1. Research Ethics & Integrity
Peter Ayton Professor of Psychology Chair of Senate Research Ethics Committee

2. What is research integrity?
Compliance
Misconduct: falsification, fabrication, authorship, conflict of interest, plagiarism, duplication…
Ethics: methodology, harms/benefits, consent, usefulness/social value
Continuing responsibility to research participants, colleagues, institution, discipline, society
Quality – highest standard of honesty, confidentiality and care
Documentation of research
Publication, authorship and acknowledgement of contributors
Fostering good practice
Also SUBJECT SPECIFIC – e.g. lab books

3. Research Integrity: Why is it important?
Research integrity is vital to ensure that research is carried out to the highest possible standards.
It should be self-evident but often it is not.
It therefore needs to be promoted and supported.
For researchers: know what is required of you, where to get help and try to think about issues and problems in advance.
For organisations: support your researchers and make sure there is no stigma attached to asking for help.
Good practice in research is based on the maintenance of professional standards. The Nolan Committee (1995) on Standards in Public Life identified Seven Principles of Public Life as selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership. The UKRIO Code of Conduct further identifies the key principles in good research practice as excellence, honesty, integrity, co-operation, accountability, providing and obtaining the necessary training and skills, and safety. University members are expected to adhere to these principles and in particular must ensure:
The application of the highest possible standards of honesty, confidentiality, care and integrity in planning, developing, completing and disseminating a piece of research, including consideration of the potential impact of the research on others (whether directly or indirectly), and in the acknowledgement of the direct and indirect contributions of others.
A continuing engagement in developments in relevant subjects and disciplines, including their methodologies.
Clear planning, rationale and methodologies for each research project.
A critical approach to one’s own research results and a willingness to engage with others in discussion of both the approach taken and the research findings.
Compliance with regulations laid down by City and funding or other relevant research bodies (eg the NHS) as well as legal, health and safety, and moral obligations. This includes consideration in all cases of whether the research to be undertaken has ethical implications and where necessary seeking and abiding by the appropriate ethical approval for the research.
Why do we promote research integrity?
Ensure research is carried out to the highest possible standards of quality and ethics.
Retain the public’s trust.
Ensure the safety of research participants.
Reduce poor practice and mistakes.
Prevent research misconduct.
Prevent ‘questionable research practices’.
Encourage researchers to engage critically with issues of good practice and high ethical standards in research.

4. University Framework for Good Practice in Research
The aims of the Framework are to:
To establish and promote a code of good practice in the conduct of all aspects of research
To encourage members of the University to maintain the highest achievable standards in their research conduct
To ensure the quality of research conducted by members of the University is safeguarded and to document the procedure for investigating allegations of misconduct

5. What is the point of research ethics committees?
To ensure the following are not harmed;
Participants
Researchers
Reputation of the university
Ethics needs to be your first consideration when planning research; , not an afterthought to be added on when everything else is in place.

6. Protecting participants from harm
Traditionally biomedical
Now all disciplines
Professional and legal requirements
All research involving human participants or collecting personal information and data have ethical implications!
Anonymity
Confidentiality
DPA
Never collect more data than is required
Transportation of data
Storage
Destruction
Re-use of personal data
International

7. What if I do not get ethical approval when it is required?
Ethics needs to be your first consideration, not an afterthought
If you do not get ethics approval when it is needed;
You may be subject to disciplinary proceedings
Your PhD/MSc will not get awarded
Your research will not be publishable
You are not insured
Retrospective ethical approval is never given.

8. Do I need ethical approval for my research?
Perhaps you don’t. Some research is exempt, such as;
Most work not involving humans or animals.
Any research that is being conducted on existing data publically available
Research involving public officials
Almost all other research involving humans and their data must undergo ethical scrutiny

9. Some research needs approval by outside bodies
For example;
NHS approval will be needed if research participants are identified from, or because of, their past or present use of NHS services, including participants recruited through these services as healthy controls. This also applies to research participants identified because of their status as relatives or carers of past or present users of these services.
Research involving members of the armed forces or research funded or sponsored by the Ministry of Defence will need MoD approval.
If participants are recruited who are currently under the auspices of the Criminal Justice System, for example, but not limited to, people on remand, prisoners and those on probation, guidance from the Offender Health Research Network must be followed.
If the study involves participants who unable to give informed consent, for example, but not limited to, people who may have a degree of learning disability or mental ill-health, that means they are unable to make an informed decision on their own behalf, the HRA: Mental Capacity Act needs to be followed.

10. Levels of ethical review within the University
Senate Research Ethics Committee
School Research Ethical Committees
SHS Cass MCSE SASS Law
Optometry LCS culture music journalism politics psychology sociology
Divisional/Departmental Research Ethical Committees

11. Proportionality
The level of ethical scrutiny should be proportional to the risk. Lower risk projects obviously need less intense scrutiny than higher risk ones. An uncontentious undergraduate project, for example, might be ‘signed off’ at departmental level by the supervisor and one other academic, while a full scale clinical trial would need consideration by the Senate Research Ethics Committee.

12. Low risk
The study does not involve participants who are vulnerable or unable to give informed consent or are in a dependent position
Participants will not be asked to take part in the study without their consent or knowledge at the time and no deception will be used
There is no risk that the highly sensitive nature of the topic might lead to disclosure from the participants concerning their own involvement in illegal activities or other activities that represent a risk to themselves or others
The study does not induce psychological stress or anxiety, or produce humiliation or cause harm or negative consequences beyond the risks encountered in the normal life of the participants
No drugs, placebos or other substances (such as food substance or vitamins) will be administered as part of this study and no invasive, intrusive or potentially harmful procedures of any kind will be used.

13. Potentially higher risk project (from an ethics point of view)
Does the study involve participants who are particularly vulnerable, unable to give informed consent or in a dependent position?  
Will participants be asked to take part in the study without their consent or knowledge at the time or will deception be involved?  
Is there a risk that the highly sensitive nature of the research topic might lead to disclosures from the participant concerning their own involvement in illegal activities or other activities that represent a risk to themselves or others ?
Could the study induce psychological stress, produce humiliation or cause harm beyond the risks encountered in normal life?  
Are drugs, placebos or other substances to be administered to the study participants or will the study involve invasive, intrusive or potentially harmful procedures of any kind?
Is there a risk of harm to the researcher?

14. Protecting participants from harm (some things you will need to consider/do)
Methods must be appropriate to answer the question posed and the question should be worthwhile
Risks of physical and psychological harm must be minimised/negated
Participants must give ‘informed consent’
The project must be fully explained to them in writing by a Participant Information Sheet.
They must sign a consent form agreeing to all aspects of the project
Sufficient time must elapse between being informed of the study and giving consent
How will potential participants be approached recruited (care must be taken to avoid any pressure on them)
How have you determined your sample size (has a power calculation been done)?
What selection criteria are you using? Specify inclusion and exclusion criteria. If exclusion of participants is made on the basis of age, gender, ethnicity, race, disability, sexuality, religion or any other factor, please explain and justify why.
If people are to be excluded how will this be explained to them?
What procedures are in place for the appropriate referral of a study participant who discloses an emotional, psychological, health, education or other issue during the course of the research or is identified by the researcher to have such a need?

15. Any questions please call or email
Anna Ramberg Research Governance & Integrity Manager Secretary to Senate Research Ethics Committee University Research Office Drysdale E214 X3040 Chair of Senate Research Ethics Committee: Professor Peter Ayton Department of Psychology X8524