Embedded Files
Rembrandt van Rijn - The Anatomy Lesson of Dr Nicolaes Tulp, 1632
Principle 5 Respect for research participants, the wider community, animals, and the environment
Principle 5 Respect for research participants, the wider community, animals, and the environment
Principle 5 Respect for research participants, the wider community, animals, and the environment
• Treat all human participants with care and respect and consider the needs of participants.
• Follow school policies in the use of animals in research and ensure that respect underpins all research with animals.
• Minimise adverse effects of the research on the environment.
Scenarios
Scenarios
Your student shoots their little brother with a water pistol every time he talks during TV/movies in a study on aversion therapy and writes up the results. What do you do?
Your student doesn't tell the participant that they are selecting 'ugly' people and trying to capture them from the most unflattering angle possible in a project to subvert beauty norms by photographing people in a project for an exhibition called 'Most People are Ugly'. What do you do?
You are told your student is distributing surveys in which easily identified people are asked if they have a mental illness. What do you do?
Guillaume Seignac - Cupid and Psyche, ca 1890s
Simple and Respectful Studies
Simple and Respectful Studies
There are simple experiments from which much can be inferred:
Read about this one: Apple test tells us if we’re sweet or sour - ANU
Guidelines to Principle 5
Guidelines to Principle 5
The following should guide research:
a) Students must get approval from their teacher for any self-developed topic or research question that requires engagement with human participants. That approval should be in writing such as an email or signed form (See the model BSSS form).
b) Teachers will ensure that formative work conducted in class is also of negligible risk to students, risks are considered and mitigated, and that ethical research is modelled to students.
c) Only negligible risk questioning (that is, where there is negligible risk to the participants or researchers) involving impersonal matters are appropriate topics for experimentation or quantitative /qualitative analysis in assessments for the Senior Secondary Certificate. More consequential matters may be investigated through an experimental/research design (i.e., not carried out), a literature review, or an assessment of published studies.
d) Students must consider the risks to themselves, their school, and their participants in planning a research study or experiment. A risk assessment should be conducted to justify the decision that the study is of negligible risk and safe (See attached Model Risk Assessment Matrix in Appendix 1).
e) A best practice approach is for teachers to provide a list of ethical experiments/studies that involve negligible risk for replication by students. Students will still follow the recommended steps for research, such as permission notes, risk assessments etc., so that they understand the seriousness and are trained in the process for later study and work.
Rebecca Solomon - The Young Teacher, 1861
f) A researcher’s top priority must always be the safety, feelings and dignity of people involved in the study. Researchers must be respectful of each participant’s personhood and ensure that they do not inflict, or repeat, trauma, psychological or physical injury on the participant. Be aware that asking personal questions could be traumatising and injurious.
When conducting oral history or biographical research, students should ask their teacher for help, or conduct research into writing good questions. Biographical methodology is a rich area of academic study. Students should access that advice from research, or follow the directions of the teacher. Generally, students should respect the right of their participant to tell their own story by planning questions and prompts carefully to minimise the effect of questions on the information received. For example, students should not ask leading questions, or not try to shape responses with their questions, e.g. How did you feel? rather than 'You must have been so angry?'
g) Students may ask follow-up questions to access more detail, but also respect that the participants may not want to discuss some issues in greater detail. Researchers should be aware of the impact their own preconceptions, beliefs or experiences may have on interactions with their participant in questions, analysing and forming arguments and conclusions, and consider that as a feature of their argument.
h) In qualitative data collection, questions are an important tool. Students should consider whether they wish to use a structured interview (where the questions are closed and read out exactly as worded) or semi-structured in which conversation is more natural and free flowing. Students should use research guides, research into methodology, or work with their teacher to plan questions that are appropriate to the purpose of their study.
Reviewing published studies can be useful to guide question development. In both structured and semi-structured interviews, students should advise the participant that they may choose not to answer any question.
Semi-structured interviews may require students to ask follow-up questions. It is recommended that the researcher consider possible follow up questions prior to the interview that could be included in the proposal that was submitted to the teacher. However, it is not uncommon that more spontaneous follow up questions in the interview are necessary to access further detail. If this occurs, students should try to ask questions in a way that limits the effect on the information likely to be provided in response. Also, students should be aware that the participant may not want to provide any more detail than they have already given.
i) In quantitative and qualitative studies, determining how to select participants is a critical part of the methodology and must be explicitly explained in the proposal and in the submitted report. Students should select participants fairly and in a manner that does not distort results or predetermine conclusions. Students should actively seek guidance into how to fairly select participants. Students should consider the implications for the data of the method of participant selection in their argumentation and conclusions.
j) People involved in a study must be fully informed of the goals and intentions of the study in writing. Human participants must give written informed consent for their involvement. People under 18 must have parental consent for participation (Schools may use the model form provided by the BSSS, or this may be an online form with an affirmation). Teacher guided formative work in class does not require permission notes of people under 18 as this is regarded as teaching, not as undertaking research.
k) Researchers can use the information gathered in research only for the stated purpose to which participants consented. It should not be used for other purposes.
l) Data gathered in a study should be considered personal information and must be stored securely and every reasonable effort made to maintain privacy. It is recommended that all data should be kept in school data drives. Data should be destroyed after unit scores are awarded and the appeals period has passed. A plan for managing data should be a part of the risk assessment. Techniques for protecting participant privacy include containing personal data about participants in password protected files and file folders. Another technique is to always use a code or substitute name in gathering, analysing, and reporting data about a person.
Preparatory sketches of live human models would best be done on paper detachable from the Process Journal, so that in the event that permission to exhibit is refused, pages can be removed and the process journal still utilised for art school interviews etc.
m) If a quantitative method is used, in which participants are deidentified and represented only by data points, participants do not need to be provided with the final product, though that would be courteous.
n) If identified or identifiable in the research product, such as an analytical or creative work, students must show the participant how they have been represented in the final work. The participant has the right to decline to be involved and remove their data at any point. Alternatively, at that point they may require the responses to be edited to be more accurate and the student should do so, even if that requires rethinking their argument or conclusions. The conclusions made from accurate data do not have to be changed, though the student-researcher should consider the implications for their relationships prior to undertaking research.
An identifiable participant might also decline to give permission for exhibition or circulation of the work, then it should not be exhibited or circulated/published. However, the work may still be marked by the teacher and internal moderator. It should not be submitted to systemic Moderation Day.
If the participant declines permission for exhibition/circulation because the final work is not consistent with the promises of the student to the participant, then the student has been unethical. The teacher will consider both sides of the argument and the teacher may impose academic integrity penalties, such as marking only the ethical components of the work, or a notional zero. Students who knowingly refuse to comply and do not inform the teacher of the withdrawal of consent risk the imposition of serious academic penalties. Existing appeals processes apply. Informed consent forms must be provided at the submission of the work for assessment.
o) A copy of the final product, if replicable, should be gifted to the participant if they are identifiable, e.g., a biography.
p) Another aspect of ethical research is that students have an ethical responsibility to engage with the cultural material and knowledge of other cultures with the intention to understand, represent fairly without stereotype, and give voice to experiences with the people of the culture. Engaging as a sympathetic observer of the cultures of traditionally disempowered groups is in many ways an ethical duty. The abstract study, analysis or appreciation of cultural products or knowledge is not appropriation and learning about marginalised or disempowered cultures is an ethical duty in itself.
Students must consider the capacity of their work to cause offence if they employ the cultural heritage of groups other than their own in research that culminates in critical or creative art works. Using the cultural material of others incorrectly, inaccurately, insensitively or without cultural authority or empathy can cause profound offence. Such research can harm members of that culture, including a loss of opportunity to gain or profit from their own heritage, or offence and humiliation. The aphorism “Nothing about me without me” is useful to illuminate this principle. Having conversations with people with cultural authority is the starting point.
Animals and Sustainability
Animals and Sustainability
There are strict guidelines in schools and school systems around use of animals in research. Students must adhere to those guidelines. Here is a link to the ACT ED policy on animals in research.
When conducting research and experiments students should consider sustainability. This includes whether equipment is reusable or recyclable and how to clean equipment without harmful chemicals entering our waterways. How to dispose of chemicals and other substances safely and without harm to the environment must also be considered.
Explanatory Notes
Explanatory Notes
Note the provision in 5-K that teacher guided simple qualitative or quantitative work in class is not regarded as research for the purposes of these principles and guidelines, though consent forms might be modelled. For example, collecting people's favourite ice-cream flavours in Essential Math to practice graphing and processing data would not be research to the extent that parental consent would be required. On a similar basis, anonymous customer service or customer feedback in Hospitality or Tourism, would not require parental consent, though people undertaking the survey should still be informed about how the responses will be used. Also, students should take care that identifiable data such as email addresses are not inadvertently collected through the survey process. Teachers should of course teach students about how companies might actively seek to collect data through such survey methods for marketing purposes, even if they don't undertake such practices in the simulated tasks.
Research material collected by students can include data or information, such as unpublished knowledge, ideas, words, sound recordings, images, and videos of participants. Any unpublished material relating to or provided by other people, such as classmates, friends, or family, can only be used with the informed consent of the participant, and evidence of consent must be provided, and data drawn from participants should be cited. If the participant is under the age of 18, parental consent must also be provided. Informed consent involves the participant understanding the purpose and goal of the work in which they appear.
If the participant declines to consent to exhibiting or publishing work that is consistent with the proposal, then that work should not be presented to others, but it still might be assessed and viewed by the teacher and internal moderating teacher. It should not be presented for review on Moderation Day. Participants have the right to withdraw consent without any reason.
However, if the nature of the final product deviates substantially from the project proposal to which the participant consented, then the researcher/student has been unethical as they failed to live up to their promises. Consequently, the work can be rejected, in part or in whole, for assessment using the rules under Academic Integrity in the BSSS Policy and Procedures Manual. This pertains to both analytical and creative work.
There are a range of considerations for investigations that involve direct interactions with living people, such as biographical works, oral history, surveys, and experimental studies. There are areas of study that secondary students should not attempt to research with human participants, as due to their inexperience or lack of knowledge they may harm their participants or themselves. For example, some topics may trigger past trauma in the research participant. Due attention should be paid to the ethics of study or experimentation in the disciplines by teachers and schools.
Consider this video on why human-based research can be risky, but also what it can provide.
This video has been made by experienced ACT teacher Dr Prathiba Nagabhushan
This video on Psychology research methods Ethics - Research Methods - YouTube has been produced by the UK curriculum authorities for A Level Psychology.
Safe Locations for Data
Safe Locations for Data
Please note that confidential data about students shouldn't be kept on third party provided platforms. The school's home drives are best, or the student's own computer with password protected file folder in both cases. For more general or deidentified data, setting up password protected folders would be a good practice for students to learn and use.
As a part of the consent to participation, the plan for deleting data should be plain and it should be adhered to. If the teacher or school becomes aware that plan has not been adhered to, that is grounds for penalty under the Academic Integrity provisions. As a matter of practicality, this cannot be assured by teachers and schools in an active way, but only responded to if it becomes known.
Confidential data about identifiable students should not be fed to Generative AI platforms to draft responses. Such platforms do not guarantee the privacy of such data and it will be used to further train the AI.
Activities 6.1
Activities 6.1
Choose one of the three following topics for exploration.
Write a paragraph reflecting on how you prepare students to implement ethical research methodologies in your discipline.
Research Study Design Tutorials:
Semi-structured- Qualitative Interviews: A How-To Guide to Interviewing in Social Science | Off the Shelf 8 - YouTube
Qualitative Research in Science/Health Fundamentals of Qualitative Research Methods: What is Qualitative Research (Module 1) - Bing video
Types of Quantitative Research Designs~GM Lectures - Bing video
Basic Quantitative Research Overview - YouTube
Street Photography- Legal and ethical differences in street photography.
These Ethical guidelines trump the law for the purposes of assessment. Photographs of people for artistic purposes rather than commercial, e.g. advertising, allow much under the law. However, for the safety of students and participants, these guidelines take a more careful approach than the law in regard to street photography.
Arts Law Centre of Australia- Street Photographer's Rights Information Sheet
Street Photography Legal and Ethical Discussions- Law and Ethics in Street Photography - YouTube
Street Photography Ethical Discussions- Is Street Photography WRONG? | The ethics and rules of street photography - YouTube
Photographic Studio work
That will require consents:
Children in the creative process (Australia) - Arts Law Centre of Australia
Photography & subject consent forms / waivers - YouTube
TechCorner - Model Release Forms - The most expensive mistake you can make in photography - YouTube
Frida Kahlo - Self Portrait with Thorn Necklace and Hummingbird, 1940
Examples of Safe and Ethical Studies in Psychology
Examples of Safe and Ethical Studies in Psychology
Examples of safe experiments for Psychology students to conduct provided by Geoff Taylor, an experienced ACT College teacher.
Here is the video explaining this list.
Studies on individual cognition are appropriate because they are sometimes easier to conduct in terms of ethical and methodological considerations. Many studies on groups dynamics are either quasi-experimental or they present too many ethical challenges regarding deception, among other problems.
Here are a few examples of experimental studies in Psychology that could be safely replicated by students.
• The working memory model and Baddeley et al.’s (1975) experiment on word length.
• Schema theory and Roediger et al.’s (2014) experiment on serial vs. repeated reproduction.
• Schema theory and Loftus and Palmer’s (1974) experiment on eyewitness memory.
• The two-system thinking model and Alter et al.’s (2007) experiment on disfluency and rational thinking.
• The two-system thinking model and Tversky and Kahneman’s (1973) experiment on the availability heuristic.
• Transactive memory and Sparrow et al.’s (2011) experiment on Google’s effects on memory.
• Social identity theory and Chiu et al.’s (2009) experiment on cultural priming and intergroup behaviour
• Social identity theory (specifically social comparison, and Jones et al.’s (1968) experiment on the primacy effect in attributions about intelligence.
• The halo effect as demonstrated in the Nisbett and Wilson (1977) experiment on evaluations of a presenter with a ‘warm’ or ‘cold’ personality.
• The effects of prior knowledge on comprehension and memory by Bransford and Johnson (1972).
• Smartphone notifications and working memory (Aharony and Zion, 2019).
• The mere presence of a smartphone and working memory (Ward et al. 2017).
• Handwriting vs. Typing by Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014).
• The Mozart Effect by Rauscher et al. (1993), Liked vs. Disliked music (Perham and Vizard, 2010), “Keep calm and pump up the jams.” (Marti-Marca et al. 2020), Music v No Music (Cokerton, Moore and Normal, 1997).
• The duration of short-term memory by Peterson and Peterson (1959).
• Google effects on Memory by Sparrow, Liu and Wegner (2011).
• The effects of TV on working memory (Lillard and Peterson, 2011).
• Facial expressions and mood by Kleinke et al. (1998).
• Anchoring bias Kahneman and Tversky (1974) and guessing Gandhi’s age by Strack and Mussweiler (1997).
• The effects of difficult to read fonts on memory (Diemand-Yauman et al. 2011).
• Weapon focus and memory reliability (Loftus, Loftus and Messo, 1987.
• The effects of colour on cognition (Rehta and Zhu, 2009).
• The effects of colour on reducing stress (Saito and Tada, 2007).
• The effects of perceived effort on the rating of quality (Kruger et al. 2010).
• The influence of self-reference on memory (Rogers, Kuiper and Kirker, 1977).
• The effects of reciting words out loud on recall (Landry and Bartling, 2011).
• Forming impressions of someone’s personality (Asch, 1946).
• The effects of visual noise on memory (Quinn and McConnell, 1996).
• The effects of word length of memory (Baddeley, Thomson, and Buchanan, 1975).
• Does holding a warm cup of coffee increased mood? (Williams and Barge, 2008).
• Effects of exercise on memory (Labuan and Etneir, 2011).
Page updated
Report abuse