Journal of Management Research

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Toward A Conceptual Model of Ethics in Research


Affiliations
1 1876 Oak Bend Drive Rockwall, Texas 75087, United States
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


History provides opportunities to look back and evaluate events. Looking back to historical events surrounding research provides the possibility for learning from decisions made and actions taken previously. It is apparent that both good and bad actions were taken during the early years of research. The purpose of this paper was to take a contemporary and historical look into the evolution of ethics in research. This investigation is valuable to higher education because by exploring the events preparations can be made to recognize potential wrongs, avoid or reduce potential wrongs, and determine who is responsible for ethical research. A conceptual model of ethical research is presented. Ethics in research is a shared responsibility. It is dependent on history, the researcher, the reviewers, and the research community. History guides the researcher, the review process, and the research communities.

Keywords

Research Ethics, Research Standards, Research Guidelines, Ethical Review of Research, History of Ethics in Research.
User
Notifications

  • Alfredo, K. and Hart, H. (2011), The University and the Responsible Conduct of Research: Who is Responsible for What? Science And Engineering Ethics, 17(3): 447-57.

  • Anderson, E. E. and DuBois, J. M. (2012), IRB Decision-making with Imperfect Knowledge: A Framework for Evidencebased Research Ethics Review, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 40(4): 951-69.

  • Aultman, J. M. (2013), Abuses and Apologies: Irresponsible Conduct of Human Subjects Research in Latin America, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 41(1): 353-68.

  • Avasthi, A., Ghosh, A., Sarkar, S. and Grover, S. (2013), Ethics in Medical Research: General Principles with Special Reference to Psychiatry Research, Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 55(1): 86-91.

  • Chalmers, D. (2011), Viewpoint: Are the Research Ethics Committees Working in the Best Interests of Participants in an Increasingly Globalized Research Environment? Journal of Internal Medicine, 269(4): 392-395.

  • Condell, S. L. and Begley, C. (2012), Clinical Research Ethics in Irish Healthcare: Diversity, Dynamism and Medicalization, Nursing Ethics, 19(6): 810-818.

  • Fouka, G. and Mantzorou, M. (2011), What are the Major Ethical Issues in Conducting Research? Is There a Conflict between the Research Ethics and the Nature of Nursing? Health Science Journal, 5(1): 3-14.

  • Gupta, A. (2013), Fraud and Misconduct in Clinical Research: A Concern, Perspectives in Clinical Research, 4(2): 144-147.

  • Hansson, S. O. (2011), Do We Need a Special Ethics for Research? Science & Engineering Ethics, 17(1): 21-29.

  • Hart, R. and Belotto, M. (2010), The Institutional Review Board, Seminars in Nuclear Medicine, 40(5): 385-92.

  • Henderson, G. E., Juengst, E. T., King, N. M. P., Kuczynski, K. and Michie, M. (2012), What Research Ethics should Learn from Genomics and Society Research: Lessons from the ELSI Congress of 2011, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 40(4): 1008-1024.

  • Horner, J. and Minifie, F. D. (2011), Research Ethics I: Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR)-Historical and Contemporary Issues Pertaining to Human and Animal Experimentation, Journal Of Speech, Language, And Hearing Research, 54(1): S303-329.

  • Lategan, L. O. K. (2012), The Building of a Responsible Research Community: The Role of Ethics, Journal of Research Administration, 43(1): 85-97.

  • Lindorff, M. (2010), Ethics, Ethical Human Research and Human Research Ethics Committees, Australian Universities’ Review, 52(1): 51-59.

  • King, N. M. P. (2012), Nanomedicine First-in-human Research: Challenges for Informed Consent, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 40(4): 823-30.

  • Juritzen, T., Grimen, H. and Heggen, K. (2011), Protecting Vulnerable Research Participants: A Foucault-inspired Analysis of Ethics Committees, Nursing Ethics, 18(5): 640-650.

  • Rotenberg, M. A. and Rudnick, A. (2011), Reporting of Ethics Procedures in Psychiatric Rehabilitation Peer-reviewed Empirical Research Publications in the Last Decade, American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation, 14(2): 97-108.

  • Schrems, B. M. (2013), Mind the Gaps in Ethical Regulations of Nursing Research, Nursing Ethics, 20(3): 336-347.

  • Smith, B. L. and Korn, D. (2000), Is there a Crisis of Accountability in the American Research University? Minerva, 38(2): 129-45.

  • Vayena, E. and Tasioulas, J. (2013), Adapting Standards: Ethical Oversight of Participant-led Health Research. PLoS Medicine, 10(3): 1-5.


Abstract Views: 789

PDF Views: 12




  • Toward A Conceptual Model of Ethics in Research

Abstract Views: 789  |  PDF Views: 12

Authors

Gail D. Caruth
1876 Oak Bend Drive Rockwall, Texas 75087, United States

Abstract


History provides opportunities to look back and evaluate events. Looking back to historical events surrounding research provides the possibility for learning from decisions made and actions taken previously. It is apparent that both good and bad actions were taken during the early years of research. The purpose of this paper was to take a contemporary and historical look into the evolution of ethics in research. This investigation is valuable to higher education because by exploring the events preparations can be made to recognize potential wrongs, avoid or reduce potential wrongs, and determine who is responsible for ethical research. A conceptual model of ethical research is presented. Ethics in research is a shared responsibility. It is dependent on history, the researcher, the reviewers, and the research community. History guides the researcher, the review process, and the research communities.

Keywords


Research Ethics, Research Standards, Research Guidelines, Ethical Review of Research, History of Ethics in Research.

References