conflicts issues arise from differences in cultural, religious, legal, or career values. In the meantime, those affected could usually feel the impacts but have feeling that they have no say in changing them.

It is emphasied that in international operations, corportions should respect the human rights of their stakeholders. Secondly, they should ensure thir counterpaties or vendors follow the same practice, not to violet human rights.

Finally, they should not do business in countries where human rights violation is the norm Enderle, This actions will conform to the view that business solves societal challenges to ensure the survival and develoment of humanity and that economic profits are just a milestone and not an end in themeslves. Personal Experience There are four ethical perspectives in as reported by Enderle in dealing with international clients on both a personal and country level Enderle, The second is the empire type perspective where international relations is taken as a pure cross-national expansion of dominant domestic relations without significant modification.

This point of view is the, forgot your primitive sensitivities, I have come to civilize you approach. From the host perspective, the perceived asymmetric power relationship often involves misunderstanding, exploitation, and repression.

The last view is the global ethical perspective that appreciates that there are universally expected moral values that each one has to adhere. In working with various clients at different times, I have had to make judgement calls on which perspective will make sense, and each person has to go through that process in international business.

Do not unplug and do not insult a religion in foreign lands, morals and ethics are not universal, or yours are not superior Holley, Business ethics 8 References Alzola, M. More From Bruno Quagliozzi. Bruno Quagliozzi. Grahambelle Cuevas. Gigi Ed Ortiz Pamittan. Popular in Concepts In Ethics. Draven Ignacio.

Dhanica Delos Santos Domdom. Celline Isabelle Reyes. Vibhu Rastogi Maegretchen Adorable. Von Fernando. Despite its profound history, medical ethics before World War II paid more attention to consolidating the power of the medical profession and to arbitrating the disputes within the profession than protecting patients and research subjects 1,2.

But the War stirred the sedate tradition of medical ethics. On August 19, , 20 Nazi physicians and three medical administrators were handed verdicts by the Nuremberg War Tribunal for their participation in murder, torture and other atrocities committed in the name of medical science. Nine of them were sentenced to long prison terms and seven were sentenced to death by hanging for subjecting unwilling victims to medical procedures that were called scientific experiments, thereby having caused their death, disfigurement or disability.

Interestingly, the War also brought about scientific revolution in medicine as during the War the US poured money for more effective military medicine, and the financial support for medical research continued even after the war. Thus, between the early s and , treatment for infections, delicate surgical procedures, life sustaining devices and so forth were discovered and brought into use in medicine and they in term brought forth new ethical problems.

In the s, thus came into existence the new discipline of bioethics. The Nuremberg tribunal also formulated the Nuremberg code for scientific experiments with voluntary informed consent as the central feature.

Further development in the formulation of ethical guidelines for biomedical research, however, had to wait for a controversy or research scandal in the s and s. The first was the impact of a paper by Beecher 3 reviewing ethics in 22 cases of research. It showed that investigators had endangered the health or life of their subjects without informing them of the risks or obtaining their consent.

Soon this was followed by the scandal of research, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, initiated in by the US Public health Service in Macon County, Alabama to determine the natural course of untreated, latent syphilis in black males. It comprised syphilitic and uninfected men as control ; and went on unhindered till when the public outcry and investigations stopped it 4.

This controversy stirred the US government and as a result of the Senate hearings, the Congress passed the Research Act of that made it necessary the establishment of Institutional Review Boards.

At the same time in , the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioural Research was appointed; it operated till and published its now famous Belmont Report in 5.

The social sciences comprise several disciplines, such as anthropology, economics, sociology, psychology, demography, statistics etc. For undertaking research in all of them, scientists cannot but deal with human beings or the data generated by other agencies, including governments, on human beings.

Thus, social sciences deal systematically with the behaviour, status, relationships among people; with the social institutions created and operated by them; and with the social and physical environment in which they function and relate to each other.

A researcher doing social inquiry into the functioning of the market, state, family, health services and systems, individuals in various institutions, and so on, is therefore, dealing with human individuals, collectivities and their institutions.

Besides, social institutions are not simple organisations devoid of their good and bad elements; they all are embodiments of the kind of power structures existing within society. The information made available from the social inquiry could be a powerful tool for further entrenching those in power as well as for unseating them in favour of others; for increasing exploitation and oppression as well as for getting rid of them.

Thus, the use of the findings of social research could have far-reaching consequences for the autonomy, well being and privacy of the individual as well as communities and the society. Indeed, the purpose for which the research is undertaken, the way research is conducted and the manner in which its findings are used; all have direct relationship, involvement or impact on human beings, and that makes social research the most contested terrain in the research enterprise.

The 17th and 18th centuries that heralded systematic social inquiry also were a part of the era of development of modem scientific method, one of the aims of which was to discover, in a rational way, the laws governing nature. While this inaugurated great revolution in science, it also made an impact by bringing the method of science to the social sciences.

This became known as positivism in the philosophy of social sciences. It is an approach that "applies scientific method to human affairs conceived as belonging to a natural order open to objective inquiry" 7. In the early years of development of social sciences, this approach was not seriously challenged. According to Barnes 6, "empirical inquiry in sociology began with the poor, in social anthropology with natives and in psychology, after an early period when highly trained respondents were used, with students".

When the objects of research are highly subordinated and the outcome of research enlightenment or discovery of truth for elite scientists, such approach could easily hold sway; and the scientists hardly talked of ethics in such an endeavour. But unlike atoms and chemicals, these objects are living human beings, and so they not only talk to researchers but also talk back. Society of humans cannot be treated as terrain for unattached objective research in the same way as laboratory, and since they are not static and society not a finished product, the humans also shape and reshape the social laws and structures.

Thus, as the poor and the natives found more voice, the positivist paradigm started getting challenged and the ethical concerns of social inquiry started emerging as a part of the social science discourse. The advent of action research put paid to the detached and objective research, as it necessarily makes researcher committed, not detached; implementer, not mere observer.

In all methodologies, and not only in action research, the researchers do take position by acts of omission or commission, and thus, invariably face ethical problems.

From his insights into the history of evolution of social sciences, their methodologies and theories, Barnes 6 proposed a model comprising four parties in social science research enterprise for understanding the source of ethical concerns. These are: i people or citizens or participants with or about whom the research is being undertaken; ii the researchers or scientists who carry out the inquiry and we may include here the institutions from where the researchers do this ; iii the sponsors of research, who could be government or non-government agents, including the research institution if it is financing and providing material support for research; and iv the gatekeepers or facilitators, who control access to the participants or people or any other research material.

These four parties normally have different positions of power in research enterprise, and so the interaction among them in the process of research creates ethical problems and issues. At the same time, the solution for the ethical issues is also embedded in the way they behave with each other.

According to Barnes 6, "any worthwhile practical attempt to resolve ethical issues in social inquiry has to take into account the distribution of power between scientists, citizens, sponsors and gatekeepers, and will often involve negotiation between the parties rather than the inflexible application of operationalised rules of procedure".

This scepticism for rules, procedures, codes and guidelines for resolving ethical issues is deep-rooted among a large section of social scientists. Perhaps that explains why unlike biomedical research, which also directly deals with human beings, the professional bodies of social scientists delayed formulating ethical guidelines for professional conduct and took even longer to accept them in their research work.

In India, this process is still in its infancy. Nevertheless, internationally, despite enduring internal scepticism the social sciences have made many advances in formulating guidelines. They did so because they also had their Tuskegees. Controversies of social science research and ethics Historically, the concern for ethics in research of any kind got highlighted in response to the controversies around the inappropriate conduct of research.

Each scandal about the gross malpractice in research, and then, each controversy about the correct way of achieving good for the participants as well as research, generated debate on whether and how to regulate and self-regulate the enterprise of research.

The codification of commonly practiced ethical norms in terms of Ethical Codes, Guidelines or Conventions and Declarations were the natural outcome of such concerns at the national and international levels. Thus, in the words of Rance and Salinas 8, "ethical guidelines carry the historical burden of abuses already perpetrated".

However, everything in the guidelines is not directly related to the scandal, there are also many elements that are formulated keeping in mind the best ways used by researchers in resolving the ethical dilemmas and problems encountered and at the same time many elements also reflect the changing power relationship between the four parties; and the relations between the local, national and international researchers and sponsors.

All of them thus make it imperative that controversies and accumulation of wisdom from the past are made educational material for future generations so that similar controversies are avoided. The discipline of anthropology was one of the first to experience problems. In colonial times, till the later part of the 19th century, many of the administrators of the colonial powers took keen interest in understanding the society they had subjugated and were ruling.

In India, the colonial administrators' reports and the anthropological material provide glimpses into the way they looked at the alien culture and society. But much of such interest was either a part of curiosity or a part of immediate interest for setting up a system of exploitation favourable to the power. As the anti-colonial struggles intensified or due to sheer need to rope in the local elite for managing the conquered society, the colonial rulers needed more information and that came from their administrators providing the insights of anthropologists or from the anthropologists themselves.

The anthropologists providing any service for reinforcing the power of the rulers against the natives they were studying inevitably created tension. And controversies on the ethical conduct hit the discipline from time to time. The 1st World War intensified this many fold. In , Price had an opportunity to examine documents of the 1st World War declassified under the Freedom of Information Act by the US government, and what he read provided some verification of the debate that took place in in the American Anthropological Association AAA.

Writing in the November 20, issue of The Nation, Price 9 mentions a letter written on December 20, to The Nation by Franz Boas, the father of academic anthropology in the USA, accusing four American anthropologists for abusing their research position by conducting espionage in Central America during the I World War. However, the governing council of the AAA immediately censured him for abusing his professional position by making such an accusation, and thus absolving the accused anthropologists from wrongdoing.

Price found enough material in the declassified files substantiating the accusation of Boar, but not only that, one of the accused scientists went on to repeat his espionage work for the intelligence agencies of the US government in the 2nd World War too. Similar debate among the social scientists took place during the Vietnam War in which the US social scientists were engaged in their professional capacity by the military on an unprecedented scale, and charges of unethical conduct were made against them and disputed by those involved and others 6.

It was argued that the areas of Vietnam bombed were often determined by using the findings of the social scientists on the rebel influence or hideouts. The use and abuse of social sciences are covered in many writings in last 50 years and longer. Once one goes into the use and misuse, one is not only talking about the essentiality of social scientists not undertaking any classified and covert research, a guidance very prominent now in most of the social science codes or guidelines, but also about being very conscious of the purpose of research and its potential use and misuse.

The ethical obligation of the social scientists to protest and correct the misinterpretation and misuse of their research is therefore now part of many guidelines of social sciences. Project Camelot The relationship between information and power is extensively discussed. Information is power and the powerful exercise their rule by having access to crucial information.

This makes the social scientists both vulnerable and powerful in the face of those who sponsor their work and have first opportunity to use the information generated on what is going on in the society. In the s the controversy around the multi-million dollar project called Camelot by the American University with sponsorship from the US Defence Department brought in sharp focus all such issues and as a fall out of this aborted attempt, stirred the social scientists, particularly of the US, to put their house in order and accept some regulations.

This project came into being as an offspring of the Army's Special Operation Research Office SORO with an initial grant of six million dollars for three to four years, the single largest grant ever provided for a social science project till that time in the US. The project located in the American University, was looked at as basic social science research with participation of academic sociologists, political scientists and anthropologists.

Its objectives included study of preconditions of internal conflicts and discovering the effects of action taken by local governments in easing, exacerbating or resolving these preconditions. The data collection was envisaged from various Latin American countries and later on also from other parts of the world.

Since the US Army sponsored the project, there was clear possibility that it would use the information to cope or manage internal conflicts in other countries 6,11, The name of the University, availability of almost unlimited money and the possibility of undertaking big-range social science research attracted many well-known social scientists from across the US.

Some did feel uncomfortable at the military sponsorship but at the same time believed that the armed forces also needed to be educated. Some were ideologically convinced that the US military could play good role in preventing revolutionary holocaust.

But none of them viewed this as an assignment for spying on behalf of the US government As the core group of the social scientists was put together, the efforts to enlist the academic social scientists from some Latin American countries for collaboration began.

When such efforts were made in Chile, the person doing it did not disclose upfront the military sponsorship though the same was well known within the US. This was construed as camouflage for possible espionage.

Need an account? Click here to sign up. Download Free PDF. Katinka de Wet. A short summary of this paper. Journal of Academic Ethics, 8 4 : DOI: