dissertation ethics form

The Research Whisperer

Just like the thesis whisperer – but with more money, how to write a successful ethics application.

She has a particular interest in tuberculosis, viral hepatitis, adolescent health, and the health of people in criminal justice settings.

Kat advises colleagues from diverse backgrounds on research ethics, study design, and data analysis.

She tweets from @epi_punk .

The word “ethics” strikes fear into the hearts of most early career researchers.

Some of the reasons are beyond our control, but there’s actually a lot we can do to make our own experiences of the ethics approval process less painful.

I’m writing this from two perspectives: as an early career researcher (I finished my PhD in 2019), and as a committee member (I’ve sat on an ethics advisory group since the start of my PhD in 2014).

The job of ethics committees is to identify the possible risks in a project, and then assess whether the research team:

• are aware of the risks.
• are taking appropriate steps to minimise them.
• have a plan to handle anything that does go wrong.

To do this, ethics committees need information. If you want your ethics application to get through the process as quickly as possible, you need to give the committee enough detail so that they understand your project and how you are managing any risks.

Getting your application as right as possible the first time makes the whole process go more quickly. If you don’t provide enough information, the committee will come back with questions. You may need to resubmit your application to the next meeting, which could be a month or two away.

Spending more time on your application for the first meeting can save you months later on!

Here are the main questions ethics committees will ask themselves when they assess your project:

• Are there any risks to the researchers? (e.g. Injuries in the lab, safety risks  travelling to study sites, exposure to distressing topics during interviews or data analysis.)
• Are there any risks to the study participants? (From the study procedures themselves; risks to their privacy; risks of distress if they are asked about or exposed to upsetting content)
• Are there any risks to third parties? (i.e. people who aren’t directly participating)
• Could anybody’s privacy be invaded by the data collection process?
• Are there other staff in a lab who might be hurt if there were an accident?
• Are the research team aware of these risks, are they taking steps to minimise them, and do they have a plan if things go wrong?

The only way for the ethics committee to assess this is from the information you put into your application. Carefully think through your project and ask yourself those questions. And then put all of the answers into your application.

Here’s an example:

I am planning a project at the moment that involves interviewing health care providers about vulnerable people that they work with.

What are the risks to me? There aren’t any physical safety risks – I’ll be sitting in my office on the phone.

What about psychological risks? Could I be distressed by the content of the interviews? It’s possible. Some of the people I’ll interview are working with clients who have experienced child abuse, and some of their stories about their work might be upsetting.

What am I doing about these risks? I’m conducting interviews on the phone, rather than travelling to other people’s workplaces or homes. I won’t ask specifically about any distressing topics (minimising the risk), although they might come up anyway. If I get upset about the content of the interviews, I will probably be okay: I’ve worked in this area for many years, and I have strategies for dealing with it when my work upsets me (taking a break, talking to a colleague on the same project later on to help me process my feelings about it).

All of this goes into my application! I don’t write “I will conduct interviews with providers” and then say there are no risks, or that I have managed the risks. I give the committee all the details about each of the foreseeable risks I’ve identified, and exactly what I’m doing about them.

What about the risks to my participants? They could also find the content of the interviews upsetting. Again, my interview tool doesn’t ask directly about any distressing topics (minimising the risk), but it may come up. What’s my plan if my participants get upset? I’ll offer to change the topic, take a break, or stop the interview entirely. I mention this risk in the consent form, and the form will tell participants that they will have these options if they feel distressed. I will repeat this to them verbally at the start of the interview, and remind them that they don’t need to discuss anything with me that they don’t want to. Again, all these details go into my application.

What about risks to other people? Some health care providers might tell me private or sensitive information about their clients, by giving me specific examples instead of talking in general terms. To avoid this, I will ask them at the start of the interview not to talk about specific individuals, but to rather keep their answers general. If a participant does start to talk about an individual, I’ll remind them that this isn’t appropriate. I’ll also erase that part of the recording later on, so that those information isn’t transcribed. Again, all these details go into my application so that the ethics committee can see that I’m aware of the risk and I have a plan to manage it if it occurs.

As a committee member, I see applications get into trouble for a few common reasons.

The first is a lack of information , giving a very brief description of what will be done, without enough detail for the committee to understand the risks and what is being done about them.

The second is inconsistency , when a researcher says one thing on their application form, and something else in their consent form. Check carefully for consistency across all your documents before you submit.

A third is when a researcher proposes to do something that directly goes against the national ethical standards for research (e.g. collecting data without consent when they could get consent, or storing sensitive data in an insecure manner). Do not do this.

Some general tips:

• Find out the deadlines for your committee now, and start your application well in advance. It’s very hard to do a good job at the last minute, especially if you need details from your supervisor or other people in the project.
• Ask a colleague for a previous successful application for a similar project. Take note of the risks they identified, and how they managed them. Look at their consent forms and other documents, and see what you can adapt and reuse.
• Use grant applications for the project as a source of information on background, aims, methods, and outcomes. The format and level of detail required by the ethics committee is often similar.
• Read your country’s ethical guidance for research projects: this is what the ethics committee is working off. Think about which issues apply to your project, and how you can meet each of the standards. Spell this out for the committee.
• Find out whether your institution has specific requirements regarding wording in consent forms, storage of data, handling chemicals in the lab, etc. In your application, tell the committee that you are aware of these requirements and say how your project will meet them. Make sure that your consent forms and other documents are consistent with your institution’s standards. If your institution offers templates, use them!
• Ethics committees also assess the technical soundness of the research because poor quality research wastes time and resources, and exposes people to risks that aren’t justified by adequate benefits. Most committees include statistician and methods experts specifically for this reason (I’m one of them). Give a detailed explanation of your methods, and make sure they are appropriate to your research question. Get advice from a methods expert or a statistician to check that your project is sound – it’s much better to identify problems at the planning stage, rather than after you’ve gotten approval and collected your data.
• If you are doing an application for the first time, get help from your supervisor or thesis advisor. They shouldn’t make you do the application on your own. The more help you can get before you submit, the more quickly your project will get approved.

Share this:

Also I suggest doing the ethics training offered by your institution, or professional body. Recently I attended ANU’s Human Ethics training session. While I occasionally teach ethics, and have been a Chief Investigator on a project, I still found it useful. https://services.anu.edu.au/training/aries-human-ethics-training-sessions

Another useful resource is The Research Ethics Application Database (TREAD), an online database of successful research ethics applications from around the world, some of which include supporting documents such as consent forms and information sheets. (TREAD is also glad to have new submissions so if you have made a successful application, please consider sharing your paperwork – fully anonymised of course.) Info here https://tread.tghn.org/

Like Liked by 1 person

[…] Writing your ethics application? Here’s some tips! […]

Leave a comment Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Ethical Considerations in Dissertation Research: A Comprehensive Guide for Students

Understanding Research Ethics     

8 Ethical Considerations in Dissertation Research      

5 Practical Steps for Ensuring Ethical Compliance     

Conclusion         

Additional Resources       

Writing a dissertation is a significant milestone in an academic journey, representing a culmination of years of study, research, and hard work. However, beyond the technical and methodological challenges, students must navigate the complex landscape of ethical considerations. Ethical research practices are paramount in ensuring the integrity, credibility, and societal value of your study. This comprehensive guide explores the key ethical considerations in dissertation research, providing students with a clear understanding of how to conduct their studies ethically and responsibly.

Understanding Research Ethics

What are research ethics.

Research ethics refer to the principles and guidelines that govern the conduct of research to ensure the integrity, quality, and validity of the research process. These principles protect the rights, dignity, and welfare of research participants and promote trust in the research findings.

Core Principles of Research Ethics

1.     Respect for Persons: This principle emphasizes the importance of respecting the autonomy and dignity of research participants. It includes obtaining informed consent and ensuring confidentiality and privacy.

2.     Beneficence: Researchers should aim to maximize benefits and minimize potential harm to participants. This involves conducting risk assessments and implementing measures to mitigate any identified risks.

3.     Justice: This principle focuses on fairness in the selection of research participants and the distribution of the benefits and burdens of research. It ensures that no group is unfairly burdened or excluded from the potential benefits of the research.

4.     Integrity: Researchers should conduct their work honestly, reporting their findings accurately and acknowledging any limitations or conflicts of interest.

5.     Accountability: Researchers are accountable for their actions and decisions throughout the research process. This includes being transparent about their methods and procedures and being open to scrutiny by peers and the public.

8 Ethical Considerations in Dissertation Research

1. informed consent, what is informed consent.

Informed consent is the process through which researchers provide potential participants with all the necessary information about the study, ensuring they understand what participation entails and voluntarily agree to take part. This information includes the study’s purpose, procedures, potential risks and benefits, and the participant's right to withdraw at any time.

Key Elements of Informed Consent

Voluntariness: Participation should be voluntary, without any coercion or undue influence.

Comprehension: Information should be presented in a way that is understandable to the participants, considering their age, language, and cognitive abilities.

Disclosure: Researchers must disclose all relevant information, including the study’s purpose, procedures, risks, benefits, and any alternative procedures.

Consent Documentation: Consent should be documented, usually through a written consent form signed by the participant.

Best Practices for Obtaining Informed Consent

Clear Communication: Use simple and clear language in consent forms and during the consent process.

Ongoing Process: Informed consent is an ongoing process. Researchers should continue to provide information and answer questions throughout the study.

Cultural Sensitivity: Be aware of and respect cultural differences that may affect how participants perceive the consent process.

2. Confidentiality and Privacy

Why is confidentiality important.

Confidentiality protects the privacy of research participants by ensuring that identifiable information is not disclosed without their consent. It fosters trust between participants and researchers and encourages honest and open participation.

Measures to Ensure Confidentiality

Anonymization: Remove or code any identifiable information from the data to prevent tracing back to individual participants.

Secure Data Storage: Use secure methods to store data, such as encrypted digital storage or locked physical storage for paper records.

Limited Access: Restrict access to data to authorized personnel only.

Balancing Confidentiality with Legal and Ethical Obligations

There may be instances where maintaining confidentiality conflicts with legal or ethical obligations, such as reporting illegal activities or protecting individuals from harm. Researchers should be prepared to address these situations by establishing clear protocols and consulting with ethics committees or legal advisors when necessary.

3. Minimizing Harm

Assessing risks and benefits.

Before beginning a study, researchers should conduct a thorough risk-benefit analysis to assess potential risks to participants and weigh them against the anticipated benefits. Risks can be physical, psychological, social, or economic.

Strategies to Minimize Harm

Risk Mitigation: Implement strategies to reduce potential risks, such as providing counseling services or debriefing sessions for participants.

Ethical Review: Submit the research proposal to an ethics review board to evaluate the potential risks and ensure appropriate measures are in place.

Pilot Testing: Conduct pilot tests to identify and address any unforeseen risks before the main study.

4. Ethical Review and Approval

Role of institutional review boards (irbs).

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) or ethics committees review research proposals to ensure that ethical standards are met. They evaluate the study’s design, consent process, confidentiality measures, and risk mitigation strategies.

Preparing for Ethical Review

Comprehensive Proposal: Prepare a detailed research proposal that includes all aspects of the study design, informed consent process, risk assessment, and data management plans.

Ethical Justification: Provide a clear ethical justification for the study, explaining how it addresses significant research questions and contributes to the field.

Ongoing Compliance: Maintain communication with the IRB throughout the study and submit any necessary amendments for review.

5. Fair Participant Selection

Avoiding exploitation and bias.

Ensure that the selection of participants is fair and equitable. Avoid exploiting vulnerable populations and ensure that no group is unfairly burdened or excluded from potential benefits.

Inclusive and Diverse Recruitment

Strive for inclusivity and diversity in participant recruitment to ensure that the research findings are generalizable and applicable to a broad population.

6. Data Management and Integrity

Ensuring data integrity.

Maintain the accuracy and integrity of the data throughout the research process. Avoid fabrication, falsification, and selective reporting of data.

Data Management Plan

Develop a data management plan that outlines how data will be collected, stored, analyzed, and shared. Include measures to protect data confidentiality and integrity.

7. Reporting and Dissemination of Findings

Accurate and honest reporting.

Report research findings accurately and honestly, including any negative or inconclusive results. Avoid manipulating data or cherry-picking results to support a desired outcome.

Transparency and Replicability

Provide sufficient detail in your methodology and analysis to allow other researchers to replicate your study. Transparency enhances the credibility and trustworthiness of your research.

8. Addressing Conflicts of Interest

Identifying and disclosing conflicts.

Identify any potential conflicts of interest that may affect the research process or outcomes. Disclose these conflicts to relevant stakeholders, including participants, sponsors, and ethical review boards.

Managing Conflicts of Interest

Develop strategies to manage and mitigate conflicts of interest, such as independent oversight or transparency in reporting.

5 Practical Steps for Ensuring Ethical Compliance

1. Develop an Ethical Mindset

Cultivate an ethical mindset by consistently reflecting on the ethical implications of your research decisions. Stay informed about ethical guidelines and best practices in your field.

2. Seek Guidance and Training

Take advantage of ethics training programs and resources offered by your institution or professional organizations. Seek guidance from mentors, advisors, and ethics committees.

3. Document Ethical Procedures

Keep detailed records of your ethical procedures, including consent forms, risk assessments, and IRB communications. Documentation provides accountability and transparency.

4. Engage with Participants

Maintain open and respectful communication with participants throughout the study. Address their concerns and questions promptly and ethically.

5. Continuous Ethical Reflection

Regularly reflect on the ethical aspects of your research, especially when facing new challenges or decisions. Engage with peers and advisors in discussions about ethical dilemmas and solutions.

Ethical considerations are integral to conducting high-quality, credible, and socially responsible dissertation research. By understanding and applying ethical principles, students can protect the rights and welfare of their participants, ensure the integrity of their research, and contribute valuable knowledge to their fields.

From obtaining informed consent to ensuring data confidentiality and integrity, ethical research practices require careful planning, continuous reflection, and a commitment to transparency and accountability. By following the guidelines and best practices outlined in this guide, students can navigate the ethical challenges of dissertation research with confidence and integrity.

Remember, ethical research is not just about following rules—it's about respecting the dignity and rights of those who contribute to your research and ensuring that your work has a positive impact on society.

Additional Resources

To further enhance your understanding and application of ethical considerations in dissertation research, here are some valuable resources, including books, online courses, articles, and institutional guidelines:

Books and Guides:

"Ethics in Qualitative Research" by Tina Miller, Maxine Birch, Melanie Mauthner, and Julie Jessop : This book explores ethical issues specific to qualitative research, providing practical guidance and real-world examples.

"The Ethics of Social Research: Surveys and Experiments" by Joan E. Sieber: Focuses on ethical issues in survey and experimental research, offering practical advice for researchers.

"Ethical Considerations in Qualitative Research" by Sarah J. Tracy: An article discussing ethical challenges and best practices in qualitative research.

"Informed Consent in Social Research" by Alan Aldridge: Explores the complexities of obtaining informed consent in social science research.

"The Role of Institutional Review Boards in Health Services Research" by Jeffrey A. Cooper: Discusses the function and importance of IRBs in overseeing ethical research practices.

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics (JERHRE): Publishes articles on ethical issues in human research, offering insights and case studies from various disciplines.

Institutional Guidelines and Resources:

University Research Ethics Committees: Many universities have their own ethics committees and resources for guiding students through the ethical approval process. Check your institution's website for specific guidelines and support.

Lined and Blank Notebooks: Available for purchase from Amazon , we offer a selection of lined and blank notebooks designed for students to capture all dissertation-related thoughts and research in one centralized place, ensuring that you can easily access and review your work as the project evolves.

The lined notebooks provide a structured format for detailed notetaking and organizing research questions systematically

The blank notebooks offer a free-form space ideal for sketching out ideas, diagrams, and unstructured notes.

By utilizing these resources, you can deepen your understanding of hypothesis writing and testing, enhance your research skills , and ensure that your dissertation is supported by robust and credible data analysis.

As an Amazon Associate, I may earn from qualifying purchases.

Dissertation Literature Review: Key Steps and Best Practices

Writing your dissertation hypothesis: a comprehensive guide for students.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• Ethical Considerations in Research | Types & Examples

Ethical Considerations in Research | Types & Examples

Published on October 18, 2021 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on May 9, 2024.

Ethical considerations in research are a set of principles that guide your research designs and practices. Scientists and researchers must always adhere to a certain code of conduct when collecting data from people.

The goals of human research often include understanding real-life phenomena, studying effective treatments, investigating behaviors, and improving lives in other ways. What you decide to research and how you conduct that research involve key ethical considerations.

These considerations work to

• protect the rights of research participants
• enhance research validity
• maintain scientific or academic integrity

Table of contents

Why do research ethics matter, getting ethical approval for your study, types of ethical issues, voluntary participation, informed consent, confidentiality, potential for harm, results communication, examples of ethical failures, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research ethics.

Research ethics matter for scientific integrity, human rights and dignity, and collaboration between science and society. These principles make sure that participation in studies is voluntary, informed, and safe for research subjects.

You’ll balance pursuing important research objectives with using ethical research methods and procedures. It’s always necessary to prevent permanent or excessive harm to participants, whether inadvertent or not.

Defying research ethics will also lower the credibility of your research because it’s hard for others to trust your data if your methods are morally questionable.

Even if a research idea is valuable to society, it doesn’t justify violating the human rights or dignity of your study participants.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Before you start any study involving data collection with people, you’ll submit your research proposal to an institutional review board (IRB) .

An IRB is a committee that checks whether your research aims and research design are ethically acceptable and follow your institution’s code of conduct. They check that your research materials and procedures are up to code.

If successful, you’ll receive IRB approval, and you can begin collecting data according to the approved procedures. If you want to make any changes to your procedures or materials, you’ll need to submit a modification application to the IRB for approval.

If unsuccessful, you may be asked to re-submit with modifications or your research proposal may receive a rejection. To get IRB approval, it’s important to explicitly note how you’ll tackle each of the ethical issues that may arise in your study.

There are several ethical issues you should always pay attention to in your research design, and these issues can overlap with each other.

You’ll usually outline ways you’ll deal with each issue in your research proposal if you plan to collect data from participants.

Voluntary participation means that all research subjects are free to choose to participate without any pressure or coercion.

All participants are able to withdraw from, or leave, the study at any point without feeling an obligation to continue. Your participants don’t need to provide a reason for leaving the study.

It’s important to make it clear to participants that there are no negative consequences or repercussions to their refusal to participate. After all, they’re taking the time to help you in the research process , so you should respect their decisions without trying to change their minds.

Voluntary participation is an ethical principle protected by international law and many scientific codes of conduct.

Take special care to ensure there’s no pressure on participants when you’re working with vulnerable groups of people who may find it hard to stop the study even when they want to.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Informed consent refers to a situation in which all potential participants receive and understand all the information they need to decide whether they want to participate. This includes information about the study’s benefits, risks, funding, and institutional approval.

You make sure to provide all potential participants with all the relevant information about

• what the study is about
• the risks and benefits of taking part
• how long the study will take
• your supervisor’s contact information and the institution’s approval number

Usually, you’ll provide participants with a text for them to read and ask them if they have any questions. If they agree to participate, they can sign or initial the consent form. Note that this may not be sufficient for informed consent when you work with particularly vulnerable groups of people.

If you’re collecting data from people with low literacy, make sure to verbally explain the consent form to them before they agree to participate.

For participants with very limited English proficiency, you should always translate the study materials or work with an interpreter so they have all the information in their first language.

In research with children, you’ll often need informed permission for their participation from their parents or guardians. Although children cannot give informed consent, it’s best to also ask for their assent (agreement) to participate, depending on their age and maturity level.

Anonymity means that you don’t know who the participants are and you can’t link any individual participant to their data.

You can only guarantee anonymity by not collecting any personally identifying information—for example, names, phone numbers, email addresses, IP addresses, physical characteristics, photos, and videos.

In many cases, it may be impossible to truly anonymize data collection . For example, data collected in person or by phone cannot be considered fully anonymous because some personal identifiers (demographic information or phone numbers) are impossible to hide.

You’ll also need to collect some identifying information if you give your participants the option to withdraw their data at a later stage.

Data pseudonymization is an alternative method where you replace identifying information about participants with pseudonymous, or fake, identifiers. The data can still be linked to participants but it’s harder to do so because you separate personal information from the study data.

Confidentiality means that you know who the participants are, but you remove all identifying information from your report.

All participants have a right to privacy, so you should protect their personal data for as long as you store or use it. Even when you can’t collect data anonymously, you should secure confidentiality whenever you can.

Some research designs aren’t conducive to confidentiality, but it’s important to make all attempts and inform participants of the risks involved.

As a researcher, you have to consider all possible sources of harm to participants. Harm can come in many different forms.

• Psychological harm: Sensitive questions or tasks may trigger negative emotions such as shame or anxiety.
• Social harm: Participation can involve social risks, public embarrassment, or stigma.
• Physical harm: Pain or injury can result from the study procedures.
• Legal harm: Reporting sensitive data could lead to legal risks or a breach of privacy.

It’s best to consider every possible source of harm in your study as well as concrete ways to mitigate them. Involve your supervisor to discuss steps for harm reduction.

Make sure to disclose all possible risks of harm to participants before the study to get informed consent. If there is a risk of harm, prepare to provide participants with resources or counseling or medical services if needed.

Some of these questions may bring up negative emotions, so you inform participants about the sensitive nature of the survey and assure them that their responses will be confidential.

The way you communicate your research results can sometimes involve ethical issues. Good science communication is honest, reliable, and credible. It’s best to make your results as transparent as possible.

Take steps to actively avoid plagiarism and research misconduct wherever possible.

Plagiarism means submitting others’ works as your own. Although it can be unintentional, copying someone else’s work without proper credit amounts to stealing. It’s an ethical problem in research communication because you may benefit by harming other researchers.

Self-plagiarism is when you republish or re-submit parts of your own papers or reports without properly citing your original work.

This is problematic because you may benefit from presenting your ideas as new and original even though they’ve already been published elsewhere in the past. You may also be infringing on your previous publisher’s copyright, violating an ethical code, or wasting time and resources by doing so.

In extreme cases of self-plagiarism, entire datasets or papers are sometimes duplicated. These are major ethical violations because they can skew research findings if taken as original data.

You notice that two published studies have similar characteristics even though they are from different years. Their sample sizes, locations, treatments, and results are highly similar, and the studies share one author in common.

Research misconduct

Research misconduct means making up or falsifying data, manipulating data analyses, or misrepresenting results in research reports. It’s a form of academic fraud.

These actions are committed intentionally and can have serious consequences; research misconduct is not a simple mistake or a point of disagreement about data analyses.

Research misconduct is a serious ethical issue because it can undermine academic integrity and institutional credibility. It leads to a waste of funding and resources that could have been used for alternative research.

Later investigations revealed that they fabricated and manipulated their data to show a nonexistent link between vaccines and autism. Wakefield also neglected to disclose important conflicts of interest, and his medical license was taken away.

This fraudulent work sparked vaccine hesitancy among parents and caregivers. The rate of MMR vaccinations in children fell sharply, and measles outbreaks became more common due to a lack of herd immunity.

Research scandals with ethical failures are littered throughout history, but some took place not that long ago.

Some scientists in positions of power have historically mistreated or even abused research participants to investigate research problems at any cost. These participants were prisoners, under their care, or otherwise trusted them to treat them with dignity.

To demonstrate the importance of research ethics, we’ll briefly review two research studies that violated human rights in modern history.

These experiments were inhumane and resulted in trauma, permanent disabilities, or death in many cases.

After some Nazi doctors were put on trial for their crimes, the Nuremberg Code of research ethics for human experimentation was developed in 1947 to establish a new standard for human experimentation in medical research.

In reality, the actual goal was to study the effects of the disease when left untreated, and the researchers never informed participants about their diagnoses or the research aims.

Although participants experienced severe health problems, including blindness and other complications, the researchers only pretended to provide medical care.

When treatment became possible in 1943, 11 years after the study began, none of the participants were offered it, despite their health conditions and high risk of death.

Ethical failures like these resulted in severe harm to participants, wasted resources, and lower trust in science and scientists. This is why all research institutions have strict ethical guidelines for performing research.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Normal distribution
• Measures of central tendency
• Chi square tests
• Confidence interval
• Quartiles & Quantiles
• Cluster sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Thematic analysis
• Cohort study
• Peer review
• Ethnography

Research bias

• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Conformity bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Availability heuristic
• Attrition bias
• Social desirability bias

Ethical considerations in research are a set of principles that guide your research designs and practices. These principles include voluntary participation, informed consent, anonymity, confidentiality, potential for harm, and results communication.

Scientists and researchers must always adhere to a certain code of conduct when collecting data from others .

These considerations protect the rights of research participants, enhance research validity , and maintain scientific integrity.

Research ethics matter for scientific integrity, human rights and dignity, and collaboration between science and society. These principles make sure that participation in studies is voluntary, informed, and safe.

Anonymity means you don’t know who the participants are, while confidentiality means you know who they are but remove identifying information from your research report. Both are important ethical considerations .

You can only guarantee anonymity by not collecting any personally identifying information—for example, names, phone numbers, email addresses, IP addresses, physical characteristics, photos, or videos.

You can keep data confidential by using aggregate information in your research report, so that you only refer to groups of participants rather than individuals.

These actions are committed intentionally and can have serious consequences; research misconduct is not a simple mistake or a point of disagreement but a serious ethical failure.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Bhandari, P. (2024, May 09). Ethical Considerations in Research | Types & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved July 4, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/research-ethics/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Other students also liked, data collection | definition, methods & examples, what is self-plagiarism | definition & how to avoid it, how to avoid plagiarism | tips on citing sources, what is your plagiarism score.

Do I Need to Complete an Ethics Form?

The Importance of Ethics and Health and Safety Forms

• First Online: 19 October 2023

Cite this chapter

• Sue Reeves   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3017-0559 3 &
• Bartek Buczkowski   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4146-3664 4  

419 Accesses

This chapter emphasises the importance of ethics, and health and safety and considers the corresponding documentation, including participant consent. Both ethical approval and a health and safety risk assessment need to be completed before embarking on any research project and should be considered an important part of the research process as they are there to guard the quality and integrity of your research, protect you, your participants, and society.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

ASAB Ethical Committee/ABS Animal Care Committee (2023) Guidelines for the ethical treatment of nonhuman animals in behavioural research and teaching. Animal Behaviour 195:I–XI. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2022.09.006

Article   Google Scholar  

Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee (2023) Does my study need ethical approval? https://www.bio.cam.ac.uk/psyres/approval . Accessed 28 Jan 2023

Coffelt T (2017) The SAGE encyclopaedia of communication research methods, vol 4. SAGE Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483381411 . Accessed 28 Jan 2023

Book   Google Scholar  

Gov.UK (2023) Data protection. https://www.gov.uk/data-protection . Accessed 25 Jan 2023

Harris J (2005) Scientific research is a moral duty. J Med Ethics 31:242

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Health and Safety Executive (2023) Health and safety at work etc Act 1974. https://www.hse.gov.uk/legislation/hswa.htm . Accessed 27 Jan 2023

Home Office (2022) . Guidance on the operation of the U.K. legislation on animals used in research and codes of practice. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/research-and-testing-using-animals

Robson C (2002) Real world research: a resource for social scientists and practitioner researchers, 2nd edn. Blackwell, Oxford

Google Scholar  

Tamin J (2010) Beyond the immediate players: do researchers have moral obligations to others? Research Ethics Review 6:76–80

UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) (2021) Framework for research ethics. https://www.ukri.org/councils/esrc/guidance-for-applicants/research-ethics-guidance/framework-for-research-ethics/our-core-principles/#:~:text=The%20six%20principles%20of%20ethical%20research&text=the%20rights%20and%20dignity%20of ,accountability%20should%20be%20clearly%20defined. Accessed 24 Jan 2023

UKRI (2023) Consent. https://www.ukri.org/councils/esrc/guidance-for-applicants/research-ethics-guidance/consent/ . Accessed 28 Jan 2023

World Medical Association (2022) WMA Declaration of Helsinki–ethics principals for medical research involving human subjects. https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/ . Accessed 23 Jan 2023

Further Reading

Oliver P (2010) The students guide to research ethics. Open University Press, London

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Roehampton, London, UK

Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK

Bartek Buczkowski

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Reeves, S., Buczkowski, B. (2023). Do I Need to Complete an Ethics Form?. In: Mastering Your Dissertation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41911-9_5

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41911-9_5

Published : 19 October 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-41910-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-41911-9

eBook Packages : Biomedical and Life Sciences Biomedical and Life Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Library Guides

Dissertations 4: methodology: ethics.

• Introduction & Philosophy
• Methodology

Research Ethics

In the research context, ethics can be defined as "the standards of behaviour that guide your conduct in relation to the rights of those who become the subject of your work, or are affected by it" (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill 2015, p239).  

The University itself is guided by the fundamental principle that research involving humans and /or animals and/or the environment should involve no more than minimal risk of harm to physical and psychological wellbeing.  

Thus, ethics relates to many aspects of your research, including the conduct towards: 

The participants  of your primary research (experiments, interviews etc). You will need to explain that participation is voluntary, and they have the right to withdraw at any time. You will need the participants' informed consent. You will need to avoid harming the participants, physically as well as mentally. You will need to respect the participants’ privacy and offer the right to anonymity. You will need to manage their personal data confidentially, also according to legislation such as the Data Protection Act 2018. You will need to be truthful and accurate when using the information provided by the participants.  

The authors you have used as secondary sources. You will need to acknowledge their work and avoid plagiarism by doing the proper citing and referencing. 

The readers of your research. You will need to exercise the utmost integrity, honesty, accuracy and objectivity in the writing of your work.   

The researcher . You will need to ensure that the research will be safe for you to undertake. 

Your research may entail some risk, but risk has to be analysed and minimised through risk  assessment. Depending on the type of your research, your research proposal may need to  be approved by an Ethics Committee, which will assess your research proposal in light of the  elements mentioned above. Again, you are advised to use a research methods book for further guidance.  

Research Ethics Online Course

Introduction to Research Ethics: Working with People  

Find out how to conduct ethical research when working with people by studying this online course for university students. Course developed by the University of Leeds. 

• << Previous: Methods
• Next: Methodology >>
• Last Updated: Sep 14, 2022 12:58 PM
• URL: https://libguides.westminster.ac.uk/methodology-for-dissertations

CONNECT WITH US

Template documents

The University has developed template participant documents based on key ethical issues and legal requirements.

These outline the key information which must be relayed to participants for all research involving human participants, their data or samples. They provide a template for how this information can be presented when using a document format (see the guidance on consent for information on alternative formats). 

These templates (or the information, if presented in an alternative format) should be tailored to your study, participants and their accessibility requirements (see 'accessibility resources' below) - modifiable content is in red text, and guidance is in blue text.

In the templates there are three types of text:

• Red text - text which you should adjust to suit your study
• Blue text - provides guidance on using the template
• Black text - core information which must usually be included.

If you need to adjust the black text you must provide details and justification in Q31 of the ethical review application form (Word) .

Participant advertisement

The  participant advertisement (Word) or an alternative containing the same information must be used for projects where adverts will be used to recruit participants (displayed physically, or sent via post or email). Also consider the University's guidance on branding .

Participant information sheet (PIS)

The  participant information sheet (PIS) (Word) , or an alternative containing the same information, must be used for all research involving living human participants.

• provides key information about the project
• helps to ensure consent is fully informed
• helps to ensure consent is freely given
• contains statements on use of participants’ data in compliance with data protection law.

It is essential that participants are given:

• a copy of the PIS that they can retain such as a hardcopy or downloadable PDF (if participants can read)
• time to consider the participant information and decide whether to take part.

There may be some instances where a PIS and consent form (in any format) are not appropriate, for example when accessing large external datasets via a 'gatekeeper'. If you feel this applies to you, discuss this with your School ethics committee and provide justification in Question 31 of the ethical review application form.

Anonymous participants

If you are conducting a study where the participants will be anonymous from the outset (such as an online questionnaire) you can use the  Participant information sheet (anonymous) (Word)

Consent form

The  consent form (Word) , or an equally robust consent process, must be used for all research projects involving living human participants.

Written consent is considered the 'gold standard'. In limited circumstances an alternative such as oral consent may be appropriate but this must be justified in the ethics application - see the guidance on consent .

Using the consent template ensures and evidences that participants have explicitly provided consent:

• to participate in your project
• in full knowledge of the nature of the project.

It also ensures and provides evidence that participants have consented explicitly to audiovisual recordings or photographs, future contact from researchers, or other optional components. If possible, you should allow individuals to participate even if they decline optional components.

The consent form contains sections on the use of participant data, ensuring compliance with data protection law.

There may be some instances where a participant information sheet and consent form (in any format) are not appropriate, for example when accessing large external datasets via a 'gatekeeper'. If you feel this applies to you, discuss this with your School ethics committee  and provide justification in Question 31 of the ethical review application form.

The  participant debrief (Word) , or an equivalent debriefing process, must be used for projects that involve:

• withholding of information
• where the participant is likely to experience distress.

You must give the contact details of any support services or organisations that the participant may find helpful. The debrief should usually be in a format that participants can retain, such as a hardcopy or pdf but may be supplied in an alternative format if literacy or accessibility needs require.

For other projects, the participant debrief (Word) is not mandatory but can be helpful to:

• ensure participants know that their contribution is valued
• remind participants of the aims of the research
• remind participants of the contact details of the researcher
• detail how participants can access the findings of the research when the project has completed.

Participant information and consent for child participants

When your research involves child participants, please use the age-appropriate versions of the participant information sheet (PIS) and consent forms as indicated below (PG indicates 'parent or guardian'). Consider the guidance above on 'normal' templates and alternative formats.

Both parent (or guardian) and child should be given information about the study and provide consent (parent and older children) plus ongoing assent (children). Assent may be verbal for younger children. For very young or non-verbal children researchers must describe in their ethics application how they will ensure ongoing assent and identify any signs of discomfort or a child's wish to discontinue participation.

These age groups are provided for guidance; however, researchers should consider which participant information and consent options are most appropriate for their participants (for example, due to literacy or comprehension levels). 

Researchers working with child participants should seek guidance from the Child Panel representative, Barbara Dritschel ( [email protected] ).

Child aged 0 to 8 years

Participant information:

• Parents or guardians should be given the PIS - PG (0-12y) (Word) .
• The child should be given information verbally.
• Parents or guardians should be given the consent form - PG (0-12y) (Word) .
• The child’s ongoing assent should be ensured throughout the research activity.

Child aged 8 to 12 years

• The child should be either given the information verbally, or using the PIS - child (12-16y) (Word) , depending on their literacy and comprehension levels.

Child aged 12 to 16 years

• Parents or guardians should be given the PIS - PG (12-16y) (Word) .
• The child should be given the PIS - child (12-16y) (Word) .
• Parents or guardians should be given the consent form - PG (12-16y) (Word) .
• The child should be given the consent form - child (12-16y) (Word) and their ongoing assent ensured throughout the research activity.

Letter to school

The template letters to schools must be used when planning research within a school, such as with pupils.

There are two template letters to reflect the process of gaining approval:

• The  letter to school - agreement in principle (Word) is to establish with the school whether they agree, in principle, to participate. You will need this to apply for ethical and Local Education Authority (LEA) approval.
• The  letter to school - study commencing (Word) should be used, once you have obtained ethical and LEA approval, to confirm that the school is still willing to participate, and to arrange the practicalities of the research.

Both letters include summary information about the project and what the participants, and the school, will be required to do.

Letter to parent or guardian

The  letter to parent or guardian (Word) , or an alternative format if needed due to accessibility or literacy requirements,  must be used when planning research with participants under the age of 16 years.

The letter includes summary information about the project and what the participant, and the parent if appropriate, will be required to do.

Accessibility resources

Researchers may find some of the following resources useful when considering accessibility and readability of participant documents. 

Researchers should also consider the sections above on participant information sheets and consent forms for children. If researchers need to use a simplified version of the legal basis statement for the participant information sheet, they should use the version included in the template  PIS - child (12-16y) (Word) as this was developed in collaboration with the University's Data Protection Officer to ensure it meets the University's obligations regarding GDPR. 

University pages 

Equality, diversity and inclusion

Diversity online training

Digital standards  (this contains a variety of resources on accessibility, content standards and house style that are primarily aimed at University web pages and digital content but which can also be useful when thinking about participant information or where participants will be recruited via a web page).

Tools to assess readability

Hemingway Editor

SMOG (simplified measure of gobbledygook) calculator

Microsoft Word - get your document's readability and level statistics

Readability Formulas

Resources for suggested wording, styles and formatting

The British Dyslexia Association style guide

The Plain English Campaign

Microsoft Word - make your Word documents accessible to people with disabilities

Other tools and resources

Microsoft Office 365 - accessibility checker

We Are Colorblind - resources for colour blind friendly designs

KnightLab at Northwestern University - blog on colour blind friendly graphics for reporting data

Browser does not support script.

• Departments and Institutes
• Research centres and groups
• Chair's Blog: Summer Term 2022
• Staff wellbeing

Research Ethics Submission System

This page provides instructions for using the online ethics review submission system and links to access the ethics review form. 

Before completing an ethics review form you may find the following resources helpful: -  Ethics review in a nutshell : provides an   overview of the ethics review process. - A pdf of  what questions you will be asked   in the form.  - Ethics review considerations: A quick guide for researchers (students or staff) - Detailed user instructions for using the online submission system are below. 

For general research ethics guidance, links to training materials, etc., please see the main  research ethics webpage  

If you have technical issues with the review form please try refreshing the page or try an alternative browser. If you still have issues please contact the systems team .

• instructions for student researchers 
• instructions for staff researchers
• instructions for supervisors and Departmental approvers
• guidance for programme managers
• how to download a pdf copy of your review form
• Amendments post-approval: see paragraphs 29-31 of the  Research Ethics Policy and complete the  amendments form . (For very minor amendments please email the  Research Ethics  team to check if an amendments form is required.)

Staff can find the name of their Departmental faculty ethics approver here .

To access the online review system, please use the link in the relevant box on the right.

If you have any technical issues please contact the support team   If you have any ethics-related questions please contact the research ethics team   If you require copies of instructions or any related guidance in an alternative format, or other reasonable adjustments, please let us know by  contacting us .

Access the review system Access for researchers (staff or students)

Access the review system Access for approvers or managers

Student intranet

Ethical approval

Student research occasionally raises ethical issues.

If you are undertaking research for a course unit, dissertation, thesis or project that involves collecting data on or from human participants, it will involve ethical considerations and University requirements for research ethics.

For coursework involving limited data collection such as evaluations, market research or working with professionals (note: students are not classed as professionals) ethical approval is not normally required but this is subject to local requirements and the decision is made by your course leader. Therefore, it is important to verify this with your course leader before you start your research.

Ethical approval of coursework is required if:

• topics are sensitive or contentious;
• vulnerable groups are included such as NHS patients, children under 18, adults with learning difficulties, adults with a terminal illness, mental illness or dementia, adults in care homes, adults or children in emergency situations (eg refugees, asylum seekers, prisoners or criminals, young offenders, users of illegal drugs or illegal substances);
• unless otherwise exempt, the data collected will form the basis of a publication or similar.

Please note that even if your project does not require formal ethical approval you must adhere to the best practice guidelines:

• a  GDPR Compliant participant information sheet and content form/script must be used, normally your course leader will have copies available for you to use;
• ethical consent must be obtained and you must provide the signed copies to your course leader (in their role as the data custodian);
• any audio transcripts must be anonymised and the original recordings deleted;
• all data protection expectations regarding storage, confidentiality and retention must be followed.

 If, after speaking to your course leader, you need further advice please contact the General Reviewer for your area.

Projects, dissertations and thesis

Before you begin your ethics application, you should complete the Ethics Decision Tool . The tool will advise whether ethical clearance is needed for your project. Ideally, you will complete the Ethics Decision Tool with your supervisor but if this is not possible, take a screengrab of the outcome and share it with your supervisor for discussion. 

If the tool and your supervisor agree that ethical approval is not required, your supervisor will email the screengrab to your Programme Administrator so that this is recorded and you can proceed with your project or research.

If the tool determined that you require ethical approval then you need to log on to the online  Ethical Review Manager (ERM)  to create a new ethics application and have it reviewed and approved so you can start your project or research, without receiving formal ethical approval by email you cannot start your research.

You may view the School of Social Sciences guidance  and the health, safety and risk information online, there is also ethics guidance for staff members.

All ethics applications are submitted via the Ethical Review Manager (ERM), please read our guidance on completing the ERM form  or read our frequently asked questions (FAQs)  document.

Further information on good research conduct, misconduct and policies and guidelines can be found on our research governance, ethics and integrity webpage on the central University website.

The application

Students and supervisors are advised to complete the application together. There are two main routes for obtaining ethical approval for your research project. The first set of questions, as well as the School of Social Sciences (SoSS) guidance notes, will determine which route you need to follow via the Ethical Review Manager (ERM).

• The SoSS Research Ethics Template (do not take this route if your data collection does not comply with the template in the SoSS guidance notes).
• The University Research Ethics Committee (UREC) reviews projects that fall outside of the scope of the SoSS template and/or require full ethical review.
• Projects involving NHS patients/users typically require review by an NHS REC.

Completing the application

When completing your application, consult with the help of bubbles beside each question as they contain lots of vital information and links to documentation such as templates for participant information sheets and consent forms.

Do not submit your application without checking that it is fully completed and all the necessary documentation is attached (consent forms, recruitment adverts etc). Applications that are not fully considered or are incomplete will be returned to you and this will significantly delay the process.

Submitting the application

Once you have completed your application (including the risk assessment) and you have signed it, you then request your supervisor signature by pressing the blue "sign" button. Once it has been signed by both of you, it will automatically be submitted. You will receive an email confirmation that it has been submitted, if you do not receive this, check with your supervisor or read our Frequently Asked Questions guidance . 

Health and safety

The health and safety of you and your participants is very important. For this reason, all students embarking on fieldwork must complete a risk assessment with their supervisor and attach it to the ethics application. These can be found on our Health and Safety intranet , you will also need to ensure that you have adequate insurance in place.

How long does the ethical review process take?

This will depend on whether you are seeking review via the University Research Ethics Committee (UREC) or at the School level.

On average, the process can take:

• 8-12 weeks for full UREC.
• 6-8 weeks for Proportionate UREC.
• 4-6 weeks for Division/School Review although we endeavour to process applications that are fully completed within 2 weeks.
• NHS approval can take a very long time, for example, a year.

It is therefore very important that you submit your application in good time and when entering the dates of your proposed data collection that they are far enough in the future for your application to be considered. Often applications are returned to applicants to amend those dates as they are not far enough in the future. Approval cannot be given retrospectively.

School template review and approval

When your application is submitted, it will be assigned to a General Receiver and to a Chair Reviewer for their consideration. You will receive an email following their consideration. The outcome of this will either be "approved" or "revisions needed".

If approved

• You and your supervisor will receive email notification of this and you can embark on your research. It is very important that you read the contents of the approval letter.

If revisions needed

• You and your supervisor will receive an email advising you that the application has been returned for further amendments or clarifications.
• You and your supervisor will consider the feedback, make the amends in the Ethical Review Manager (ERM) and resign the application, you will both need to sign this again.
• Check you have received your confirmation email.
• Your application will then be sent back for consideration and you will be informed of the outcome. 

UREC review and approval

If your research project needs ethical review and approval from the University Research Ethics Committee (UREC), read our research ethics guidance . 

The UREC application is submitted via the Ethics Review Manager (ERM), the process is:

• Complete the application online and upload documents and appendices (eg participant information sheets, consent forms and recruitment advertisements). Templates for participant information sheets and consent forms are available on the research ethics guidance webpage.
• The completed form will be pre-screened by a research ethics signatory authorised on behalf of the School. The purpose of pre-screening is to check if the project necessitates UREC approval and ensure that all applications are completed appropriately. The school signatory will aim to review your application within 10 working days.
• Once completed, the signatory will submit it directly via the ERM (applicants will be copied into the email confirmation) for subsequent review at the next available UREC meeting. Dates of UREC meetings and potential outcomes can also be found on the research ethics guidance webpage.

The Research Ethics Office will email you to confirm the details of your review. You cannot proceed with your research until you have received an email confirming you have received ethical approval.

Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS)

Do you require a dbs check.

• This depends on various factors such as the environments, the activity being completed, the duration and the subjects involved, read our DBS webpage for more information.
• If you do need a DBS check, please contact Susan Rowe in the Faculty of Humanities. 

If you already have a DBS certificate from The University of Manchester

• You may upload this certificate when completing your online ethical application.

If you already have a DBS certificate but it is not from The University of Manchester

• If you signed up for the update service at the time your certificate was produced, you can contact your Programme Administrator who will check the update service to verify that there have been no changes since your check was completed. You can upload a copy of the certificate when completing your online ethical application.
• If you did not sign up for the update service, you may require a new check to be completed by The University of Manchester.

Data protection

It is imperative that data is handled confidentially and securely to protect research participants and to preserve the reputation of students, staff and the University.

Data protection and processing personal data guidance has been issued by the University and should be followed in all research studies.

Please ensure the guidance is read carefully and issues of data security are explicitly addressed in applications for ethical approval.

Training on research ethics, practice and integrity

Training related to research ethics, practice and integrity that you should take depends on the nature of your research and may include:

• research integrity;
• clinical trials;
• human tissue;
• DBS check; and
• data protection.

Some of these may be required by the research ethics reviewer/committee. Please see the research governance, ethics and integrity website for more information.

Research integrity training for PhDs

PhD students within the School of Social Sciences can view our research ethics policies in the PGR handbook. 

Dissertations

• Where to start
• Research Proposal
• Primary Research
• Literature Review
• Methodology
• Guest Blog: How to publish your research paper
• Downloadable Resources
• Further Reading

What is it?

Research ethics are a set of principles that govern how you conduct your research, to make sure that moral guidelines are followed.  Readers usually expect to see ethics in a research proposal, or mentioned in your writing, even if there doesn't appear to be any problematic ethical issues to be addressed. 

Why do I need to do it?

When someone embarks on a piece of research there is a chance of doing harm, even if harm isn't intended. Setting ethical guidelines ensures there are set standards for conducting research to ensure the research will not harm people physically or emotionally. 

How do I do it?

If you are studying on a taught programme (undergraduate or taught postgraduate) then your module or programme leader will let you know what steps you need to take to make sure your research meets the necessary ethical standards.

If you are a postgraduate research student then your supervisory team will be able to give you guidance on submitting a research ethics application.

The books below provide useful background information.

• << Previous: Research Proposal
• Next: Primary Research >>
• Last Updated: Aug 30, 2023 1:11 PM
• URL: https://libguides.derby.ac.uk/dissertations

Research Ethics

York University is committed to the highest standards of integrity in research. All projects involving the use of  Human Subjects ,  Animals  and  Biohazardous Materials  are subject to review by the appropriate University committee. York University has formulated policies for the conduct of research involving all three of these areas. It is the policy of the University that researchers conducting research involving human subjects , animals and/or biohazardous agents must obtain approval of their research from the relevant ethics committee  prior to  commencing research activities.

The Faculty of Graduate Studies is governed by the Senate Policy on Research Involving Human Participants . The Senate Policy states that all University-based research involving human participants, whether funded or non-funded, faculty or student, scholarly, commercial or consultative, is subject to the ethics review process.

Graduate students undertaking research for graduate courses, major research papers, theses, or dissertations involving human participants are required to follow the appropriate procedures and obtain ethics approval  before conducting research activities . Students also  must maintain active registration status  while conducting the approved research. The information below outlines the ethics protocols and procedures for each category of research.

• Theses, Dissertations and Pilot Projects
• Graduate Courses and Major Research Papers (MRPs)

Please carefully review the procedures that are relevant to your project, and ensure that you complete and submit all of the required documents along with your research proposal to your graduate program. Incomplete or illegible protocols will be returned to the student, which will delay the process. If you have further questions about research ethics review processes, consult  Decision Chart- Full Board and Delegated Ethics Review Processes .

Graduate Student Risk Assessment

The  Graduate Student Risk Assessment Guidelines  of the Faculty of Graduate Studies (FGS) serve to assist graduate students in identifying appropriate health and safety considerations and preventative efforts prior to departing for field activities. In concert with the  Graduate Student Risk Assessment Form, Undertaking, Release and Checklist , graduate students should review these guidelines with their faculty supervisor. Assessing risk is a critical step in determining necessary hazard controls and other mitigation required for specific research activities.

Please visit  Graduate Student Risk Assessment  for more information including applicable forms.

Quick Links

• Academic Important Dates
• Registration & Enrolment
• How to Apply
• Graduate Supervision
• Academic Petitions
• Book a Wellness Consultation
• 2024 Academic Remediation

Theses, Dissertations and Pilot Projects Involving Human Participants

Graduate students conducting research for the purposes of completing a graduate thesis or dissertation are subject to review by a delegated ethics review committee comprised of the Associate Dean(s), Research, Faculty of Graduate Studies and the Chair/Vice-Chair HPRC. Where delegated reviewers decide that a protocol should not be approved, the protocol will be referred to the HPRC for full board review.

All graduate student researchers must complete the TCPS tutorial to establish that they have completed the necessary education component and attach their certificate of completion to their protocols. Protocols will not be accepted for review unless a valid TCPS tutorial certificate is attached.

When is Ethics Review Required

All research involving human participants is considered research subject to review. The Principal Investigator (researcher) of any research project involving human participants:

• MUST have a protocol that describes how the researcher(s) will interact with the human participants; and
• MUST have that protocol reviewed and approved by the appropriate Research Ethics Committee before the  research commences; and
• MUST obtain informed consent from ALL research participants. For minor-age participants (Those under the age of 16 for minimal-risk research), both parental consent and participant assent are required.

NOTE:   Failure to obtain ethics approval prior to the commencement of Research Activities is considered both a breach of Senate Policy as well as research misconduct.  All such instances of non-compliance will be addressed by the appropriate institutional office. NOTE: Graduate students must be registered as active in a graduate program while conducting approved research with human participants, animals, and/or biological agents. Graduate students on leave or who have withdrawn from their graduate program with an approved research protocol on record may not conduct/continue to conduct any research with human participants, animals, and/or biological agents, until such time that their student registration status becomes active. 

With an ‘inactive’ registration status, please note that your approved protocol will be marked as suspended by the Office of Research Ethics. When you are ready to return to your studies, students must petition to reinstate, and must contact the Office of Research Ethics at [email protected] , citing their protocol number, and inquire as to whether they need to reapply (if leave has been longer than a year) or if the pause can be lifted.

Graduate students are not permitted to conduct any research with human participants, animals and/or biological agents without an approved proposal by their programs and FGS and an approved ethics protocol.

Research Ethics Review and Approval: Forms and Processes

• If the research is minimum risk*: –  Form TD1: Thesis/Dissertation Research Proposal – Thesis/Dissertation Proposal –  Form TD2: Research Ethics Protocol Form for Graduate Student Thesis, Dissertation, or Pilot Project –  Informed consent  and other relevant documents described in TD2 checklist –  TCPS Tutorial Certificate (*Must complete the CORE 2022 certificate released in 2022)
• If the research involves Aboriginal/Indigenous Peoples; clinical trials; or research that is more than minimum risk: –  Form TD1: Thesis/Dissertation Research Proposal – Thesis/Dissertation Proposal –  Human Participant Research Committee (HPRC) form –  Informed consent  and other relevant documents described in HPRC form –  TCPS Tutorial Certificate (*Must complete the CORE 2022 certificate released in 2022)
• If the research is conducted as part of or a subset of a faculty member’s approved research project: –  Form TD1: Thesis/Dissertation Research Proposal – Thesis/Dissertation Proposal –  Form TD4: Statement of Relationship Between Proposal and an Existing HPRC-Approved Project – HPRC Approval Certificate for faculty’s research project –  TCPS Tutorial Certificate (*Must complete the CORE 2022 certificate released in 2022)
• If the research that is based on secondary data analysis: –  Form TD1: Thesis/Dissertation Research Proposal – Thesis/Dissertation Proposal –  Form TD2: Research Ethics Protocol Form for Graduate Student Thesis, Dissertation, or Pilot Project –  Informed consent  and other relevant documents described in TD2 checklist (if applicable), Debriefing Consent Form for studies involving deception –  TCPS Tutorial Certificate (*Must complete the CORE 2022 certificate released in 2022)

*For the purposes of Research Ethics Review, “minimal risk” research is defined by the TCPS as research in which the probability and magnitude of possible harms implied by participation in the research is no greater than those encountered by participants in those aspects of their everyday life that relate to the research.

*If your research involves an in-person method, please review required documents and steps .

NOTE: If the proposed research poses an elevated risk to yourself as the researcher requiring further health and safety considerations, you must consult the Graduate Student Risk Assessment Guidelines and complete the Graduate Student Risk Assessment Form .

• A pilot project is defined as preliminary research that is necessary in order to be able to write the thesis or dissertation proposal. Pilot projects must still include a description of research procedures and sample research instruments (e.g., survey or interview questions). Please submit TD2 form and informed consent documents .
• Secondary Data Analysis is described as the analysis of data involving human participants collected for a purpose other than that for which it was originally collected in order to pursue a research interest which is distinct from that of the original work.
• The HPRC uses the definition of minimal risk as outlined in the SSHRC/NSERC/CIHR Tri-Council Policy Statement: “Ethical Conduct for Research involving Humans” (December 2014): “‘minimal risk’ research is defined as research in which the probability and magnitude of possible harms implied by participation in the research is no greater than those encountered by participants in those aspects of their everyday life that relate to the research” (Article 2.8B). An expanded version of this definition is available from the Office of Research Ethics upon request.
• your research will be conducted on Aboriginal land (Canada; international);
• recruitment criteria will include Aboriginal identity as either a factor for the entire study or for a subgroup of the study;
• your research will seek input from participants regarding an Aboriginal community’s cultural heritage, artefacts or traditional knowledge;
• aboriginal identity or membership in an aboriginal community will be used as a variable for the purpose of analysis of the research data; or
• interpretation of research results will refer to Aboriginal communities, peoples, language, history or culture. Note: Literary criticism and/or history (excluding oral history) and/or primarily textual activities are not applicable.
• To access the HPRC form, please visit HPRC form

All research involving human participants for graduate courses and Graduate Major Research Papers (MRPs) that is non-funded, minimal-risk, does not involve Aboriginal peoples or a clinical trial must be reviewed by the relevant unit level Delegated Ethics Review Committee. Research subject to review includes, but is not limited to: surveys, questionnaires, interviews, participant observation and secondary data analysis.

NOTE:  Research conducted for a course or Major Research Paper (MRP) that is more than minimal risk and /or involves Aboriginal/Indigenous peoples and/or involves clinical trials  must be  reviewed by the Human Participants Review Committee (HPRC). For these types of research, students are required to complete the  HPRC form  and submit it to the HPRC for review.  Please contact the Office of Research Ethics for more information ( [email protected] )

For more information on ethics review requirements for graduate and undergraduate course-related research and MRPs, please go to,  “Ethics Review Requirements"  for Course-Related Research by Students.

When Is Ethics Review Required?

All research involving human participants is considered  research subject to review . The Principal Investigator (researcher) of any research project involving human participants:

• MUST obtain informed consent from ALL research participants. For minor age participants (those under the age of 16 for minimal risk research), both parental consent and participant assent is required.

NOTE:   Failure to obtain ethics approval prior to the commencement of Research Activities is considered both a breach of Senate Policy as well as research misconduct.  All such instances of non-compliance will be addressed by the appropriate institutional office.

What Forms Do I Use and Where Do I Submit Them?

A. If you are a Graduate or Undergraduate Course Instructor:

If the students in your graduate or undergraduate course are conducting research involving human participants as part of a course assignment, the research is minimal risk and does NOT involve Aboriginal/Indigenous peoples, and all students in the class are conducting the same or similar research, then proceed as follows:

• Complete the  Generic Protocol: Course Related Research Involving Human Participants 
• Review the “ Course Director Responsibilities ” document
• Submit the completed Protocol Package ( Protocol form, Consent document(s) and other relevant documents ) (such as survey tools, questionnaires, recruitment materials etc) to the relevant  Unit level Delegated E thics Review Committee

B. If you are an Undergraduate Student:

If you are conducting research involving human participants , as part of an undergraduate course assignment, or as an individual project (either for the class or for an undergraduate thesis), then proceed as follows:

• Complete the  Individualized Protocol: Course Related Research Involving Human Participants ;
• Review the “ Student Researcher Responsibilities ” document
• Submit the completed Protocol Package ( Protocol form, Consent document(s), your completed TCPS tutorial certificate and other relevant documents ) (such as survey tools, questionnaires, recruitment materials etc) to the relevant  Unit level Delegated Ethics Review Committee   for review and approval.

C. If you are a Graduate Student:

• If you are conducting research involving human participants , as part of a  graduate course assignment , and the research is minimal risk and does NOT involve Aboriginal/Indigenous peoples, then proceed as follows:
• Complete the Individualized Protocol: Course Related Research Involving Human Participants;
• Submit the completed Protocol Package ( Protocol form, Consent document(s), your completed TCPS tutorial certificate and other relevant documents ) (such as survey tools, questionnaires, recruitment materials etc) to the relevant  Unit level Delegated Ethics Review Committee .

2. If you are conducting research involving human participants, in support of a  Major Research Paper  and the research is minimal risk and does NOT involve Aboriginal/Indigenous peoples, then proceed as follows:

• Complete the  MRP Protocol: Research Involving Human Participants ;
• Review the “ Student Researcher Responsibilities ” document;
• Submit the MRP protocol package ( Protocol form, Consent document(s), your completed TCPS tutorial certificate and other relevant documents ) (such as survey tools, questionnaires, recruitment materials etc) to your Supervisory/Advisory Committee for approval and signature;
• Submit the signed MRP Protocol package the relevant  Unit level Delegated Ethics Review Committee  for review and approval.

D. Graduate Program Directors:

Annually, each Graduate Program will compile the following information for the period from June 1st to May 31 st  and submit it to the Faculty of Graduate Studies:

• A listing of all courses in which research was conducted involving human participants
• A listing of the titles of MRPs involving human participants and the names of students who undertook the MRPs
• Information about the Unit level Delegated Ethics Review Committee, including the Chair, review members and administrative contact

Further information about the Delegated Ethics Review Committees (Composition, responsibilities, reporting requirements and forms)  are available at the  Office of Research Ethics website .

For more information, please consult the following sources:

• Research Ethics Policies & Guidelines, Office of Research Ethics
• SSHRC/NSERC/CIHR Tri-Council Policy Statement Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans
• TCPS Tutorial
• HPRC protocol  * This form is to be used  ONLY  by those students who are conducting research involving Aboriginal/Indigenous Peoples; clinical trials; and/or research that is more than minimum risk:
• Amendment Request Form Graduate Student—Thesis or Dissertation
• Renewal Request Form Graduate Student—Thesis or Dissertation
• Faculty of Graduate Studies Ethics Review Process

Faculty of Graduate Studies: Research Officer by visiting our FGS Staff Directory .

The Office of Research Ethics (ORE): [email protected]

ORE Office Hour

The ORE will host virtual office hours (via Zoom) for students and faculty members who have questions about ethics applications for research involving human participants. Their virtual office hours will be every Wednesday between 12:00 PM - 1:00 PM . No appointment is necessary. Zoom: Join the Meeting

Connect with FGS

• Schools & departments

The School of Literatures, Languages and Cultures attaches great importance to research ethics and integrity and has developed rigorous procedures for ensuring proper ethical review and accountability.

Research ethics

The University is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity .

The research ethics review process is designed to support researchers in managing risks associated with their research, and to ensure the highest professional standards in designing, conducting and disseminating research. The University of Edinburgh adheres to the  UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO) Code of Practice for Research  and the Universities UK (UUK) Concordat to Support Research Integrity . 

In line with the principles outlined in these documents, the University of Edinburgh has published the University Research Ethics Policy and the College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences (CAHSS) has developed the  College Research Ethics Framework (CREF) and the College Research Integrity Framework (CRIF) .

Staff and students in LLC should familiarise themselves with these policies before completing the LLC Research Ethics Checklist and, if required, the online Research Ethics, Integrity & Governance Application , which serves as the vehicle for formal research ethics review.

Why do we need ethics review?

Research ethics are “the moral principles that govern how researchers should carry out their work” (Wellcome Trust, 2014). The aim of the ethics review process in LLC is to facilitate high quality ethical research by ensuring that research comes in line with University research ethics principles. The LLC Research Ethics Committee (REC) is committed to working with staff and student researchers in a collaborative way and aims to help researchers think through any ethical issues associated with their research and to find appropriate solutions and/or mitigations. The REC plays an important role in the research process by ensuring that research is planned appropriately, safely and ethically. It is therefore of prime importance that applicants set out any ethical issues clearly and explain the reasoning behind their decisions, as well as describing in detail the processes they have put in place to ensure that the research is conducted in an ethically viable way. Applicants should bear in mind that the ultimate responsibility for research being carried out in an ethical manner lies with them.

Applicants should note that although the LLC REC will consider how the research will keep data secure and obtain informed consent (where needed), a favourable opinion given by the REC does not mean that the research is compliant with data privacy and UK GDPR requirements for processing personal data. It is ultimately the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that their research is compliant.

When should research ethics review be conducted?

This depends on the type of research being conducted.

In line with University policy, all staff and student researchers should:

explicitly self-evaluate the ethical implications of all their research. Where the research might reasonably be considered to raise ethical questions, then research ethics review will be required before the research commences. Ethical consideration is not solely the preserve of research on humans and animals. Many other fields have ethical considerations (e.g. ranging from physics, the environment, energy, to the arts). It is the responsibility of the researchers to consider, and where appropriate, seek ethical review prior to instigating any project. University Research Ethics Policy, p.2

The LLC Research Ethics Checklist is an aid to helping staff and student researchers "self-evaluate" whether or not their research requires formal ethics review via the LLC Research Ethics Committee by submitting a Research Ethics, Integrity & Governance Application .

It is the responsibility of all researchers – staff and students – to ensure that their research project undergoes ethics review via the LLC Research Ethics Committee, if required.

Supervisors of undergraduate, postgraduate taught, MScR and PhD projects should ensure to the best of their ability that student research under their supervision goes through the formal ethical review process where required. In addition, "supervisors of student research have an ongoing responsibility throughout the research to make students aware of the ethical issues and requirements associated with their research" (University Research Ethics Policy, p.8).

Any new ethical issues which arise during the carrying out of the research should be addressed via further ethics review in a timely manner.

For Research Ethics, Integrity & Governance Applications, please ensure that you adhere to the LLC submission deadlines of a minimum of:  ​​

• 8 weeks before the commencement of any project or  submission of a funding application

This will  allow sufficient time for proper research ethics review of the proposed research to be conducted. Please note that for projects which involve complex ethical issues, it may be necessary to seek advice from the College Research Ethics Committee or specialists in other schools within the University.

For student research projects , the following deadlines apply:

Undergraduate dissertations: &nbsp;If a dissertation project requires formal ethics review, it is expected that Research Ethics, Integrity & Governance Applications will be submitted no later than the end of the first week of December in the academic year in which the dissertation will be submitted. Such dissertation projects should secure a favourable opinion (“approval”) no later than three months before the submission deadline. No data gathering or analysis should take place before a favourable opinion is secured.

If a favourable opinion is not secured by the deadline, the student will have to change their research project plan to a low-risk project which does not require ethics review. This means that they should not conduct research which is not defined as low-risk according to the LLC Research Ethics Checklist (ie, answers to all questions are ‘No’).

Taught postgraduate dissertations:

If a dissertation project requires formal ethics review (via a Research Ethics, Integrity & Governance Application), such dissertation projects should secure a favourable opinion (“approval”) no later than three months before the submission deadline. No data gathering or analysis should take place before a favourable opinion is secured.

If a favourable opinion is not secured by the deadline, the student will have to change their research project plan to a low-risk project which does not require ethics review. This means that they should not conduct research which is not defined as low-risk according to the LLC Research Ethics Checklist (i.e., answers to all questions are ‘No’).

MScR dissertations:

15,000 word dissertations: If a dissertation project requires formal ethics review (via a Research Ethics, Integrity & Governance Application), such dissertation projects should secure a favourable opinion (“approval”) no later than three months before the submission deadline. No data gathering or analysis should take place before a favourable opinion is secured.

30,000 word dissertations: If a dissertation project requires formal ethics review (via a Research Ethics, Integrity & Governance Application), such dissertation projects should secure a favourable opinion (“approval”) no later than six months before the submission deadline. No data gathering or analysis should take place before a favourable opinion is secured.

PhD theses: &nbsp;If a PhD project requires formal ethics review (via a Research Ethics, Integrity & Governance Application), such projects should secure a favourable opinion (“approval”) no later than three months after the First Year Review. No data gathering or analysis should take place before a favourable opinion is secured.

Please note that for projects which involve complex ethical issues, it may be necessary to seek advice from the College Research Ethics Committee or specialists in other schools within the University.

If required to submit a Research Ethics, Integrity and Governance (REIG) Application, when should I submit my application?

There is a wide range of approaches to designing and conducting research. It is not always clear exactly when a research project begins and ends. You will need to take some preparatory steps in order to identify things such as your topic, possible research questions, primary materials, secondary literature, theoretical approach, etc. You should submit your research ethics application for review when you have a clear idea of what your project is about (topic and research question/s) and what your approach will be (your methods or methodology). You should not begin analysing primary materials or generating new data before securing a favourable ethical opinion (sometimes referred to as “ethics approval”).

If, having completed the LLC Research Ethics Checklist, I am required to complete a Research Ethics, Integrity & Governance (REIG) Application, what are some of the elements of research that I could do before submitting my REIG application?

It is generally fine to identify primary materials or potential sources of primary data; for example, audio-visual materials such as audio recordings, videos, films; texts such as novels, poems, diaries; visual materials such as photographs, murals, propaganda posters; interview participants; performances; archival materials; online discussion forums or online communities; policy or legal documents.

If, having completed the LLC Research Ethics Checklist, I am required to complete a Research Ethics, Integrity & Governance (REIG) Application, what are some of the elements of research that I should NOT do before submitting my REIG application?

While it is fine to identify primary materials or potential sources of primary data before submitting your research ethics application, you should not generate (“collect”) primary data or conduct systematic analysis of primary materials. For example, you should not analyse audio-visual or textual materials (in cases where you have identified ethical issues with the use of these materials), or conduct surveys, interviews or participant observation.

Can I apply for research ethics review after I have started my research?

No. Retrospective research ethics review refers to ethics review which is conducted after a research project has commenced or after a research project has been completed. Retrospective research ethics review is not permitted under any circumstances for projects which have already been completed, without exception. In the case of projects which have already commenced (or where data has been collected or generated) retrospective ethics review is only permitted in exceptional circumstances, and usually only where changes have been made to a previously reviewed Research Ethics, Integrity & Governance Application. In cases where a researcher seeks retrospective research ethics review, there MUST be a clear and justifiable reason for doing so. For the sake of clarity, retrospective ethics review would be permitted in the following scenarios:

• In circumstances where a researcher comes across or is given access to materials or a setting which later have the potential to serve as data for a research project.
• In circumstances where, in the course of an existing research project which has already been through the research ethics review process, the researcher comes across or is given access to materials or a setting which was not anticipated at the outset of the project.

In either of these circumstances, further research using this data should not proceed without formal research ethics review. This should be done in a timely manner.

It should be stressed that if the generation or collection of any data does not meet the research ethics and GDPR criteria set out in these pages, then it may not be possible for the researcher to utilise the research data in any output, including dissertations and publications.

Whose research is subject to ethical review procedures?

All research carried out by members of the School, including academics, emeritus staff, teaching staff, undergraduate students, postgraduate students (Masters and PhD), visiting scholars and fellows, and research assistants, are subject to the procedures outlined in these pages.

The review process

Undergraduate and taught postgraduate students:

Applications will go to the Supervisor (or Course Organiser for in-class projects other than dissertations) for ethics review and sign-off/escalation. The application will then go to the LLC Research Ethics Committee (REC) for review. In the majority of cases, the REC will provide an ethical opinion. However, if the LLC REC determines that an application needs further scrutiny then it will be escalated to College for additional review. 

MScR and PhD students:

Applications will go to the Supervisor (or Course Organiser for in-class projects other than dissertations) for ethics review and sign-off/escalation. Applications will then go to the LLC Research Ethics Committee (REC) for review. They will be reviewed independently by two REC members. In the majority of cases, the REC will provide an ethical opinion. However, if the LLC REC determines that an application needs further scrutiny then it will be escalated to College for additional review. 

Applications will go to the LLC Research Ethics Committee (REC) for review where they will be reviewed independently by two REC members. In the majority of cases, the REC will provide an ethical opinion. However, if the LLC REC determines that an application needs further scrutiny then it will be escalated to College for additional review.

‘Legacy’ Research Projects and Ethics Review Guidance

An increasing number of journals are requesting evidence of formal ethics review for the research upon which outputs are based. While it seems to be the case that journals in the Arts and Humanities are less likely to request this, the situation is changing, and there have been several cases in LLC where scholars have been asked for proof of ethics review after an article has been accepted for publication. In cases where formal ethics review has been carried out, this is not a problem. However, in situations where scholars have been working on a research project which started before the introduction of ethics review processes in the School, the situation is more complicated since we do not conduct retrospective ethics review in LLC. In such situations, we suggest that colleagues try the following:

• Consider to what extent the research adheres to either University or external ethics guidelines/policies (or both – this will very much depend on the field). Assuming that the research does adhere to the University (or external) ethics guidelines/policies, put together a ‘defence’ of the research, explaining how it adheres to the guidelines/policies. 
• Use this ‘defence’ to try to negotiate with the publisher (assuming that ethics review processes were not in place at the time the research was conducted (in LLC, this would be prior to 2013).

NB: LLC does not conduct retrospective review and the LLC REC should not be approached to provide a cover letter or other documentation where ethics review has not been conducted.

What are the consequences of conducting research that requires ethics review without first securing a favourable opinion from the relevant Research Ethics Committee?

If you conduct research which requires formal ethics review and you do so without a favourable (or conditional favourable) opinion, you are in violation of the University of Edinburgh’s University Research Ethics Policy.

In such cases, the REC may recommend the deletion of data or the halting of the research project. In addition, the University has put in place processes for dealing with misconduct in relation to research ethics.

“Failure to meet research ethical obligations can constitute research misconduct, and as such may lead to the implementation of a research misconduct investigation, following the Research Misconduct Policy ” (University Research Ethics Policy, pp. 8-9).

For students:

“Failure to meet research ethical obligations may constitute research misconduct. This failure may lead to a referral to the relevant Academic Misconduct Officer and implementation of academic misconduct procedures, and could lead to referral of the case for disciplinary action under the Code of Student Conduct ” (University Research Ethics Policy, p.10).

IOE - Faculty of Education and Society

Ethics applications: IOE students

• Guidance on changed contexts due to Coronavirus: moving research online
• Process for reviewing IOE Masters and Undergraduate student ethics applications
• Process for reviewing IOE doctoral student ethics applications
• Referring student ethics applications to the IOE Research Ethics Committee
• Student ethics application guidance

Information for IOE students applying for ethics review approval.

Postgraduate taught (Master's) and undergraduate students

For applications reviewed by the dissertation supervisor and another academic member of staff - data protection compliance will be assessed as part of the review process.

All student research is required to gain ethical approval before starting.

Ethics review is required to ensure that the research conforms to the ethical standards expected by IOE. It is also used to assist supervisors and students when reflecting upon ethical research practice.

When student research involves particularly complicated or sensitive ethical issues, it can be referred by the reviewers to the IOE Research Ethics Committee.

• Guidance for supervisors and tutors on when to refer student ethics applications to the REC

IOE Undergraduate (UG) and Postgraduate (PGT) dissertations and reports - data collection 2022/23

Guidance for students and their supervisors/tutors .

This guidance is for IOE UG and PGT students and their tutors/supervisors. It relates to new and resuming dissertations, reports and projects, for which students would like to apply for approval to collect data face-to-face (in person) or online. It applies from 1st October 2022 until further notice. 

Students should complete the IOE UG/PGT ethics application form. The supervisor and an extra member of the academic staff should review the ethics application form and approve before the research can start. Students should NOT proceed to data collection unless they have received ethics approval.

All students seeking approval for face to face data collection outside the UK are required to have a back-up plan should they have to change to online data collection due to unforeseen circumstances. This plan must be included in the ethics application form, section 10, and must be reviewed by the supervisor and the other member of academic staff as part of the ethics approval process.

For any further questions on this guidance please contact Evi Katsapi , IOE Head of Undergraduate Provision for UG and Dr Jo Fraser-Pearce , IOE Head of Postgraduate Taught Provision for PGT.

Ethics application form

Ethics application form: student research (docx).

PGCE students

Research forming part of normal professional practice, for example when embedded in a PGCE programme, is not required to undergo a full ethics review in the same way as other student research projects. These projects can be reviewed by the student's tutor. Where the tutor identifies that the project is a substantial piece of research rather than part of professional practice, the above application form must be completed and reviewed by a tutor and another member of the course team, in line with standard student ethics procedures.

Risk assessment

All ethics applications should cover a risk assessment of the research. Researchers need to include an outline of the risk assessment in Section 8 of the ethics form. You may find it helpful to use IOE's risk assessment template and you can include this together with your ethics application. However, completion of the risk assessment form in addition to the ethics application is not mandatory.

• IOE risk assessment form (DOCX)

Postgraduate research students (MRes, PhD and EdD)

For applications reviewed by the supervisor and another academic member of staff - data protection registration is required before submission of ethics application.

Ethics guidance

• Research with children - guidance on data protection issues
• Online MPhil/PhD international students: guidance on applying for criminal records check (DOCX)

All Postgraduate research students are required to submit their IOE Ethics Application Form to [email protected] in order to obtain a mandatory data protection number for their research, before the ethics review. Please follow the links below for more detailed information.

Details on and forms for the student reviewing process for all postgraduate research students can be found here:

• Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)  - IOE students require a DPIA if the project includes sensitive personal data and/or is likely to be high risk, which will be determined by their supervisory team. In the context of a student research project, the supervisor is responsible for ensuring the completion of a DPIA.
• Process for IOE Doctoral student data protection registration and ethics applications review
• Postgraduate research students (MRes, PhD, EdD) ethics application form (DOCX)

All ethics applications should cover a risk assessment of the research. Researchers need to include an outline of the risk assessment in Section 8 of the ethics form. You may find it helpful to use IOE's risk assessment template and you can include this together with your ethics application. However, completion of the risk assessment form in addition to the ethics application is not mandatory.

GDPR-compliant exemplars for guidance 

• Consent forms and participant information sheets
• Moving research online
• Application guidance
• Reviewing Master's and Undergraduate applications
• Reviewing doctoral applications
• Referring applications to Ethics Committee

Article Categories

Book categories, collections.

• Academics & The Arts Articles
• Language & Language Arts Articles
• Writing Articles

Dissertation Ethics in a Nutshell

Writing a dissertation for dummies.

Sign up for the Dummies Beta Program to try Dummies' newest way to learn.

Social science studies (including your dissertation), are about individuals, communities and societies. Even though you’re not carrying out a case study, questionnaire or interview when doing your research for your dissertation, you’re bound to be looking at an issue that involves people – and before starting off you need to sort out any ethical matters connected with your research.

You have to make sure that the interests and rights of anyone affected by your work are safeguarded and you must ensure that you keep to the following:

Obeying the legislation on human rights and data protection

Maintaining good quality research (data collection, storage analysis, dissemination of information)

Gaining the informed consent of your subjects

Thinking through the consequences of your work

Most undergraduate dissertations are fairly straightforward because the sample group you’re researching is usually fairly small and the context is known to the supervisor and the student. This scenario (of knowing your subjects and there being minimal risk and concern) is recommended because it makes the whole process manageable and more feasible in the timescale that you’re given for your dissertation.

If your research causes you to fall into any of the following categories, you need to ask your supervisor for advice on what you should do:

Your study involves vulnerable participants and/or those unable to give informed consent (such as children or people with learning difficulties or disabilities).

Some of your subjects may be feeling under pressure to take part (friends, colleagues, family members).

Your research means discussing issues that may upset people or cause stress, such as health matters, personal experiences or something the person knows to be illegal such as drug use.

Your study involves communicating with a ‘gatekeeper’ in order for you to have access to the subjects (for example, you need to obtain the agreement of the teacher and the parents to access the children in her class).

Your participants may be taking part without their knowledge (for example, carrying out observation of children in a playground).

You may be at risk when carrying out observations or interviews.

Dissertation ethics: Check your compliance with university regulations

Universities have specific regulations about getting ethical clearance for any part of a study that may breach ethical guidelines. You’re going to have to comply with particular permissions if you’re carrying out observations or interviews.

Your university may ask you to complete a form to get ethical clearance for your research. This is the norm for higher level studies and research projects but less common for undergraduate dissertations. If you do need to fill in a form addressing ethical concerns, the questions you’re likely to be asked are:

Aim of study.

Background (naming some of the literature and other studies in a similar area).

Research methodologies and methods.

Potential problems for subjects (such as discussing sensitive issues).

Potential problems for the researcher (such as travel following interviews carried out in the evening).

Methods of recruiting subjects (including declaration of inducements – that is, whether or not you paid them).

Evidence of having informed consent.

Data protection (including the security of your data storage and anonymity of subjects).

Look through the list and have an answer in mind for each question in case ethical concerns and obligations come up during supervision.

Dissertation ethics: Know what’s appropriate

A group of first year undergraduate students were interested in looking at teenagers’ views about how sexual content is used to boost sales of magazines. The students put together an interview schedule for a focus group but didn’t run the questions by a tutor first. Using university headed notepaper so that the questions looked official the students presented the group of 13- and 14-year-olds with the questions.

The first question asked: ‘Have you had sex?’ and the questions moved onto others including ‘Do you think that all your friends are sexually active?’ and ‘How does it feel to be the only one in your group of friends who’s still a virgin?’ Clearly these questions wouldn’t have been approved by the tutor, but the students were genuinely surprised when the university staff expressed their shock.

Dissertation ethics: Gain informed consent

You must have the consent of people taking part in your research. In most cases you’re required to have written consent and your course tutor or department may well have a standard form for you to use. Consent forms are designed to comply with Government requirements, which exist to protect vulnerable people from any poor research practices. One example of this is the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) check that you’re going to need if your research involves children.

Your responsibility to your subjects doesn’t end once you’ve collected the data. It’s up to you to be frank and honest when interpreting your subjects’ words and actions. You’re not allowed to twist words or alter what people have said or done.

Dissertation ethics: Respect other people’s ideas and views

When you’re doing interviews and carrying out questionnaires it’s important to keep your thoughts to yourself. Hiding your feelings can be hard, but if you disagree violently with someone you can end up stopping the person from expressing his views for fear of ‘getting something wrong’.

Don’t be a robot though – you can express mild surprise if someone says something really strange (you may find some subjects are after a reaction so you sometimes need to oblige), but try not to let other people’s views faze you. After all, you’re asking for the person’s opinion, so you need to let him express his opinion without feeling stupid.

Strike the right balance between modesty and arrogance. Don’t be so self-deprecating that people think that your research is a waste of time: ‘Oh, it’s just a little project, it’s not that interesting, it’s not a big deal’. Also avoid sounding self-important as this is equally off-putting: ‘Yes, I’m dealing with some really vital issues here – I want to expose the problems and find a solution to these continual low standards.’

Dissertation ethics: Keep your subjects’ anonymity

When you’re writing about the people in your research project you need to disguise the person’s real identity, making sure that the person can’t be identified and traced. Some of your subjects may say that you don’t need to hide their identity, but although that can seem like a good idea at the time, you don't yet know where you research is going to take you and you may later regret choosing that option.

A parent, (not just the institution where the child is living, studying, or staying), must agree on behalf of a child.

Speak to your dissertation tutor about the legal aspects of your work. Generally a ‘child’ is 16 years old or under, but if someone is 17 and still studying in school, for example, you need to follow different guidelines than if you were asking your college peers who are over 18, or a 17-year-old with a full-time job.

The onus is on you to check the legality of what want to pursue. Consult your tutor if in doubt.

Changing the names of your research subjects when you’re writing about them is a good idea, but you need to do this with care and make it clear that you’ve changed the person’s names to preserve their privacy by simply saying: ‘In this dissertation, the names of subjects have been changed to preserve their anonymity’.

Give some thought to what the alternative names are going to be. Changing ‘Kelly’ to ‘Kerry’ or ‘Ian’ to ‘Iain’ isn’t going to do a good job of hiding anything much, and also be sure that you don’t change genders by mistake.

Although it can be a good idea to find a name that reflects the cultural background of your research subjects, if this is relevant to the study – take care here that you don’t slip into stereotype.

Researchers often refer to their subjects as ‘Child X’ or ‘Mrs Y’ and this does the job perfectly well. Some readers are not keen on dissertations that use this method because it seems very impersonal and makes for a jerky read.

Plus, if the examiner is marking a large number of dissertations that use the same convention, like other examiners, she may tend to forget which ‘Child A’ is which because there’s no personality linked to a person labelled by an initial letter of the alphabet (except for ‘Mr T’ of course).

Your rule of thumb is to use recognisable names that aren’t too outlandish and that are distinct from one another (don’t call your three subjects ‘Emily’, ‘Emma’ and ‘Emmie’ for example). Remember to be consistent throughout your dissertation.

Keep the real and ‘code’ names of your subjects in your dissertation notebook so that you don’t get confused.

Also remember to hide the names of schools, hospitals, specific departments or organisations you’ve been allowed to review where there are any potentially sensitive issues. Don't try to anonymise organisations such as governments or government departments, even if you’re being critical.

In your appendices and additional material you have to make sure that you anonymise any letter headings, delete logos from policy documents and change names or delete them from personal reports. It’s a fairly common error in dissertations to find that students give away their subjects’ identities in the additional material – probably because students leave dealing with the appendices and additional material until the last moment.

When you’ve finished writing up your dissertation, do a Word ‘Find’ search through the text, looking for the real names of your subjects in case you’ve slipped up somewhere.

Dissertation ethics: Acknowledge the people who help you

Your acknowledgements are more about courtesy than being a fixed requirement in your dissertation, but it’s good manners to acknowledge people who’ve helped you by being subjects in your research, or by making it easy for you find your subjects.

For example, if you’ve interviewed budget holders about how they forecast their annual spend and your gatekeeper contact at the department was a research officer or someone in human resources, be sure to thank your contact as well as the subjects you interviewed.

You can make your acknowledgements without revealing the person’s identity. Use the person’s job title and if they evenutally see a copy of your dissertation they’re going to know who they are and recognise and appreciate your gratitude. All you need to say is: ‘With sincere thanks to all those people who helped me by giving up their valuable time and sharing their considered views’.

About This Article

This article is from the book:.

• Writing a Dissertation For Dummies ,

About the book author:

Dr Carrie Winstanley is a Principal Lecturer in Education at Roehampton University, London, where she works with both undergraduate and postgraduate students. Carrie was recently named one of the Top 50 university teachers in the UK by the Higher Education Academy, for which she was awarded a national teaching fellowship.

This article can be found in the category:

• Essential Networking when Writing a Dissertation
• Obeying the Dissertation Rules and Regulations<b> </b>
• Optimising Your Dissertation Writing
• Organising Your Working Methods while Writing a Dissertation
• Settling on Your Dissertation Research Question
• View All Articles From Book

• Cookies & Privacy
• GETTING STARTED
• Introduction
• FUNDAMENTALS
• Acknowledgements
• Research questions & hypotheses
• Concepts, constructs & variables
• Research limitations
• Getting started
• Sampling Strategy
• Research Quality
• Research Ethics
• Data Analysis

Ethics consent form

An Ethics Consent Form is not always required for dissertation research at the undergraduate or master's level. It will depend on: (a) whether it is feasible to get informed consent , which varies according to the type of dissertation research you are performing; and (b) the expectations of your supervisor, department and/or university. If you are expected to get written consent , the article sets out the four main components of your Ethics Consent Form , which also acts as an Information Sheet for potential participants.

If you have been given a specific Ethics Consent Form to use by your dissertation supervisor; or one is included in your dissertation guidelines, you should use this. If not, your Ethics Consent Form should consist of four components: (a) background to the research; (b) possible demands on participants; (c) questions about participants? consent; and (d) official bits. Each of these four components is discussed in turn:

Background to the research

Possible demands on participants, questions about participants' consent, official bits.

You should include the following information:

Dissertation title

Purpose of the research

Method(s) you will use

Possible research outcomes

It may be possible to provide this background within a single paragraph, reducing the time demands on your participants.

You should outline the possible demands on participants associated with taking part in your dissertation research. These include:

Time demands

Inconveniences

Possible discomfort

You should also explain what you will be doing to minimise these demands (e.g., how you will be protecting participants' identity).

Your Ethics Consent Form will need to include a number of questions that confirm that respondents:

have read and understood the background information that you provided about your research;

recognise the possible demands that will be put on them and what you have done to try and minimise these demands;

have volunteered to take part in the research and have acknowledged that they can withdraw at any time.

Some example questions would be:

Do you understand the purpose of the research (Yes/No)?

Have you read and understood what the research requires of you? (Yes/No)

Do you understand that you can withdraw from this research at any time? (Yes/No)

There are a number of generic questions like these that you can ask, but you may also need to include questions that are specific to your research.

The final part of your Ethics Consent Form should include some text confirming that participants acknowledge (a) they have voluntarily agreed to take part in your dissertation research and (b) understand what is required of them (i.e., informed consent ).

Finish off the form by providing space for your research participants and you (the researcher) to date and sign the form. You should offer a copy of the Ethics Consent Form to the research participants.

School of Social and Political Science

Research ethics, ethical practice in sps.

In the School of Social and Political Science (SPS) we recognise that good ethical practice is a cornerstone of all our research and a mark of our commitment to professionalism, including our care for our research participants, our colleagues, collaborators, and research partners, as well as the data produced in our research.

SPS attaches great importance to research ethics, and is developing extensive procedures for supporting staff and ensuring proper ethical review and accountability.

Please use the links below to find out more and complete the online ethical review.

Good practice guidance is available from various sources including:

• College of Humanities and Social Science - Research Ethics and Integrity
• The University of Edinburgh - Policy on Conflict of Interest (PDF)
• ESRC - Framework for research ethics
• UKRIO - UK Research Integrity Office
• UKRI - Research Integrity
• European Commission - Ethics for Researchers (PDF)

All research carried out by members of the School is are subject to ethical review. The ethical review process is designed to support researchers in managing risks associated with their research, ensuring the highest professional standards in designing, conducting and disseminating research.

PLEASE NOTE: The staff ethics form and associated material has now been moved onto the Research Office intranet. This section of the (public) webpage is only updated on student ethics processes. To view information related to staff ethics processes, please visit the  SPS Ethics Intranet webpages .

Further information on ethics processes can be found on the  CAHSS Research Ethics site .

All research carried out by members of the School, including undergraduate and post-graduate dissertation projects, needs to go through an ethical review process. The ethical review process is designed to support researchers and students in managing risks associated with their research, and to ensure the highest professional standards in designing, conducting and disseminating research.

Before starting any empirical research, all students need to complete ethical review through using the support form on the SPS intranet. This will involve a series of prompts about issues which might arise during research. Completed forms will be reviewed by the student’s supervisor or relevant course organiser. Please review the important information below.

Ethics, Data and Research Integrity Online Support Form

On page 1 of the form, students will be asked to specify their supervisor and/or course organiser. For PhD students or MSc students submitting their dissertation, it is important that they list their dissertation or PhD supervisor here and must leave the course organiser box  BLANK. Otherwise the form will be sent to the wrong person and will not be processed. If their supervisor does not appear in the drop down list, please select specify someone not in the list and add in their details.

All of the questions asked on the form are directly related to the type of research to be undertaken and so it should be a straightforward form to complete. The form can be saved and returned to at a later point, so students can clarify any issues with their supervisors as they complete the process.

View a listing of current in-progress and submitted applications

Note that if you are uploading more than one document into a form field, this must be uploaded in a single file eg a zip file.

If the research involves  human participants , students must complete the checklist for either on campus or off campus research, and include it as an attachment with the ethics application.

Research activity - COVID-checklist

Once submitted, the supervisor will be in touch via email to request further information or with the outcome. Students should check their Clutter and Junk folders on their student email account in case any of the communications are sent there.

If for any reason students need to update, revise, or check the status of their form, this can be done by logging in and viewing your submissions .

MSc students must carefully read section 6 of the Dissertation Handbook for guidance on dissertation ethics review.

MSc Dissertation Handbook 2023-24.docx (live.com)

In case of any queries on the process or the status of an application please contact your supervision or course organiser in the first instance. You may also contact:

• for MSc Dissertation Research Ethics submissions:  [email protected]
• for PhD and MScR Research Ethics submissions:  [email protected]

Supervisors are the first point of contact for students reflecting on the ethical implications of their planned research. They play a key role in guiding students through the ethics review process, conducting initial reviews of the ethics form, and ensuring that research carried out by their students adheres with ethical standards. The role of supervisors and other staff in ethics review differs depending on the level of study with differing processes at PGR, PGT and UGT. Supervisors must consult the relevant guidance on the Supervisor Resources intranet page: Supervisor Resources (sharepoint.com) .

We have prepared a template consent form and a template information sheet for colleagues in the School to adapt for projects as appropriate for the research.

Use of these templates is not compulsory. You can create your own versions, tailored to your own research context. Even if you do not use these templates, working through them may help you clarify appropriate practice for your own project.

For collaborative projects, or projects using oral consent, creating a list of key commitments and intentions around participant information and consent based on these templates may still be useful for sharing with team members, or documenting practice when oral consent is being used.

Participant Information Sheet Template

Informed Consent Form Template

What are SARELS?

This is a new role created to expand capacity across the School for dealing with ethical and related data management issues.

These new roles are intended to increase capacity for dealing with:

• ethical review
• to provide more integration and oversight of staff and student ethics processes
• to contribute to promoting good practice in research ethics across the School
• to contribute to the development of strategy around ethics

The appointees will work closely with the Deputy Director of Research Ethics (DDoR Ethics).

These roles are appointed by the Head of School in consultation with the DDoR Ethics. The appointments are normally for a period of three years. Appointees will normally be active in research and not solely desk-based research.

Areas of responsibility

Strategy and development.

• To work together with DDoR (Ethics), the DDoR (Data Management), the Director of Research, as well as the Research Support Office and other members of the Research Management Team as necessary, in order to promote best practice around ethics and data management in the School
• To contribute to the development of School strategy around ethics and data management

Research ethics: staff

• To review and provide an opinion on Level 1 applications (from across the School; not all in own subject area)
• To work with Deputy Director of Research Ethics & Integrity for review and provide an opinion on Level 2 applications (from across the School; not all in own subject area)
• To act as the lead to coordinate the review and provide an opinion on Level 3 reviews (from across the School; not all in own subject area) and to be available to sit on the panel for other Level 3 reviews if appropriate.
• To act as a point of contact for ethics queries at subject area level

Research Ethics: PhD students

• To provide guidance on SSPS research ethics processes and requirements for PhD students.
• To provide advice on level 2 ethics applications to Subject Area supervisors.
• To act as the lead to coordinate the review and sign-off of level 3 reviews for students and to be available to sit on the panel for other level 3 reviews, or project set-up meetings, if appropriate, in conjunction with DDoR (Ethics)
• To participate in planning for support for PhD student projects at level 2 and level 3
• Supervisor Resources for Ethics, including details of the PGR Ethics process, can be found here: SPS Sharepoint - Ethics Supervisor Resources .
• To participate in induction and training for the role
• To participate in an ethics and data management committee meeting, approximately monthly in term time (may be virtual or face-to-face)
• To contribute to the ongoing development of ethical practice in the School, including around data management, identifying emerging issues, addressing gaps in provision, proposing solutions etc
• To manage the ethics email box, where ethics applications will be forwarded from the RSO
• To carry out other emerging tasks related to ethics and data management as appropriate

Current SARELS (last update: February 2024)