Research Ethics Dilemma
Ethics Dilemma: You’re conducting a study on the effectiveness of a new teaching method. Midway through your experiment, you realize that the control group is performing significantly worse than the experimental group. What are the ethical considerations in this situation? Should you continue the study as planned, or intervene? Discuss the ethical principles at play and how you would approach this dilemma.
Check out our Essay writing services
Research Ethics Dilemma
Ethical Principles Involved
The first principle at play is beneficence, which requires researchers to maximize benefits and minimize harm. Continuing the study without intervention could disadvantage the control group. Justice is also critical because it demands fairness in how participants are treated. Respect for persons emphasizes informed consent and protecting participants’ rights. Together, these principles create a framework for ethical decision-making in research settings.
To Intervene or Continue
If the control group is significantly disadvantaged, continuing the study without change could raise ethical concerns. Intervening ensures that participants in the control group are not harmed by missing access to a beneficial teaching method. However, intervening too soon could undermine the validity of the research. The researcher must weigh the potential harm against the scientific value of completing the study as originally planned.
Balancing Scientific Integrity
Scientific integrity is essential for producing reliable results. Stopping or altering the study prematurely may compromise data quality and limit future benefits for larger populations. However, ethical responsibility to current participants often outweighs long-term goals. Researchers may consider modifying the design, such as offering the experimental teaching method to the control group after the study concludes. This balances fairness with scientific rigor.
Recommended Approach
The most ethical approach is to consult with an institutional review board (IRB) immediately. Transparency is vital, and adjustments should protect participants while maintaining as much scientific validity as possible. A delayed-intervention model could be implemented to provide both groups access to the new method. This ensures that no group is permanently disadvantaged while still allowing the study to generate meaningful data.
