79C3C34C52B45572883A05D425EB0F82
Guidelines for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences, Humanities, and Theology
https://www.etikkom.no/globalassets/documents/english-publications/60127_fek_guidelines_nesh_digital_corr.pdf
http://leaux.net/URLS/ConvertAPI Text Files/BF4733C6D9C94FCCC297786C855D0EAF.en.txt
Examining the file media/Synopses/BF4733C6D9C94FCCC297786C855D0EAF.html:
This file was generated: 2020-12-01 07:28:29
| Indicators in focus are typically shown highlighted in yellow; |
Peer Indicators (that share the same Vulnerability association) are shown highlighted in pink; |
"Outside" Indicators (those that do NOT share the same Vulnerability association) are shown highlighted in green; |
Trigger Words/Phrases are shown highlighted in gray. |
Link to Orphaned Trigger Words (Appendix (Indicator List, Indicator Peers, Trigger Words, Type/Vulnerability/Indicator Overlay)
Applicable Type / Vulnerability / Indicator Overlay for this Input
Political / Illegal Activity
Searching for indicator illegal:
(return to top)
p.000016: of the results, and for informing the parties involved and the general public about the purpose and results of the
p.000016: project, for example through the internet or other media like newspapers, radio and television (see also point 10).
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016: 16 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000017:
p.000017: 9 Confidentiality
p.000017: Generally, researchers must process data acquired about personal matters confidentially. Personal data must normally be
p.000017: de-identified, while publication and dissemination of the research material must normally be anonymised. In certain
p.000017: situations, researchers must nonetheless balance confidentiality and the obligation to notify.
p.000017:
p.000017: When researchers promise confidentiality to participants, the pledge implies that the infor- mation will not be passed
p.000017: on in ways that can identify the individuals. Both the credibility of the researchers and the participants’ trust in
p.000017: research are closely linked to confidentiality. At the same time, the requirement of confidentiality has a legal aspect
p.000017: associated with protection of personal integrity and privacy, and both the Public Administration Act and the Personal
p.000017: Data Act set limits on the type of confidentiality researchers can promise participants. Researchers must therefore
p.000017: communicate clearly the limits of the pledge of confidentiality.
p.000017: Sometimes a conflict can arise between the duty of confidentiality and the obligation to notify. The research may
p.000017: reveal censurable or illegal situations that can expose researchers to conflicting loyalties, particularly with a view
p.000017: to the promise of confidentiality. Researchers must therefore not allow themselves to become dependent on the
p.000017: participants, and such conflicts can be prevented by explaining the limits on the promise of confidentiality. This also
p.000017: applies to processing of data that is subject to protection of sources.19
p.000017: In given situations, the duty of confidentiality must yield to the duty to prevent a criminal offence.20 Researchers
p.000017: are legally bound to prevent a criminal offence or report it to the police, without regard for the duty of
p.000017: confidentiality. This includes suspicion of espionage, acts of terrorism, murder, rape, incest or domestic violence.21
p.000017: Children are particularly entitled to protection, and when abuse or neglect are suspected, researchers also have a duty
p.000017: of disclosure and must report the matter to the child welfare authorities. This applies to everyone, notwithstanding
p.000017: the duty of confidentiality.22
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: 19 Eivind Smith, Taushetsplikt og kildevern for forskere [Confidentiality and protection of sources for researchers],
...
Political / criminal
Searching for indicator criminal:
(return to top)
p.000017: de-identified, while publication and dissemination of the research material must normally be anonymised. In certain
p.000017: situations, researchers must nonetheless balance confidentiality and the obligation to notify.
p.000017:
p.000017: When researchers promise confidentiality to participants, the pledge implies that the infor- mation will not be passed
p.000017: on in ways that can identify the individuals. Both the credibility of the researchers and the participants’ trust in
p.000017: research are closely linked to confidentiality. At the same time, the requirement of confidentiality has a legal aspect
p.000017: associated with protection of personal integrity and privacy, and both the Public Administration Act and the Personal
p.000017: Data Act set limits on the type of confidentiality researchers can promise participants. Researchers must therefore
p.000017: communicate clearly the limits of the pledge of confidentiality.
p.000017: Sometimes a conflict can arise between the duty of confidentiality and the obligation to notify. The research may
p.000017: reveal censurable or illegal situations that can expose researchers to conflicting loyalties, particularly with a view
p.000017: to the promise of confidentiality. Researchers must therefore not allow themselves to become dependent on the
p.000017: participants, and such conflicts can be prevented by explaining the limits on the promise of confidentiality. This also
p.000017: applies to processing of data that is subject to protection of sources.19
p.000017: In given situations, the duty of confidentiality must yield to the duty to prevent a criminal offence.20 Researchers
p.000017: are legally bound to prevent a criminal offence or report it to the police, without regard for the duty of
p.000017: confidentiality. This includes suspicion of espionage, acts of terrorism, murder, rape, incest or domestic violence.21
p.000017: Children are particularly entitled to protection, and when abuse or neglect are suspected, researchers also have a duty
p.000017: of disclosure and must report the matter to the child welfare authorities. This applies to everyone, notwithstanding
p.000017: the duty of confidentiality.22
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: 19 Eivind Smith, Taushetsplikt og kildevern for forskere [Confidentiality and protection of sources for researchers],
p.000017: NESH, Oslo 1998.
p.000017: 20 Section 196 of the General Civil Penal Code.
p.000017: 21 The National Research Ethics Committees, Forskeres taushetsplikt og meldeplikt [Researchers’ duty of
p.000017: confidentiality and duty of notification], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH) and Helene Ingierd (NENT), Oslo 2013.
p.000017: 22 Section 6-4 of the Child Welfare Act.
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: GUIDELINES – NESH 17
p.000018:
p.000018: 10 Limited re-use
p.000018: Identifiable personal data collected for a specific research purpose cannot automatically be used for other research.
p.000018:
...
Political / political affiliation
Searching for indicator party:
(return to top)
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: 6 Privacy
p.000013: Researchers must respect the participants’ autonomy, integrity, freedom and right of co-determination.
p.000013:
p.000013: From a legal perspective, the protection of privacy is linked to the processing of personal data. Thus, research must
p.000013: be conducted in accordance with basic considerations for data protection, such as personal integrity, privacy and
p.000013: responsible use and storage of personal data. However, privacy also has a wider scope in research ethics, and
p.000013: researchers must exercise due caution and responsibility
p.000013: • when self-respect or other values of importance to individuals are at stake;
p.000013: • when individuals have little influence on the decision to participate in research, for example in connection with
p.000013: research using the internet or at an institution;
p.000013: • when individuals have impaired or absent capacity to protect their own needs and interests;
p.000013: • when individuals actively contribute in acquiring data for research, for example by agreeing to be observed or
p.000013: interviewed;
p.000013: • when individuals can be identified, directly or indirectly, either as participants or as part of communities
p.000013: recognisable in publications or in other dissemination of research;
p.000013: • when a third party is affected by the research.
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: 7 Duty to inform
p.000013: Researchers must provide participants with adequate information about the field of research, the purpose of the
p.000013: research, who has funded the project, who will receive access to the information, the intended use of the results, and
p.000013: the consequences of participation in the research project.
p.000013:
p.000013: The type of information required depends on the nature of the research; whether it takes the form of field studies,
p.000013: experiments or using the internet. There are various considerations associated with different types of source material
p.000013: and data; whether it is a matter of personal
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: GUIDELINES – NESH 13
p.000014:
p.000014: data, sensitive information, previously acquired material, anonymised material or information acquired from the
p.000014: internet. When collecting and processing personal data, especially sensitive personal data, researchers also have a
p.000014: statutory obligation to notify the subjects or participants in the research and must also obtain their consent (see
p.000014: Introduction and point 8).
p.000014: Researchers must provide information in a neutral manner, so that the subjects are not exposed to undue pressure. The
p.000014: information must be adapted to the participatns’ cultural background and communicated in a language they understand. In
p.000014: some research projects, it may be necessary to use an interpreter to provide the necessary information. It may also be
...
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 34 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000035:
p.000035: 37 Independence and conflict of interests
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions should maintain their independence in relation to their principals.
p.000035:
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions must avoid becoming dependent on their com- missioners. Dependence may
p.000035: undermine their impartiality and the scientific quality of the research. This is particularly true if a single
p.000035: commissioner is responsible for a substantial portion of the researcher’s or research institution’s funding. It is
p.000035: therefore important for the researcher/institution and the commissioner not to have convergent interests to the point
p.000035: that they threaten the independence of the research (the vested interest threat). The sale of advisory or consulting
p.000035: services to actors who also have an interest in the research having a particular outcome may increase the vested
p.000035: interest threat.
p.000035: Non-financial factors may also threaten independent research. Personal ties, either through family relations or as a
p.000035: result of long-term connections between the research institution/researcher and those taking part in the research
p.000035: projects may lead to dependence in several ways. These ties may lead to the research being used to promote the views
p.000035: and interests of certain parties (representative party threat), or it may lead to there not being sufficient distance
p.000035: between the researcher and the participants (threat to confidentiality), or it may lead to independence being
p.000035: threatened because the participants are in a position where they can influence the researcher (threat of pressure).
p.000035: In some situations, the role of independent research may come into conflict with other roles the researcher may have,
p.000035: for example as adviser or consultant. If a researcher accepts an assignment that may undermine the institution’s
p.000035: credibility, it is necessary to report the situation at the very least. In some situations, the conflict between roles
p.000035: will be so strong that the roles should not be combined.
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035: 38 Transparency in research funding
p.000035: Both researchers and commissioners have a duty to make it publicly known who is funding the research.
p.000035:
p.000035: It must be clear who is funding the research. Transparency concerning funding makes it easier for researchers to
p.000035: protect themselves against undue pressure and thus ensure the freedom and independence of the research. Moreover,
p.000035: commissioners have a reasonable claim to have their funding of research publicly known.
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035: GUIDELINES – NESH 35
p.000036:
p.000036: When researchers are going to publish and use results, they have an independent responsi- bility to be open and
p.000036: transparent about all ties (commissioners and funding etc.) that might have a bearing on the credibility of the
...
Searching for indicator political:
(return to top)
p.000009: for Research [Personvernombudet for forskning] at the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (formerly NSD) performs this
p.000009: task for many research institutions in Norway.
p.000009: The main task of the data protection officer is to ensure that institutions are able to perform their statutory
p.000009: obligations related to internal control and quality assurance of own research. The data protection officer may also
p.000009: offer guidance and advice on matters regarding privacy. Projects that involve processing personal data may not begin
p.000009: until a data protection officer has reviewed the project.
p.000009: e) According to the Personal Data Act, it is a general rule that the Data Protection Authority [Datatilsynet] must
p.000009: grant a licence for the processing of sensitive personal data, but research projects are exempt from this obligation to
p.000009: obtain a licence if a data protection officer has recommended the project.12 Sensitive personal data include
p.000009: information about a person’s health, race or ethnic background, sexuality, and their political, philosophical or
p.000009: religious beliefs. Some projects that process sensitive personal data are not covered by the exemption in the Personal
p.000009: Data Regulations, nor do they require a license from the Data Protection Authority.13
p.000009: If the project is subject to an obligation to obtain a licence, the Data Protection Official for Research may assist
p.000009: with the writing of the application for a license and help send it to the Data Protection Authority. The Authority’s
p.000009: responsibilities include assessing whether society’s interest in new knowledge clearly outweighs the burdens the
p.000009: research may impose on individuals. The Data Protection Authority may issue a license under the assumption that
p.000009: specific conditions are met. Such conditions will be legally binding on researchers. Projects that are subject to an
p.000009: obligation to obtain a licence cannot be initiated until the Data Protection Authority has given such a licence.
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009: 11 Section 31 of the Personal Data Act; Section 7-12 of the Personal Data Regulations.
p.000009: 12 Section 33 subsection 1 of the Personal Data Act; Section 7-27 of the Personal Data Regulations. 13 Projects that
...
p.000010: by various specific and values. The most fundamental obligation of science is the pursuit for truth. At the same time,
p.000010: research can never fully achieve this goal. Most conclusions are contingent and limited. Nevertheless, the norms of
p.000010: science have a value in themselves as guidelines and regulatory principles for the research community’s collective
p.000010: pursuit for truth.
p.000010: In the humanities and social sciences, involvement and interpretation are often integral parts of the research process.
p.000010: Different academic approaches and theoretical positions may also allow for different, but nonetheless reasonable,
p.000010: interpretations of the same material. Consequently, it is important to reflect on and account for how one’s own values
p.000010: and attitudes affect the choice of topic, data sources and interpretations. Integrity in documentation, consistency in
p.000010: argumentation, impartiality in assessment and openness regarding uncer- tainty are common obligations in research
p.000010: ethics, irrespective of the values, positions or perspectives of the researchers.
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010: 2 Freedom of research
p.000010: Both researchers and research institutions are responsible for preserving the freedom and independence of research,
p.000010: especially when the topic is controversial or when strategic or commercial considerations impose pressure and
p.000010: constraints on research.
p.000010:
p.000010: Scientific norms regarding originality, openness and trustworthiness may conflict with the desire of other parties to
p.000010: prevent or govern research. Research must be safeguarded against internal or external pressure that limits the
p.000010: exploration of well-defined problems that may intersect financial, political, social, cultural or religious interests
p.000010: and traditions. This is part of the reason why academic freedom was made statutory in 2007, ordering institutions to
p.000010: promote and protect academic freedom.14 However, the independence of research exists as a norm independently of this
p.000010: codification, while at the same time the law now states that teaching and research must comply with recognised
p.000010: scientific and ethical principles.
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010: 14 Section 1-5 of the Universities and Colleges Act.
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010: 10 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000011:
p.000011: It is the soundness and relevance of the arguments and the quality of the documentation that should provide the
p.000011: foundation for research based conclusions – and for knowledge production in research in general – not any established
p.000011: interests and traditions in or outside the research community.
p.000011: The duty and obligation of openness and publication means that neither researchers nor research institutions may
p.000011: withhold or selectively report results and conclusions. Any attempts to impose or dictate what results the research
p.000011: should lead to, are illegitimate. This calls for arrangements to ensure both the independence of institutions and the
p.000011: independence of researchers within the institutions. Research presupposes the freedom to seek, produce and disseminate
p.000011: scientific knowledge to the wider public.
p.000011: The level of independence varies between basic, applied and commissioned research. All research must nonetheless be
p.000011: protected from pressure that endangers good and respon- sible research. In addition, commissioned research outside the
...
p.000021: are subject to abuse, assault or neglect (see point 9).
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: 24 The National Research Ethics Committees, Barn i forskning. Etiske dimensjoner [Children in research. Ethical
p.000021: dimensions], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH), Jacob Hølen (NEM) and Helene Ingierd (NESH), Oslo 2013.
p.000021: 25 The Consumer Ombudsman and the Data Protection Authority, Barn og unges personopplysninger: Veiledning for
p.000021: innhenting og bruk [Guidelines for the collection and use of personal data on children and young persons], Oslo 2004.
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: GUIDELINES – NESH 21
p.000022:
p.000022: 15 Respect for privacy and family life
p.000022: Researchers must respect individuals’ privacy and family life. Participants are entitled to check whether confidential
p.000022: information about them is made available to others.
p.000022:
p.000022: Respect for privacy aims at protecting individuals against unwanted interference and expo- sure. This applies not only
p.000022: to emotional issues, but also to questions that involve sickness and health, political and religious opinions, and
p.000022: sexuality.
p.000022: Researchers should be especially attentive when they ask questions regarding intimate matters and they should avoid
p.000022: putting pressure on participants. What participants perceive as sensitive information may vary from one individual or
p.000022: group to the next.
p.000022: It can be difficult to distinguish between the private and the public sphere, for example when conducting research on
p.000022: and via the internet. When using material from such inter- actions, researchers must be duly aware of the fact that
p.000022: people’s understanding of what is private and what is public in such media may vary.26
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 16 Respect for the values and motives of others
p.000022: Researchers must not ascribe irrational or unworthy motives to participants without providing convincing documentation
p.000022: and justification. Researchers must show respect for the values and views of research participants, not least when they
p.000022: differ from those generally accepted by society at large.
p.000022:
p.000022: Research is often concerned with the behaviour and values of minorities, e.g. religious groups, ethnic minorities,
p.000022: youth groups, or political subcultures. Some persons may find this research to be intrusive or offensive. Researchers
p.000022: must take seriously the participants’ understanding of themselves and avoid representations that diminish their
p.000022: legitimate rights In many research projects in the humanities and social sciences, where actions are often
p.000022: used in explanations, the participants’ motives often play a key role. There is frequently uncertainty associated with
p.000022: exploration of motives, not least when it comes to research on other cultures or historical periods. A clear
p.000022: distinction should therefore be drawn between description and interpretation, or between documentation of actual
p.000022: courses of events and different interpretations of such events.
p.000022: At the same time, the participants’ motives are often directly associated with their social roles. For example,
p.000022: researchers may assume that politicians seek influence, that
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 26 NESH, Ethical Guidelines for Internet Research, Oslo (2003) 2016.
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 22 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000023:
p.000023: business leaders seek profit, or that there are conflicts between generations. Stronger evi- dence is required to
p.000023: ascribe more unusual motives to participants. Special documentation and argumentation are required for providing
p.000023: accounts of actions that ascribe unworthy motives to participants or motives other than those they invoke themselves.
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: 17 Respect for posthumous reputations
p.000023: It is important to act with care when conducting research on deceased persons.
p.000023:
p.000023: Respect, documentation and accountability are also required when conducting research on deceased persons. Out of
...
p.000035: commissioners have a reasonable claim to have their funding of research publicly known.
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035: GUIDELINES – NESH 35
p.000036:
p.000036: When researchers are going to publish and use results, they have an independent responsi- bility to be open and
p.000036: transparent about all ties (commissioners and funding etc.) that might have a bearing on the credibility of the
p.000036: research/reporting that has been conducted.
p.000036:
p.000036:
p.000036: 39 Presentation and use of results
p.000036: Both researchers and commissioners have a responsibility to prevent research results from being presented in a
p.000036: misleading manner. It is unethical to delimit the subject of the research with a view to producing particularly
p.000036: desirable results, or to present research results in an intentionally skewed manner.
p.000036:
p.000036: Commissioners may not withhold research results in such a way that the findings that are made public give a distorted
p.000036: picture of one or more circumstances. Researchers must be protected against undue pressure from the commissioner to
p.000036: draw particular conclusions, and in certain situations should invoke their right to withdraw from assignments.
p.000036: Commissioners must accept that researchers have a right to discuss their mandates as part of research reporting: for
p.000036: example, to point out that perspectives, interpretations or considerations of manifest professional or practical
p.000036: relevance have been omitted from the mandate. The requirements regarding source material and valid reasoning are
p.000036: especially important when research may have consequences for the reputation or integrity of indi- viduals or groups, or
p.000036: when it may affect political decisions. In such cases, it is particularly important for researchers to discuss
p.000036: alternative interpretations of their findings, or to point out scientific uncertainty. If the results are used in a
p.000036: selective or tendentious manner by a commissioner, researchers has an obligation to point this out, and to demand that
p.000036: the misleading presentation be corrected.
p.000036:
p.000036:
p.000036: 40 Right and duty to publish
p.000036: Knowledge is a collective good, and as a general rule, all results should be published. This is also important to
p.000036: enable the results to be critically examined or re-used.
p.000036:
p.000036: Generally, researchers have a right and duty to publish complete descriptions and results of research projects. This
p.000036: may be important both for preventing research results from being presented selectively or in a skewed manner, and for
p.000036: giving others the opportunity to test the results.
p.000036: However, private companies and government agencies may have a legitimate desire to protect themselves and their
p.000036: interests. Both negotiating strategies and the interests of
p.000036:
p.000036:
p.000036:
p.000036: 36 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000037:
p.000037: national security may dictate that publication should be postponed or, in special cases, that the results should not be
p.000037: published. With exceptions for such situations and privacy considerations, commissioners and researchers should
p.000037: endeavour to ensure that the public has access to results. Any restrictions on the right to publish must be stipulated
p.000037: by contract at the start of the project.
p.000037:
p.000037:
p.000037: F) DISSEMINATION OF RESEARCH
p.000037:
p.000037: 41 Dissemination as an academic responsibility
...
p.000039: express themselves clearly enough for colleagues from other fields and other participants in the discourse to take a
p.000039: reasoned position on their assertions. As in the case of internal academic discussions, renderings of the contributions
p.000039: of others must not be tendentious and persons with other opinions must not have unreasonable views falsely attributed
p.000039: to them.
p.000039: Dissemination should be clear and plainly express both academic uncertainty and the limitations of individual
p.000039: disciplines. Researchers should express clearly the limitations from the perspective of their own discipline and
p.000039: expertise in the field in question, which may make it easier for readers and the general public to determine whether
p.000039: other disciplinary perspectives could lead to other interpretations. Such interdisciplinary and inter-institutional
p.000039: discussions can serve as a sort of extended peer review.
p.000039:
p.000039:
p.000039: 44 Participation in public debate
p.000039: Researchers should contribute scientific arguments to the public debate. Researchers should express themselves fairly
p.000039: and clearly in order to avoid tendentious interpretations of research results.
p.000039:
p.000039: When researchers take part in public debate, they are using academic expertise as a basis for contributions to the
p.000039: formation of public opinion. They may contribute information in an area that is being debated, they may take a reasoned
p.000039: position on controversial topics, or they may seek to introduce new topics onto the public agenda.
p.000039: Researchers have a responsibility to express themselves clearly and precisely, so that their research cannot be
p.000039: interpreted tendentiously and misused in political, cultural, social and economic contexts. Researchers should also
p.000039: engage in discussions about reasonable interpretations and justifiable use of research results. Other organisations and
p.000039: institutions, such as public relations departments, the mass media, political parties, interest organisations,
p.000039: enterprises and administrative bodies also have a responsibility to conduct themselves reasonably and acceptably in
p.000039: this context.
p.000039: Participation in public debates places great demands on fairness, reasoning and clarity. There may be grey areas
p.000039: between participation as a researcher and participation as a citizen. Researchers should state their discipline and not
p.000039: only their degree or position, when acting in the capacity of expert. When academics take part as citizens, they should
p.000039: not use their titles or refer to special academic expertise.
p.000039:
p.000039:
p.000039:
p.000039: GUIDELINES – NESH 39
p.000040:
p.000040: 45 Accountability in dissemination
p.000040: The requirement of accountability is equally stringent in dissemination as in publication.
p.000040:
p.000040: The audience of popularised academic presentations cannot be expected to be able to verify assertions made by
p.000040: specialised researchers. Accordingly, the requirement of accountability is equally stringent in dissemination as in
p.000040: academic publication.
p.000040: Footnotes/endnotes and reference lists may seem cumbersome, but they can also help the interested reader to navigate
p.000040: through a large body of literature. It is also important to remember that specialists in other disciplines are part of
p.000040: the relevant audience.
p.000040: Researchers may share hypotheses, theories and preliminary findings with the public in the course of a project, but
p.000040: must be cautious about presenting preliminary results as final conclusions.
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040: 46 Reporting results to participants
p.000040: Researchers have a special obligation to report results back to the participants in a compre- hensible and acceptable
p.000040: manner.
p.000040:
...
Political / vulnerable
Searching for indicator vulnerable:
(return to top)
p.000002: 14
p.000002: 7 Duty to inform
p.000002: 14
p.000002: 8 Consent and obligation to notify 15
p.000002: 9 Confidentiality
p.000002: 17
p.000002: 10 Limited re-use
p.000002: 18
p.000002: 11 Storage of personal data 18
p.000002: 12 Responsibility for avoiding harm 19
p.000002: 13 Respect for third parties 20
p.000002: 14 Protection of children 20
p.000002: 15 Respect for privacy and family life 22
p.000002: 16 Respect for the values and motives of others 22
p.000002: 17 Respect for posthumous reputations 23
p.000002: 18 Defining roles and responsibilities 23
p.000002: C) Respect for groups and institutions 24
p.000002: 19 Respect for private interests 24
p.000002: 20 Respect for public administration 24
p.000002: 21 Respect for vulnerable groups 24
p.000002: 22 Preservation of cultural monuments and remains 25
p.000002: 23 Research on other cultures 26
p.000002: 24 Limits on cultural recognition 26
p.000002: 2 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000003:
p.000003: D) The research community 27
p.000003: 25 Co-authorship
p.000003: 27
p.000003: 26 Good citation practice 28
p.000003: 27 Plagiarism
p.000003: 29
p.000003: 28 Scientific integrity
p.000003: 29
p.000003: 29 Data sharing
p.000003: 30
p.000003: 30 Impartiality
p.000003: 30
p.000003: 31 Relations with colleagues 31
p.000003: 32 The student-supervisor relationship 32
p.000003: 33 Responsibilities of supervisors and project managers 33
p.000003: E) Commissioned research 33
p.000003: 34 Different types of research 33
p.000003: 35 Commissioned research 34
p.000003: 36 The responsibility of researchers in large projects 34
...
p.000019: professional follow-up in order to process any problems that have arisen as a result of participation in the project.
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019: 23 The Archives Act.
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019: GUIDELINES – NESH 19
p.000020:
p.000020: 13 Respect for third parties
p.000020: Researchers should consider and anticipate effects on third parties that are not directly included in the research.
p.000020:
p.000020: Interviews, archival studies and observations often result in the researcher gaining access to information about far
p.000020: more individuals than those who are the focus of the study. The research may have an impact on the privacy and close
p.000020: relationships of individuals who are not included in the research, but who are drawn in as parties closely related to
p.000020: the partici- pants. In some cases, for example when a researcher observes groups and communities, it can be difficult
p.000020: to protect the privacy of individuals who have not given consent directly, or who have actively declined, but who
p.000020: nevertheless remain in the situation. Researchers have a responsibility nonetheless to protect the privacy of those
p.000020: individuals who are directly or indirectly affected by the research project.
p.000020: Studies can be conducted in small and transparent communities, and the protection of third parties is especially
p.000020: important in such circumstances. Researchers should take account of the possible negative consequences for third
p.000020: parties. This is particularly important when vulnerable individuals, like children and minors, are indirectly involved
p.000020: in the research.
p.000020: In a society in which research results are used to assess and adjust decisions, it can be very difficult to prevent
p.000020: research from having negative consequences for groups and institutions. Researchers should be aware of potential
p.000020: unintended consequences of their research, for example that other members of a group feel unreasonably exposed. The
p.000020: con- sideration of strain on the part of third parties should be weighed against the consideration of the critical
p.000020: function of the research and the pursuit of truth.
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020: 14 Protection of children
p.000020: Children and adolescents who take part in research are particularly entitled to protection.
p.000020:
p.000020: Research on children and their lives and living conditions is valuable and important. Children and adolescents are key
p.000020: contributors to this research. Their specific needs and interests must be protected in ways supplementary to the
p.000020: general treatment of adult subjects. Children are developing individuals, and they have different needs and abilities
p.000020: at various phases. Researchers must know enough about children to be able to adapt both their methods and the direction
...
p.000024: operate in society. Companies and organisations are under no legal obligation to provide information except where
p.000024: specific statutory provisions apply to certain types of information. Such institutions should nonetheless make their
p.000024: archives available for research. If they deny access, this must be respected.
p.000024: Researchers who choose to undertake research on organisations that are opposed to the research are subject to
p.000024: particular requirements regarding meticulous documentation and use of methods. Situations may arise where researchers
p.000024: have reason to suspect abuse or serious violations of the law. It may still be ethically acceptable to continue the
p.000024: research providing that the abuse cannot be exposed or documented in any other way.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 20 Respect for public administration
p.000024: Public bodies should make themselves available for research into their activities.
p.000024:
p.000024: People have a legitimate interest in how social institutions function. This implies that researchers must have the
p.000024: greatest possible access to public administration and bodies.
p.000024: It should be possible to research public archives. Access may be restricted, with reference to privacy, overriding
p.000024: national interests, or national security. Classified material should be declassified as soon as it is prudent to do so.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 21 Respect for vulnerable groups
p.000024: Researchers have a special responsibility to respect the interests of vulnerable groups throughout the entire research
p.000024: process.
p.000024:
p.000024: Vulnerable and disadvantaged individuals and groups are not always equipped to defend their interests when dealing with
p.000024: researchers. Accordingly, researchers cannot take for granted that ordinary procedures for eliciting information and
p.000024: consent will ensure individuals’ self-determination or protect them from unreasonable strain.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 24 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000025:
p.000025: Individuals who belong to disadvantaged groups may not want to be the subjects of research for fear of being viewed by
p.000025: the general public in an unfavourable light. In such cases, researchers must place particular emphasis on the
p.000025: requirements regarding information and consent. On the other hand, society has a legitimate interest for example in
p.000025: surveying living conditions, measuring the effectiveness of social welfare schemes, or charting the paths in and out of
p.000025: destructive and anti-social behaviour. Protecting a vulnerable group is occa- sionally counter-productive. In reality,
p.000025: such efforts may serve to protect society at large from gaining insight into processes that lead to discrimination and
p.000025: rejection.
p.000025: Researchers who collect information about the characteristics and behaviour of indi- viduals and groups should be
p.000025: cautious about using classifications or designations that give rise to unreasonable generalisation, and which in
p.000025: practice result in the stigmatisation of particular social groups.
p.000025:
p.000025:
p.000025: 22 Preservation of cultural monuments and remains
p.000025: Researchers must respect the need to preserve all types of cultural monuments and remains.
p.000025:
p.000025: The need for preservation of sites, monuments, artefacts, texts, archives, remains and infor- mation about the past is
p.000025: based on the interest of present and future generations in learning about their own history and culture and that of
p.000025: others.28 When researchers handle human remains from archaeological excavations, they should be especially aware of
p.000025: the ethical problems associated with research on this type of material. Human remains dating back to before the
p.000025: Reformation (1537) and Sami remains that are more than 100 years old are auto- matically protected under the Cultural
p.000025: Heritage Act. With a few exceptions, other remains from the post-Reformation period do not receive this protection.
p.000025: Remains from post-1537 may also be of great interest to research. Consequently, more recent remains from archaeo-
...
Health / Cognitive Impairment
Searching for indicator impaired:
(return to top)
p.000013: self-determination, respect privacy and family life, and safeguard against harm and unreasonable strain. While research
p.000013: may help promote human dignity, it can also threaten it. Researchers must therefore show respect for human dignity in
p.000013: their choice of topic, in relation to the research subjects, and when reporting and publishing research results.
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: 6 Privacy
p.000013: Researchers must respect the participants’ autonomy, integrity, freedom and right of co-determination.
p.000013:
p.000013: From a legal perspective, the protection of privacy is linked to the processing of personal data. Thus, research must
p.000013: be conducted in accordance with basic considerations for data protection, such as personal integrity, privacy and
p.000013: responsible use and storage of personal data. However, privacy also has a wider scope in research ethics, and
p.000013: researchers must exercise due caution and responsibility
p.000013: • when self-respect or other values of importance to individuals are at stake;
p.000013: • when individuals have little influence on the decision to participate in research, for example in connection with
p.000013: research using the internet or at an institution;
p.000013: • when individuals have impaired or absent capacity to protect their own needs and interests;
p.000013: • when individuals actively contribute in acquiring data for research, for example by agreeing to be observed or
p.000013: interviewed;
p.000013: • when individuals can be identified, directly or indirectly, either as participants or as part of communities
p.000013: recognisable in publications or in other dissemination of research;
p.000013: • when a third party is affected by the research.
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: 7 Duty to inform
p.000013: Researchers must provide participants with adequate information about the field of research, the purpose of the
p.000013: research, who has funded the project, who will receive access to the information, the intended use of the results, and
p.000013: the consequences of participation in the research project.
p.000013:
p.000013: The type of information required depends on the nature of the research; whether it takes the form of field studies,
p.000013: experiments or using the internet. There are various considerations associated with different types of source material
p.000013: and data; whether it is a matter of personal
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: GUIDELINES – NESH 13
p.000014:
p.000014: data, sensitive information, previously acquired material, anonymised material or information acquired from the
p.000014: internet. When collecting and processing personal data, especially sensitive personal data, researchers also have a
...
p.000015: informants’ motivation to take part in research projects, and may influence the responses provided by the participants,
p.000015: thus constituting a source of error in the data collected.
p.000015: The fact that consent is informed means that a researcher has provided adequate information about what it means to take
p.000015: part in a research project. The need for clear information is particularly great when the research involves a risk of
p.000015: strain (see point 7).
p.000015: That the consent is given in an explicit form means that the participants clearly state that they understand what it
p.000015: actually means to take part in the research project. They must have real opportunities to refrain from taking part
p.000015: without this presenting an disadvantage, and they must be fully aware that they can end their participation at any time
p.000015: without this having any negative consequences. Researchers must ensure that the participants have actually understood
p.000015: this information. This responsibility does not end even if an agreement has been signed, requiring researchers to be
p.000015: alert at all times.
p.000015: It should also be possible to document the consent, both to substantiate the researcher’s responsibility and to
p.000015: safeguard the rights of research subjects. Usually, there should be a signed consent form, but sometimes other types of
p.000015: documentation may be more suitable.
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015: GUIDELINES – NESH 15
p.000016:
p.000016: Impaired or absent capacity to consent
p.000016: Freely given and informed consent is difficult to obtain in some types of research. Such research can raise ethical
p.000016: concerns if the need for protection against harm, or the need for freedom, self-determination and privacy are
p.000016: jeopardised to any significant extent. In such cases, researchers have a special responsibility for protecting the
p.000016: integrity of the individ- uals. This may apply, for example, to research involving individuals that either have an
p.000016: impaired or absent capacity to give a free and informed consent.
p.000016: The question of impaired or absent capacity to consent is usually raised in connection with research involving
p.000016: children, the mentally ill, persons with intellectual disabilities, persons suffering from dementia and intoxicated
p.000016: individuals. Individuals unable to give a free and informed consent will generally only be included in research when a)
p.000016: it cannot be conducted on individuals who are able to give consent, and b) it can be shown to be probable that the
p.000016: research in question is of direct or substantial benefit to the individuals or group being studied. In some cases, it
p.000016: may be a matter of research where the knowledge may benefit the group in question, but where any direct benefit to the
p.000016: individuals included is absent, uncertain or in the remote future. A prerequisite for including individuals who cannot
p.000016: give a free and informed consent is that any risk and strain associated with the study are negligible for the
p.000016: individuals included.
p.000016:
p.000016: Research without consent
p.000016: Although a free and informed consent is the general rule, exceptions can be made in situa- tions in which the research
...
Health / Drug Dependence
Searching for indicator dependence:
(return to top)
p.000031: and analytical techniques.
p.000031: Good research cultures are characterised by researchers who read each other’s work and give one another positive and
p.000031: negative criticism. It is a breach of ethical norms if researchers keep serious criticism of existing research to
p.000031: themselves, and do not present it in relevant circles to ensure that problematics are considered from all angles. This
p.000031: is consistent with the scientific norm of systematic and organised scepticism. Relevant circles may extend to a broader
p.000031: public than the specialist community.
p.000031:
p.000031:
p.000031: 35 Section 6 of the Public Administration Act.
p.000031:
p.000031:
p.000031:
p.000031: GUIDELINES – NESH 31
p.000032:
p.000032: Most disciplines are characterised by competing schools of thought and disagreement on fundamental questions of
p.000032: scientific theory. Those responsible for the academic assessment of the work of others must therefore be willing to
p.000032: seriously consider arguments and ways of thinking that are recognised in other research traditions than their own.
p.000032: Academic assessments must be characterised by professional carefulness, fairness and openness. Researchers frequently
p.000032: participate in evaluations for academic posts. They evaluate master’s and doctoral theses, project applications,
p.000032: journal articles and similar. In such contexts, the assessor must review their own impartiality and work professionally
p.000032: and objectively.
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032: 32 The student-supervisor relationship
p.000032: Supervisors are obliged to act in the students’ best interests and not to take advantage of their dependence. This
p.000032: applies to academic results and personal matters.
p.000032:
p.000032: Supervisors must be conscious of the asymmetry of the supervisory situation, and not take advantage of their academic
p.000032: authority or use their authority in a manner liable to cause the student offence. Supervisors must not take advantage
p.000032: of students’ dependence.
p.000032: If a supervisor wishes to use in his or her own research material from work that the student has not yet completed, the
p.000032: supervisor and the student must make an agreement to this effect. If the student has collected the material personally,
p.000032: it should only be used after the student is finished with the material, normally after taking the examination. The
p.000032: institution should draw up a standard agreement for this situation. Supervisors must employ good citation practice when
p.000032: using a student’s material and work. Supervisors must also take note of how others use students’ work before it is
p.000032: completed, and if relevant how the supervisor’s contribution should be indicated. Similarly, students should employ
p.000032: good citation practice in relation to their supervisors.
p.000032: In a supervisory situation, double relationships may arise, leading to compromised impartiality when the candidate’s
p.000032: work is to be assessed. The supervisor’s integrity must be protected as well as the candidate’s. It must not be
p.000032: possible for anyone to cast doubt as to where the line goes between private and professional matters, nor as to a
p.000032: supervisor’s impartiality. If the relationship between supervisor and candidate becomes overly close, the general rule
p.000032: is that the supervisor should withdraw from the position.
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032: 32 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000033:
p.000033: 33 Responsibilities of supervisors and project managers
...
p.000034: Researchers who take part in large research projects have a shared responsibility for those projects. It should be
p.000034: clear how an individual researcher has contributed to a research project.
p.000034:
p.000034: When research is organised into large, hierarchically managed projects, the relationship between individual researchers
p.000034: and the project management is analogous to the relationship between the researcher/research institution and the
p.000034: commissioner. If researchers experi- ences a conflict between loyalty to the institution or project and an ethically
p.000034: acceptable approach, the basic principle is that the individual researcher has a responsibility for their own
p.000034: participation. Researchers are also responsible for disclosing circumstances that are not acceptable according to
p.000034: research ethics.
p.000034: Copyright and the right to publish must be regulated by explicit agreements. This also applies to the relationship
p.000034: between the commissioner, the research institution and the researcher in connection with commissioned research and
p.000034: reports.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 36 Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, «Standard agreement for research and report assignments», Oslo 2012.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 34 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000035:
p.000035: 37 Independence and conflict of interests
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions should maintain their independence in relation to their principals.
p.000035:
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions must avoid becoming dependent on their com- missioners. Dependence may
p.000035: undermine their impartiality and the scientific quality of the research. This is particularly true if a single
p.000035: commissioner is responsible for a substantial portion of the researcher’s or research institution’s funding. It is
p.000035: therefore important for the researcher/institution and the commissioner not to have convergent interests to the point
p.000035: that they threaten the independence of the research (the vested interest threat). The sale of advisory or consulting
p.000035: services to actors who also have an interest in the research having a particular outcome may increase the vested
p.000035: interest threat.
p.000035: Non-financial factors may also threaten independent research. Personal ties, either through family relations or as a
p.000035: result of long-term connections between the research institution/researcher and those taking part in the research
p.000035: projects may lead to dependence in several ways. These ties may lead to the research being used to promote the views
p.000035: and interests of certain parties (representative party threat), or it may lead to there not being sufficient distance
p.000035: between the researcher and the participants (threat to confidentiality), or it may lead to independence being
p.000035: threatened because the participants are in a position where they can influence the researcher (threat of pressure).
p.000035: In some situations, the role of independent research may come into conflict with other roles the researcher may have,
p.000035: for example as adviser or consultant. If a researcher accepts an assignment that may undermine the institution’s
p.000035: credibility, it is necessary to report the situation at the very least. In some situations, the conflict between roles
p.000035: will be so strong that the roles should not be combined.
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035: 38 Transparency in research funding
p.000035: Both researchers and commissioners have a duty to make it publicly known who is funding the research.
p.000035:
p.000035: It must be clear who is funding the research. Transparency concerning funding makes it easier for researchers to
p.000035: protect themselves against undue pressure and thus ensure the freedom and independence of the research. Moreover,
p.000035: commissioners have a reasonable claim to have their funding of research publicly known.
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035: GUIDELINES – NESH 35
p.000036:
...
Health / Drug Usage
Searching for indicator influence:
(return to top)
p.000011: should lead to, are illegitimate. This calls for arrangements to ensure both the independence of institutions and the
p.000011: independence of researchers within the institutions. Research presupposes the freedom to seek, produce and disseminate
p.000011: scientific knowledge to the wider public.
p.000011: The level of independence varies between basic, applied and commissioned research. All research must nonetheless be
p.000011: protected from pressure that endangers good and respon- sible research. In addition, commissioned research outside the
p.000011: university and university college sector must also have procedures for protecting the integrity of research, as set out
p.000011: in the Ministry of Education and Research’s «Standard agreement for research and report assignments» (2012).15
p.000011:
p.000011:
p.000011: 3 Responsibility of research
p.000011: Responsible research requires freedom from control and constraints, while trust in research requires the exercise of
p.000011: responsibility by both researchers and research institutions.
p.000011:
p.000011: Scientific, ethical and legal norms and values regulate the responsibility of research. Research also has a social
p.000011: responsibility, whether it be instrumental as a foundation for societal decisions, critical as a source of correctives
p.000011: and alternative choices of action, or deliberative as a supplier of research-based knowledge to the public discourse.
p.000011: Great demands are placed on the justifications of the researchers for their choice of questions, methods and analytical
p.000011: perspectives, and also on the quality of the documentation used to support conclusions, so that preconceived notions
p.000011: and unwitting opinions have minimal influence on the research. The methodological requirements posed by the research
p.000011: community in respect of argumentation, reasoning, documentation and willingness to revise opinions in the light of
p.000011: well-founded criticism may serve as a model for how to deal with disagreement in other segments of society.
p.000011:
p.000011: 15 The Ministry of Education and Research, «Standard agreement for research and report assignments», Oslo 2012. See
p.000011: also the report from the National Research Ethics Committees, Oppdragsforskning: åpen het, kvalitet, etterrettelighet,
p.000011: Oslo 2003 [Commissioned research: transparency, quality, accountability].
p.000011:
p.000011:
p.000011:
p.000011: GUIDELINES – NESH 11
p.000012:
p.000012: Research is valuable, but it can also cause harm. Good and responsible research also includes assessing unintended and
p.000012: undesirable consequences. Researchers must make sure that the research does not violate laws and regulations, or
p.000012: represent a risk to poeple, society and nature
p.000012: – in accordance with the principles of sustainability and precaution in research ethics.16
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012: 4 Responsibility of institutions
p.000012: Research institutions must guarantee that research is good and responsible by preventing misconduct and promoting the
p.000012: guidelines for research ethics.
p.000012:
p.000012: The institutions must facilitate the development and maintenance of good scientific practice. They should communicate
...
p.000012: politics], NENT publication no. 11, Oslo 1997.
p.000012: 17 Article 102 of the Norwegian Constitution.
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012: 12 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000013:
p.000013: or to benefit society in other ways. Researchers must protect personal integrity, preserve individual freedom and
p.000013: self-determination, respect privacy and family life, and safeguard against harm and unreasonable strain. While research
p.000013: may help promote human dignity, it can also threaten it. Researchers must therefore show respect for human dignity in
p.000013: their choice of topic, in relation to the research subjects, and when reporting and publishing research results.
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: 6 Privacy
p.000013: Researchers must respect the participants’ autonomy, integrity, freedom and right of co-determination.
p.000013:
p.000013: From a legal perspective, the protection of privacy is linked to the processing of personal data. Thus, research must
p.000013: be conducted in accordance with basic considerations for data protection, such as personal integrity, privacy and
p.000013: responsible use and storage of personal data. However, privacy also has a wider scope in research ethics, and
p.000013: researchers must exercise due caution and responsibility
p.000013: • when self-respect or other values of importance to individuals are at stake;
p.000013: • when individuals have little influence on the decision to participate in research, for example in connection with
p.000013: research using the internet or at an institution;
p.000013: • when individuals have impaired or absent capacity to protect their own needs and interests;
p.000013: • when individuals actively contribute in acquiring data for research, for example by agreeing to be observed or
p.000013: interviewed;
p.000013: • when individuals can be identified, directly or indirectly, either as participants or as part of communities
p.000013: recognisable in publications or in other dissemination of research;
p.000013: • when a third party is affected by the research.
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: 7 Duty to inform
p.000013: Researchers must provide participants with adequate information about the field of research, the purpose of the
p.000013: research, who has funded the project, who will receive access to the information, the intended use of the results, and
p.000013: the consequences of participation in the research project.
p.000013:
p.000013: The type of information required depends on the nature of the research; whether it takes the form of field studies,
p.000013: experiments or using the internet. There are various considerations associated with different types of source material
p.000013: and data; whether it is a matter of personal
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: GUIDELINES – NESH 13
p.000014:
p.000014: data, sensitive information, previously acquired material, anonymised material or information acquired from the
...
p.000015: required from the Data Protection Authority or a recommendation from a data protection officer (see the Introduction).
p.000015: The obligation to obtain consent will prevent violations of personal integrity, and safeguard the freedom and
p.000015: self-determination of the participants. The consent must be based on information about the purpose of the project, the
p.000015: methods, risks, possible dis- comfort, and other consequences of importance to the participants. Consent also makes it
p.000015: possible to conduct research that involves a certain risk of strain.
p.000015: Freely given consent means that the consent has been obtained without external pressure or constraints on individual
p.000015: freedom. Such pressure may arise from the presence of the researcher, or it can be mediated through persons in
p.000015: authority with whom the researcher has been in contact. Rewarding or paying participants may also influence the
p.000015: informants’ motivation to take part in research projects, and may influence the responses provided by the participants,
p.000015: thus constituting a source of error in the data collected.
p.000015: The fact that consent is informed means that a researcher has provided adequate information about what it means to take
p.000015: part in a research project. The need for clear information is particularly great when the research involves a risk of
p.000015: strain (see point 7).
p.000015: That the consent is given in an explicit form means that the participants clearly state that they understand what it
p.000015: actually means to take part in the research project. They must have real opportunities to refrain from taking part
p.000015: without this presenting an disadvantage, and they must be fully aware that they can end their participation at any time
p.000015: without this having any negative consequences. Researchers must ensure that the participants have actually understood
p.000015: this information. This responsibility does not end even if an agreement has been signed, requiring researchers to be
p.000015: alert at all times.
p.000015: It should also be possible to document the consent, both to substantiate the researcher’s responsibility and to
p.000015: safeguard the rights of research subjects. Usually, there should be a signed consent form, but sometimes other types of
p.000015: documentation may be more suitable.
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015: GUIDELINES – NESH 15
p.000016:
p.000016: Impaired or absent capacity to consent
...
p.000022: people’s understanding of what is private and what is public in such media may vary.26
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 16 Respect for the values and motives of others
p.000022: Researchers must not ascribe irrational or unworthy motives to participants without providing convincing documentation
p.000022: and justification. Researchers must show respect for the values and views of research participants, not least when they
p.000022: differ from those generally accepted by society at large.
p.000022:
p.000022: Research is often concerned with the behaviour and values of minorities, e.g. religious groups, ethnic minorities,
p.000022: youth groups, or political subcultures. Some persons may find this research to be intrusive or offensive. Researchers
p.000022: must take seriously the participants’ understanding of themselves and avoid representations that diminish their
p.000022: legitimate rights In many research projects in the humanities and social sciences, where actions are often
p.000022: used in explanations, the participants’ motives often play a key role. There is frequently uncertainty associated with
p.000022: exploration of motives, not least when it comes to research on other cultures or historical periods. A clear
p.000022: distinction should therefore be drawn between description and interpretation, or between documentation of actual
p.000022: courses of events and different interpretations of such events.
p.000022: At the same time, the participants’ motives are often directly associated with their social roles. For example,
p.000022: researchers may assume that politicians seek influence, that
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 26 NESH, Ethical Guidelines for Internet Research, Oslo (2003) 2016.
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 22 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000023:
p.000023: business leaders seek profit, or that there are conflicts between generations. Stronger evi- dence is required to
p.000023: ascribe more unusual motives to participants. Special documentation and argumentation are required for providing
p.000023: accounts of actions that ascribe unworthy motives to participants or motives other than those they invoke themselves.
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: 17 Respect for posthumous reputations
p.000023: It is important to act with care when conducting research on deceased persons.
p.000023:
p.000023: Respect, documentation and accountability are also required when conducting research on deceased persons. Out of
p.000023: respect for the deceased and their beraved, researchers should choose their words with care. Archives and documents
p.000023: left behind by deceased persons may also contain sensitive personal data, and researchers must handle information about
p.000023: deceased persons and their descendants with care and respect. Research on graves and human remains must be conducted
p.000023: with respect by the researchers.27
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: 18 Defining roles and responsibilities
p.000023: Researchers are responsible for explaining to the participants the limitations, expectations and requirements
p.000023: associated with their role as researchers.
p.000023:
p.000023: In situations where researchers relate to participants in a variety of capacities, they are responsible for defining
p.000023: the limits of their role and responsibility as a researcher. Examples are a combination of the roles of researcher and
...
p.000033: other types of research as well.
p.000033: Research communities interact with society in general. When society funds research, it is because it expects something
p.000033: in return. Society’s expectations concerning utility and relevance are not irreconcilable with the requirement that
p.000033: research must be free and independent, but this places demands on transparency with respect to terms of contract,
p.000033: ownership, confidentiality and the right to publish.
p.000033: Knowledge is a collective good, and if research becomes too privatised, it will inhibit both the development of
p.000033: knowledge and the contribution of research to society. At the same time, commissioned research, where external
p.000033: principals decide on the subject, are an important part of society’s aggregate knowledge development. For that reason,
p.000033: there must be a balance between commissioned research and researcher-driven research. Research
p.000033:
p.000033:
p.000033:
p.000033: GUIDELINES – NESH 33
p.000034:
p.000034: funders should be aware of established standards for the organisation of research and reporting assignments.36
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 35 Commissioned research
p.000034: Both public and private commissioners have a legitimate right to set the parameters for research assignments, as long
p.000034: as those parameters does not conflict with the other require- ments made with regard to the research. However, that
p.000034: does not exempt researchers and research institutions from their share of the responsibility for the agreements they
p.000034: sign with commissioners.
p.000034:
p.000034: Researchers and research institutions do not merely report their own results; they also repre- sent the credibility of
p.000034: the research community as a reliable source of knowledge. The com- missioner has a right to steer or influence the
p.000034: subject and issues addressed, but not the choice of method, results or conclusions drawn by the researcher on the basis
p.000034: of the results. Both researchers and research institutions have a right and a duty to point out the uncertainties and
p.000034: limitations of the research, for example when the results are to be used in policy decisions.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 36 The responsibility of researchers in large projects
p.000034: Researchers who take part in large research projects have a shared responsibility for those projects. It should be
p.000034: clear how an individual researcher has contributed to a research project.
p.000034:
p.000034: When research is organised into large, hierarchically managed projects, the relationship between individual researchers
p.000034: and the project management is analogous to the relationship between the researcher/research institution and the
p.000034: commissioner. If researchers experi- ences a conflict between loyalty to the institution or project and an ethically
p.000034: acceptable approach, the basic principle is that the individual researcher has a responsibility for their own
p.000034: participation. Researchers are also responsible for disclosing circumstances that are not acceptable according to
p.000034: research ethics.
p.000034: Copyright and the right to publish must be regulated by explicit agreements. This also applies to the relationship
p.000034: between the commissioner, the research institution and the researcher in connection with commissioned research and
p.000034: reports.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 36 Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, «Standard agreement for research and report assignments», Oslo 2012.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 34 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000035:
...
p.000035: undermine their impartiality and the scientific quality of the research. This is particularly true if a single
p.000035: commissioner is responsible for a substantial portion of the researcher’s or research institution’s funding. It is
p.000035: therefore important for the researcher/institution and the commissioner not to have convergent interests to the point
p.000035: that they threaten the independence of the research (the vested interest threat). The sale of advisory or consulting
p.000035: services to actors who also have an interest in the research having a particular outcome may increase the vested
p.000035: interest threat.
p.000035: Non-financial factors may also threaten independent research. Personal ties, either through family relations or as a
p.000035: result of long-term connections between the research institution/researcher and those taking part in the research
p.000035: projects may lead to dependence in several ways. These ties may lead to the research being used to promote the views
p.000035: and interests of certain parties (representative party threat), or it may lead to there not being sufficient distance
p.000035: between the researcher and the participants (threat to confidentiality), or it may lead to independence being
p.000035: threatened because the participants are in a position where they can influence the researcher (threat of pressure).
p.000035: In some situations, the role of independent research may come into conflict with other roles the researcher may have,
p.000035: for example as adviser or consultant. If a researcher accepts an assignment that may undermine the institution’s
p.000035: credibility, it is necessary to report the situation at the very least. In some situations, the conflict between roles
p.000035: will be so strong that the roles should not be combined.
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035: 38 Transparency in research funding
p.000035: Both researchers and commissioners have a duty to make it publicly known who is funding the research.
p.000035:
p.000035: It must be clear who is funding the research. Transparency concerning funding makes it easier for researchers to
p.000035: protect themselves against undue pressure and thus ensure the freedom and independence of the research. Moreover,
p.000035: commissioners have a reasonable claim to have their funding of research publicly known.
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035: GUIDELINES – NESH 35
p.000036:
p.000036: When researchers are going to publish and use results, they have an independent responsi- bility to be open and
p.000036: transparent about all ties (commissioners and funding etc.) that might have a bearing on the credibility of the
p.000036: research/reporting that has been conducted.
p.000036:
p.000036:
p.000036: 39 Presentation and use of results
p.000036: Both researchers and commissioners have a responsibility to prevent research results from being presented in a
p.000036: misleading manner. It is unethical to delimit the subject of the research with a view to producing particularly
p.000036: desirable results, or to present research results in an intentionally skewed manner.
...
Health / Intoxication
Searching for indicator intoxicated:
(return to top)
p.000015: documentation may be more suitable.
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015: GUIDELINES – NESH 15
p.000016:
p.000016: Impaired or absent capacity to consent
p.000016: Freely given and informed consent is difficult to obtain in some types of research. Such research can raise ethical
p.000016: concerns if the need for protection against harm, or the need for freedom, self-determination and privacy are
p.000016: jeopardised to any significant extent. In such cases, researchers have a special responsibility for protecting the
p.000016: integrity of the individ- uals. This may apply, for example, to research involving individuals that either have an
p.000016: impaired or absent capacity to give a free and informed consent.
p.000016: The question of impaired or absent capacity to consent is usually raised in connection with research involving
p.000016: children, the mentally ill, persons with intellectual disabilities, persons suffering from dementia and intoxicated
p.000016: individuals. Individuals unable to give a free and informed consent will generally only be included in research when a)
p.000016: it cannot be conducted on individuals who are able to give consent, and b) it can be shown to be probable that the
p.000016: research in question is of direct or substantial benefit to the individuals or group being studied. In some cases, it
p.000016: may be a matter of research where the knowledge may benefit the group in question, but where any direct benefit to the
p.000016: individuals included is absent, uncertain or in the remote future. A prerequisite for including individuals who cannot
p.000016: give a free and informed consent is that any risk and strain associated with the study are negligible for the
p.000016: individuals included.
p.000016:
p.000016: Research without consent
p.000016: Although a free and informed consent is the general rule, exceptions can be made in situa- tions in which the research
p.000016: does not imply direct contact with the participants, where the data being processed is not particularly sensitive, and
p.000016: where the utility value of the research clearly exceeds any disadvantages for the individuals involved. One example is
p.000016: the use of existing registry data, where it is not feasible to obtain consent from all of the persons covered by the
p.000016: registers. In such cases, researchers have a special responsibility to explain in detail the potential beneficial value
...
Health / Mentally Disabled
Searching for indicator mentally:
(return to top)
p.000006: pedagogical and ethical prin- ciples».4 There is also an Act relating to ethics and integrity in research (the
p.000006: Research
p.000006:
p.000006:
p.000006:
p.000006: 2 Internationally the first two are usually linked to the term Research Integrity (RI), while the latter two are
p.000006: linked to the wider term Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI).
p.000006: 3 NESH, Ethical Guidelines for Internet Research, Oslo (2003) 2016. See also Ethical Guidelines for Research on Human
p.000006: Remains, Oslo, 2013, drawn up by the National Committee for Research Ethics on Human Remains, which is a subordinate
p.000006: committee to NESH.
p.000006: 4 Section 1-5 of the Universities and Colleges Act.
p.000006:
p.000006:
p.000006:
p.000006: 6 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000007:
p.000007: Ethics Act), which «seeks to ensure that all research carried out by public and private institutions is conducted in
p.000007: accordance with recognised ethical standards».5
p.000007: The guidelines for research ethics do not serve the same role or function as legislation. The guidelines primarily
p.000007: serve as tools for researchers and the research community. They identify relevant factors that researchers should take
p.000007: into account, while acknowledging that researchers often have to weigh such factors against each other, as well as
p.000007: against other requirements and obligations.
p.000007: Even though the distinction between law and ethics is often unclear, they are funda- mentally different. They are both
p.000007: normative, but ethical norms are formulated as guidelines rather than prescriptions and prohibitions. The guidelines
p.000007: for research ethics are intended to serve an advisory, guiding and preventive function. They state what researchers
p.000007: should take into consideration and do for their research to be responsible. Accordingly, research ethics is in
p.000007: accordance with the principle of academic freedom self-regulation. This is why the primary responsibility for research
p.000007: ethics lies with researchers and research institutions. Without this freedom and responsibility, research ethics loses
p.000007: much of its moral value.
p.000007: Some of the ethical norms laid down in the guidelines for research ethics can also be found in the legislation. For
p.000007: example, the requirement of privacy and the consideration of human dignity has a legal basis in the Personal Data Act
p.000007: and is also covered by the guidelines for research ethics (Part B).6 If researchers fail to observe the statutory
p.000007: require- ments, they may be subject to penalties and other sanctions. Such reactions will then ensue because the
p.000007: researchers have broken the law, not because they have acted in conflict with the guidelines for research ethics.
p.000007: NESH thus issues guidelines for research ethics, but it is not a supervisory or controlling body, nor does it have a
...
p.000015: safeguard the rights of research subjects. Usually, there should be a signed consent form, but sometimes other types of
p.000015: documentation may be more suitable.
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015: GUIDELINES – NESH 15
p.000016:
p.000016: Impaired or absent capacity to consent
p.000016: Freely given and informed consent is difficult to obtain in some types of research. Such research can raise ethical
p.000016: concerns if the need for protection against harm, or the need for freedom, self-determination and privacy are
p.000016: jeopardised to any significant extent. In such cases, researchers have a special responsibility for protecting the
p.000016: integrity of the individ- uals. This may apply, for example, to research involving individuals that either have an
p.000016: impaired or absent capacity to give a free and informed consent.
p.000016: The question of impaired or absent capacity to consent is usually raised in connection with research involving
p.000016: children, the mentally ill, persons with intellectual disabilities, persons suffering from dementia and intoxicated
p.000016: individuals. Individuals unable to give a free and informed consent will generally only be included in research when a)
p.000016: it cannot be conducted on individuals who are able to give consent, and b) it can be shown to be probable that the
p.000016: research in question is of direct or substantial benefit to the individuals or group being studied. In some cases, it
p.000016: may be a matter of research where the knowledge may benefit the group in question, but where any direct benefit to the
p.000016: individuals included is absent, uncertain or in the remote future. A prerequisite for including individuals who cannot
p.000016: give a free and informed consent is that any risk and strain associated with the study are negligible for the
p.000016: individuals included.
p.000016:
p.000016: Research without consent
p.000016: Although a free and informed consent is the general rule, exceptions can be made in situa- tions in which the research
p.000016: does not imply direct contact with the participants, where the data being processed is not particularly sensitive, and
p.000016: where the utility value of the research clearly exceeds any disadvantages for the individuals involved. One example is
...
Health / Motherhood/Family
Searching for indicator family:
(return to top)
p.000002: A) Research, society and ethics 10
p.000002: 1 Norms and values of research 10
p.000002: 2 Freedom of research 10
p.000002: 3 Responsibility of research 11
p.000002: 4 Responsibility of institutions 12
p.000002: B) Respect for individuals 12
p.000002: 5 Human dignity
p.000002: 12
p.000002: 6 Privacy
p.000002: 14
p.000002: 7 Duty to inform
p.000002: 14
p.000002: 8 Consent and obligation to notify 15
p.000002: 9 Confidentiality
p.000002: 17
p.000002: 10 Limited re-use
p.000002: 18
p.000002: 11 Storage of personal data 18
p.000002: 12 Responsibility for avoiding harm 19
p.000002: 13 Respect for third parties 20
p.000002: 14 Protection of children 20
p.000002: 15 Respect for privacy and family life 22
p.000002: 16 Respect for the values and motives of others 22
p.000002: 17 Respect for posthumous reputations 23
p.000002: 18 Defining roles and responsibilities 23
p.000002: C) Respect for groups and institutions 24
p.000002: 19 Respect for private interests 24
p.000002: 20 Respect for public administration 24
p.000002: 21 Respect for vulnerable groups 24
p.000002: 22 Preservation of cultural monuments and remains 25
p.000002: 23 Research on other cultures 26
p.000002: 24 Limits on cultural recognition 26
p.000002: 2 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000003:
p.000003: D) The research community 27
p.000003: 25 Co-authorship
p.000003: 27
p.000003: 26 Good citation practice 28
p.000003: 27 Plagiarism
p.000003: 29
p.000003: 28 Scientific integrity
p.000003: 29
p.000003: 29 Data sharing
p.000003: 30
p.000003: 30 Impartiality
p.000003: 30
...
p.000012: the distribution of roles and responsibilities is clear. In this context, the guidelines for research ethics will be an
p.000012: important tool for preventing undesirable practice and ensuring that research is good and responsible. The institutions
p.000012: should also have clear procedures for handling suspicions and accusations of serious breaches of good scientific
p.000012: practice, for example by establishing misconduct committees with responsibility for oversight and investigation.
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012: B) RESPECT FOR INDIVIDUALS
p.000012:
p.000012: 5 Human dignity
p.000012: Researchers must base their work on a fundamental respect for human dignity.
p.000012:
p.000012: Human dignity is closely linked to individual inviolability. Respect for human dignity and personal integrity is
p.000012: formalised and laid down in a series of international laws and conven- tions on human rights.17 In research ethics,
p.000012: this means that individuals have interests and integrity, which cannot be set aside in research in order to achieve
p.000012: greater understanding
p.000012:
p.000012: 16 NENT, Førevar prinsippet: Mellom forskning og politikk [The precautionary principle: Between research and
p.000012: politics], NENT publication no. 11, Oslo 1997.
p.000012: 17 Article 102 of the Norwegian Constitution.
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012: 12 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000013:
p.000013: or to benefit society in other ways. Researchers must protect personal integrity, preserve individual freedom and
p.000013: self-determination, respect privacy and family life, and safeguard against harm and unreasonable strain. While research
p.000013: may help promote human dignity, it can also threaten it. Researchers must therefore show respect for human dignity in
p.000013: their choice of topic, in relation to the research subjects, and when reporting and publishing research results.
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: 6 Privacy
p.000013: Researchers must respect the participants’ autonomy, integrity, freedom and right of co-determination.
p.000013:
p.000013: From a legal perspective, the protection of privacy is linked to the processing of personal data. Thus, research must
p.000013: be conducted in accordance with basic considerations for data protection, such as personal integrity, privacy and
p.000013: responsible use and storage of personal data. However, privacy also has a wider scope in research ethics, and
p.000013: researchers must exercise due caution and responsibility
p.000013: • when self-respect or other values of importance to individuals are at stake;
p.000013: • when individuals have little influence on the decision to participate in research, for example in connection with
p.000013: research using the internet or at an institution;
p.000013: • when individuals have impaired or absent capacity to protect their own needs and interests;
p.000013: • when individuals actively contribute in acquiring data for research, for example by agreeing to be observed or
...
p.000021: particularly applies when children take part in research. However, situations can arise in which researchers are either
p.000021: legally or ethically required to provide confidential information, whether it be to the child’s next-of-kin, adult
p.000021: helpers or the child welfare service. The obligation to notify applies, for example, if researchers learn that children
p.000021: are subject to abuse, assault or neglect (see point 9).
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: 24 The National Research Ethics Committees, Barn i forskning. Etiske dimensjoner [Children in research. Ethical
p.000021: dimensions], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH), Jacob Hølen (NEM) and Helene Ingierd (NESH), Oslo 2013.
p.000021: 25 The Consumer Ombudsman and the Data Protection Authority, Barn og unges personopplysninger: Veiledning for
p.000021: innhenting og bruk [Guidelines for the collection and use of personal data on children and young persons], Oslo 2004.
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: GUIDELINES – NESH 21
p.000022:
p.000022: 15 Respect for privacy and family life
p.000022: Researchers must respect individuals’ privacy and family life. Participants are entitled to check whether confidential
p.000022: information about them is made available to others.
p.000022:
p.000022: Respect for privacy aims at protecting individuals against unwanted interference and expo- sure. This applies not only
p.000022: to emotional issues, but also to questions that involve sickness and health, political and religious opinions, and
p.000022: sexuality.
p.000022: Researchers should be especially attentive when they ask questions regarding intimate matters and they should avoid
p.000022: putting pressure on participants. What participants perceive as sensitive information may vary from one individual or
p.000022: group to the next.
p.000022: It can be difficult to distinguish between the private and the public sphere, for example when conducting research on
p.000022: and via the internet. When using material from such inter- actions, researchers must be duly aware of the fact that
p.000022: people’s understanding of what is private and what is public in such media may vary.26
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 16 Respect for the values and motives of others
p.000022: Researchers must not ascribe irrational or unworthy motives to participants without providing convincing documentation
p.000022: and justification. Researchers must show respect for the values and views of research participants, not least when they
p.000022: differ from those generally accepted by society at large.
p.000022:
p.000022: Research is often concerned with the behaviour and values of minorities, e.g. religious groups, ethnic minorities,
...
p.000034: between the commissioner, the research institution and the researcher in connection with commissioned research and
p.000034: reports.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 36 Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, «Standard agreement for research and report assignments», Oslo 2012.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 34 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000035:
p.000035: 37 Independence and conflict of interests
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions should maintain their independence in relation to their principals.
p.000035:
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions must avoid becoming dependent on their com- missioners. Dependence may
p.000035: undermine their impartiality and the scientific quality of the research. This is particularly true if a single
p.000035: commissioner is responsible for a substantial portion of the researcher’s or research institution’s funding. It is
p.000035: therefore important for the researcher/institution and the commissioner not to have convergent interests to the point
p.000035: that they threaten the independence of the research (the vested interest threat). The sale of advisory or consulting
p.000035: services to actors who also have an interest in the research having a particular outcome may increase the vested
p.000035: interest threat.
p.000035: Non-financial factors may also threaten independent research. Personal ties, either through family relations or as a
p.000035: result of long-term connections between the research institution/researcher and those taking part in the research
p.000035: projects may lead to dependence in several ways. These ties may lead to the research being used to promote the views
p.000035: and interests of certain parties (representative party threat), or it may lead to there not being sufficient distance
p.000035: between the researcher and the participants (threat to confidentiality), or it may lead to independence being
p.000035: threatened because the participants are in a position where they can influence the researcher (threat of pressure).
p.000035: In some situations, the role of independent research may come into conflict with other roles the researcher may have,
p.000035: for example as adviser or consultant. If a researcher accepts an assignment that may undermine the institution’s
p.000035: credibility, it is necessary to report the situation at the very least. In some situations, the conflict between roles
p.000035: will be so strong that the roles should not be combined.
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035: 38 Transparency in research funding
p.000035: Both researchers and commissioners have a duty to make it publicly known who is funding the research.
p.000035:
p.000035: It must be clear who is funding the research. Transparency concerning funding makes it easier for researchers to
p.000035: protect themselves against undue pressure and thus ensure the freedom and independence of the research. Moreover,
...
Health / Physically Disabled
Searching for indicator illness:
(return to top)
p.000007: assessments and advice when researchers have to weigh and balance different research ethics considerations. Secondly,
p.000007: NESH makes statements on individual cases that raise questions of principle regarding research ethics. Thirdly, NESH
p.000007: may address current and important matters of research ethics on its own initiative. Finally, NESH will also con-
p.000007: tribute to the efforts to prevent scientific misconduct.
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007: 5 Section 1 of the Research Ethics Act.
p.000007: 6 The Personal Data Act.
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007: GUIDELINES – NESH 7
p.000008:
p.000008: Other institutions and authorities
p.000008: In cases that not only deal with research ethics, but also legislation and rights, there is an overlap between NESH and
p.000008: several other authorities that deal with special considerations and requirements. Even though others deal with the
p.000008: legal aspects of such cases, research ethics is always a supplementary consideration.
p.000008:
p.000008: a) The National Commission for the Investigation of Research Misconduct oversees integrity in research. The Commission
p.000008: [Granskningsutvalget] assesses and handles specific cases where serious breaches of good scientific practice are
p.000008: suspected, as defined in the Research Ethics Act.7
p.000008: b) Medical and health-related research projects intended to develop new knowledge about illness and health must be
p.000008: reviewed in accordance with the Health Research Act. Such projects require prior approval by a Regional Committee for
p.000008: Medical and Health Research Ethics (REK).8
p.000008: c) Personal data collected by the public administration is normally subject to confidenti- ality. The Public
p.000008: Administration Act allows exemption from the duty of confidentiality regarding information for use in research under
p.000008: certain circumstances, and within the Act’s field of application. The individual ministry may grant an exemption from
p.000008: the duty of confidentiality, but the authority to grant exemption is often delegated to under- lying agencies. A
p.000008: statement confirming an exemption must be obtained from the Council for Confidentiality and Research [Rådet for
p.000008: taushetsplikt], pursuant to the Public Administration Regulations.9 Such a statement is nevertheless unnecessary if
p.000008: the admin- istrative body that reviews the matter of an exemption finds it clear that the application should be granted
p.000008: or denied, or if the researcher plans to directly contact the persons who are entitled to confidentiality.
p.000008: d) The Personal Data Act requires that persons who process personal data protect personal integrity and privacy.10
p.000008: Personal data consists of information and assessments that either directly or indirectly are linkable to a person, for
p.000008: example names, national identification numbers or e-mail addresses, or by compiling background data. Electronic
p.000008: processing of such information is subject to an obligation to notify and in general, this processing must be based on
...
Health / ill
Searching for indicator ill:
(return to top)
p.000015: documentation may be more suitable.
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015: GUIDELINES – NESH 15
p.000016:
p.000016: Impaired or absent capacity to consent
p.000016: Freely given and informed consent is difficult to obtain in some types of research. Such research can raise ethical
p.000016: concerns if the need for protection against harm, or the need for freedom, self-determination and privacy are
p.000016: jeopardised to any significant extent. In such cases, researchers have a special responsibility for protecting the
p.000016: integrity of the individ- uals. This may apply, for example, to research involving individuals that either have an
p.000016: impaired or absent capacity to give a free and informed consent.
p.000016: The question of impaired or absent capacity to consent is usually raised in connection with research involving
p.000016: children, the mentally ill, persons with intellectual disabilities, persons suffering from dementia and intoxicated
p.000016: individuals. Individuals unable to give a free and informed consent will generally only be included in research when a)
p.000016: it cannot be conducted on individuals who are able to give consent, and b) it can be shown to be probable that the
p.000016: research in question is of direct or substantial benefit to the individuals or group being studied. In some cases, it
p.000016: may be a matter of research where the knowledge may benefit the group in question, but where any direct benefit to the
p.000016: individuals included is absent, uncertain or in the remote future. A prerequisite for including individuals who cannot
p.000016: give a free and informed consent is that any risk and strain associated with the study are negligible for the
p.000016: individuals included.
p.000016:
p.000016: Research without consent
p.000016: Although a free and informed consent is the general rule, exceptions can be made in situa- tions in which the research
p.000016: does not imply direct contact with the participants, where the data being processed is not particularly sensitive, and
p.000016: where the utility value of the research clearly exceeds any disadvantages for the individuals involved. One example is
p.000016: the use of existing registry data, where it is not feasible to obtain consent from all of the persons covered by the
...
Social / Access to Social Goods
Searching for indicator social welfare:
(return to top)
p.000024: national interests, or national security. Classified material should be declassified as soon as it is prudent to do so.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 21 Respect for vulnerable groups
p.000024: Researchers have a special responsibility to respect the interests of vulnerable groups throughout the entire research
p.000024: process.
p.000024:
p.000024: Vulnerable and disadvantaged individuals and groups are not always equipped to defend their interests when dealing with
p.000024: researchers. Accordingly, researchers cannot take for granted that ordinary procedures for eliciting information and
p.000024: consent will ensure individuals’ self-determination or protect them from unreasonable strain.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 24 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000025:
p.000025: Individuals who belong to disadvantaged groups may not want to be the subjects of research for fear of being viewed by
p.000025: the general public in an unfavourable light. In such cases, researchers must place particular emphasis on the
p.000025: requirements regarding information and consent. On the other hand, society has a legitimate interest for example in
p.000025: surveying living conditions, measuring the effectiveness of social welfare schemes, or charting the paths in and out of
p.000025: destructive and anti-social behaviour. Protecting a vulnerable group is occa- sionally counter-productive. In reality,
p.000025: such efforts may serve to protect society at large from gaining insight into processes that lead to discrimination and
p.000025: rejection.
p.000025: Researchers who collect information about the characteristics and behaviour of indi- viduals and groups should be
p.000025: cautious about using classifications or designations that give rise to unreasonable generalisation, and which in
p.000025: practice result in the stigmatisation of particular social groups.
p.000025:
p.000025:
p.000025: 22 Preservation of cultural monuments and remains
p.000025: Researchers must respect the need to preserve all types of cultural monuments and remains.
p.000025:
p.000025: The need for preservation of sites, monuments, artefacts, texts, archives, remains and infor- mation about the past is
p.000025: based on the interest of present and future generations in learning about their own history and culture and that of
p.000025: others.28 When researchers handle human remains from archaeological excavations, they should be especially aware of
p.000025: the ethical problems associated with research on this type of material. Human remains dating back to before the
p.000025: Reformation (1537) and Sami remains that are more than 100 years old are auto- matically protected under the Cultural
p.000025: Heritage Act. With a few exceptions, other remains from the post-Reformation period do not receive this protection.
...
Searching for indicator access:
(return to top)
p.000013: be conducted in accordance with basic considerations for data protection, such as personal integrity, privacy and
p.000013: responsible use and storage of personal data. However, privacy also has a wider scope in research ethics, and
p.000013: researchers must exercise due caution and responsibility
p.000013: • when self-respect or other values of importance to individuals are at stake;
p.000013: • when individuals have little influence on the decision to participate in research, for example in connection with
p.000013: research using the internet or at an institution;
p.000013: • when individuals have impaired or absent capacity to protect their own needs and interests;
p.000013: • when individuals actively contribute in acquiring data for research, for example by agreeing to be observed or
p.000013: interviewed;
p.000013: • when individuals can be identified, directly or indirectly, either as participants or as part of communities
p.000013: recognisable in publications or in other dissemination of research;
p.000013: • when a third party is affected by the research.
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: 7 Duty to inform
p.000013: Researchers must provide participants with adequate information about the field of research, the purpose of the
p.000013: research, who has funded the project, who will receive access to the information, the intended use of the results, and
p.000013: the consequences of participation in the research project.
p.000013:
p.000013: The type of information required depends on the nature of the research; whether it takes the form of field studies,
p.000013: experiments or using the internet. There are various considerations associated with different types of source material
p.000013: and data; whether it is a matter of personal
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: GUIDELINES – NESH 13
p.000014:
p.000014: data, sensitive information, previously acquired material, anonymised material or information acquired from the
p.000014: internet. When collecting and processing personal data, especially sensitive personal data, researchers also have a
p.000014: statutory obligation to notify the subjects or participants in the research and must also obtain their consent (see
p.000014: Introduction and point 8).
p.000014: Researchers must provide information in a neutral manner, so that the subjects are not exposed to undue pressure. The
p.000014: information must be adapted to the participatns’ cultural background and communicated in a language they understand. In
p.000014: some research projects, it may be necessary to use an interpreter to provide the necessary information. It may also be
p.000014: relevant to provide information about possible benefits associated with participating in the research, but this
p.000014: information must be clear and not raise unreasonable expectations on the part of the research subjects. Where relevant,
...
p.000023: therapist when evaluating possible courses of treatment or the roles of researcher and teacher in a teaching situation.
p.000023: Participant observation in fieldwork may also lead researchers to establish friendships and close rela- tionships with
p.000023: (some) participants or students. Parallel roles may serve a valuable purpose in research, but the use of information
p.000023: obtained by virtue of such parallel roles also requires a free and informed consent if used for research purposes.
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: 27 The National Committee for Research Ethics on Human Remains, Etiske retningslinjer for forskning på menneskelige
p.000023: levninger [Ethical Guidelines for Research on Human Remains], Oslo 2013.
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: GUIDELINES – NESH 23
p.000024:
p.000024: C) RESPECT FOR GROUPS AND INSTITUTIONS
p.000024:
p.000024: 19 Respect for private interests
p.000024: Researchers must respect the legitimate reasons that private companies, interest organi- sations etc. may have for not
p.000024: wanting information about themselves, their members or their plans to be published.
p.000024:
p.000024: It may be of great interest to the general public to learn about how private companies and interest organisations
p.000024: operate in society. Companies and organisations are under no legal obligation to provide information except where
p.000024: specific statutory provisions apply to certain types of information. Such institutions should nonetheless make their
p.000024: archives available for research. If they deny access, this must be respected.
p.000024: Researchers who choose to undertake research on organisations that are opposed to the research are subject to
p.000024: particular requirements regarding meticulous documentation and use of methods. Situations may arise where researchers
p.000024: have reason to suspect abuse or serious violations of the law. It may still be ethically acceptable to continue the
p.000024: research providing that the abuse cannot be exposed or documented in any other way.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 20 Respect for public administration
p.000024: Public bodies should make themselves available for research into their activities.
p.000024:
p.000024: People have a legitimate interest in how social institutions function. This implies that researchers must have the
p.000024: greatest possible access to public administration and bodies.
p.000024: It should be possible to research public archives. Access may be restricted, with reference to privacy, overriding
p.000024: national interests, or national security. Classified material should be declassified as soon as it is prudent to do so.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 21 Respect for vulnerable groups
p.000024: Researchers have a special responsibility to respect the interests of vulnerable groups throughout the entire research
p.000024: process.
p.000024:
p.000024: Vulnerable and disadvantaged individuals and groups are not always equipped to defend their interests when dealing with
p.000024: researchers. Accordingly, researchers cannot take for granted that ordinary procedures for eliciting information and
p.000024: consent will ensure individuals’ self-determination or protect them from unreasonable strain.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 24 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000025:
p.000025: Individuals who belong to disadvantaged groups may not want to be the subjects of research for fear of being viewed by
p.000025: the general public in an unfavourable light. In such cases, researchers must place particular emphasis on the
p.000025: requirements regarding information and consent. On the other hand, society has a legitimate interest for example in
p.000025: surveying living conditions, measuring the effectiveness of social welfare schemes, or charting the paths in and out of
...
p.000030: the work of others. Improved openness and quality assurance can be achieved by sharing data.34 At the same time, data
p.000030: sharing gives rise to ethical challenges relating to privacy and confidentiality. Therefore, the norm of transparency
p.000030: and data-sharing, particularly in large-scale registry research, should be balanced against other considerations and
p.000030: requirements of research ethics.
p.000030: Generally, those responsible for collecting material have the priority right to use it in analyses and in publications.
p.000030: Data acquired with the aid of public funding must be made publicly available after a short period.
p.000030:
p.000030:
p.000030: 30 Impartiality
p.000030: Both researchers and research institutions are obliged to report and consider possible conflicts of interest and of
p.000030: roles.
p.000030:
p.000030: All researchers are obliged to respect the requirements regarding their own impartiality and that of others. Partiality
p.000030: can make research less reliable and independent, for example by leading to biased publication or selective reporting.
p.000030: Researchers may not take part in processes that involve approving, funding or judging their own research or the
p.000030: consequences of that research. Nor may researchers take part in evaluating measures that they have been involved in
p.000030: developing or implementing, or which are the result of their own research.
p.000030: Impartiality requirements are the responsibility not only of researchers, but also of research institutions. Research
p.000030: institutions should as a matter of routine raise the question of
p.000030:
p.000030:
p.000030: 34 The Research Council of Norway, Open Access to Research Data, Policy for Open Access, Oslo 2014.
p.000030:
p.000030:
p.000030:
p.000030: 30 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000031:
p.000031: impartiality and potential conflicts of interests in matters where this is relevant. Institutions and the research
p.000031: community generally should strive for openness and discussion concerning impartiality.
p.000031: Ethical considerations often have a wider reach than purely legal rules and impartiality requirements [habilitet].35
p.000031: Conflicting interests can detract from the quality of research, also indirectly, when persons who are parties or
p.000031: stakeholders state their view without taking part in the research themselves. In other cases, it is not only the
p.000031: credibility of the research that is relevant, but also the requirement that the research should be objective. If it is
p.000031: reasonable to raise doubt about a researcher’s impartiality, or if a researcher has a possible conflict of interests,
p.000031: this may undermine confidence in the research, both in the academic community and among the public generally.
p.000031:
p.000031:
p.000031: 31 Relations with colleagues
p.000031: Research should be conducted in compliance with norms of research ethics, for example with regard to openness, fairness
p.000031: and (self-criticism, thereby contributing to research cultures that promote good research.
p.000031:
p.000031: Research institutions must create conditions for research cultures that is conducive to good research. They must strive
p.000031: to maintain a culture based on constructive discourse and manage- ment of collegial disagreement. They should encourage
p.000031: well-balanced recruitment of researchers. Criticism must not be silenced by referring to obligations of loyalty or
p.000031: require- ments of obedience. Fairness must be maintained, such as the requirement to avoid tenden- tious renderings
...
p.000036: especially important when research may have consequences for the reputation or integrity of indi- viduals or groups, or
p.000036: when it may affect political decisions. In such cases, it is particularly important for researchers to discuss
p.000036: alternative interpretations of their findings, or to point out scientific uncertainty. If the results are used in a
p.000036: selective or tendentious manner by a commissioner, researchers has an obligation to point this out, and to demand that
p.000036: the misleading presentation be corrected.
p.000036:
p.000036:
p.000036: 40 Right and duty to publish
p.000036: Knowledge is a collective good, and as a general rule, all results should be published. This is also important to
p.000036: enable the results to be critically examined or re-used.
p.000036:
p.000036: Generally, researchers have a right and duty to publish complete descriptions and results of research projects. This
p.000036: may be important both for preventing research results from being presented selectively or in a skewed manner, and for
p.000036: giving others the opportunity to test the results.
p.000036: However, private companies and government agencies may have a legitimate desire to protect themselves and their
p.000036: interests. Both negotiating strategies and the interests of
p.000036:
p.000036:
p.000036:
p.000036: 36 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000037:
p.000037: national security may dictate that publication should be postponed or, in special cases, that the results should not be
p.000037: published. With exceptions for such situations and privacy considerations, commissioners and researchers should
p.000037: endeavour to ensure that the public has access to results. Any restrictions on the right to publish must be stipulated
p.000037: by contract at the start of the project.
p.000037:
p.000037:
p.000037: F) DISSEMINATION OF RESEARCH
p.000037:
p.000037: 41 Dissemination as an academic responsibility
p.000037: Researchers and research institutions are obliged to disseminate scientific knowledge to a broader audience outside the
p.000037: research community.
p.000037:
p.000037: Dissemination of research involves communicating scientific results, methods and values from specialised research
p.000037: fields to people outside the disciplines. Dissemination may be aimed at researchers in other disciplines, or at a
p.000037: broader audience. It may be a matter of disseminating established insights into the discipline, or results from more
p.000037: recent research.
p.000037: The relationship between research and reporting is especially close in the humanities and social sciences, where a
p.000037: scholarly publication often also is a form of dissemination. In some cases there is not even a clear line between
p.000037: research and dissemination, because the knowledge is mediated as part of a public debate which in turn influences the
p.000037: research questions and answers.
p.000037: One of the main reasons for dissemination of research is to satisfy the intellectual curiosity of the general public.
p.000037: Dissemination is also important for a well-functioning democratic society. Dissemination should contribute to
p.000037: maintaining and developing cultural traditions, to informing public opinion and to the dissemination of knowledge of
p.000037: relevance to society. Society has invested large sums in research, and therefore has a right to share the results.
p.000037:
p.000037:
...
Searching for indicator access to information:
(return to top)
p.000019: physical harm. However, serious mental strain is a possibility. This may be more difficult to define and predict, and
p.000019: it can be difficult to assess the long-term effects, if any. «Strain» is used here in a broad sense, and it covers both
p.000019: everyday discomfort, risk of retraumatisation, and also more serious mental strain which the research may cause the
p.000019: participants. Researchers nevertheless have responsibility for participants not being subjected to serious or
p.000019: unreasonable pain or stress.
p.000019: The risk of causing minor strain must be balanced against both the benifit of the research for society and the value
p.000019: for the participants. Researchers must justify such benifit and value as specifically as possible, also to the parties
p.000019: involved (through information retrospectively). Researchers should also ensure that individuals involved are offered
p.000019: professional follow-up in order to process any problems that have arisen as a result of participation in the project.
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019: 23 The Archives Act.
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019: GUIDELINES – NESH 19
p.000020:
p.000020: 13 Respect for third parties
p.000020: Researchers should consider and anticipate effects on third parties that are not directly included in the research.
p.000020:
p.000020: Interviews, archival studies and observations often result in the researcher gaining access to information about far
p.000020: more individuals than those who are the focus of the study. The research may have an impact on the privacy and close
p.000020: relationships of individuals who are not included in the research, but who are drawn in as parties closely related to
p.000020: the partici- pants. In some cases, for example when a researcher observes groups and communities, it can be difficult
p.000020: to protect the privacy of individuals who have not given consent directly, or who have actively declined, but who
p.000020: nevertheless remain in the situation. Researchers have a responsibility nonetheless to protect the privacy of those
p.000020: individuals who are directly or indirectly affected by the research project.
p.000020: Studies can be conducted in small and transparent communities, and the protection of third parties is especially
p.000020: important in such circumstances. Researchers should take account of the possible negative consequences for third
p.000020: parties. This is particularly important when vulnerable individuals, like children and minors, are indirectly involved
p.000020: in the research.
p.000020: In a society in which research results are used to assess and adjust decisions, it can be very difficult to prevent
p.000020: research from having negative consequences for groups and institutions. Researchers should be aware of potential
p.000020: unintended consequences of their research, for example that other members of a group feel unreasonably exposed. The
...
Social / Age
Searching for indicator age:
(return to top)
p.000020: in the research.
p.000020: In a society in which research results are used to assess and adjust decisions, it can be very difficult to prevent
p.000020: research from having negative consequences for groups and institutions. Researchers should be aware of potential
p.000020: unintended consequences of their research, for example that other members of a group feel unreasonably exposed. The
p.000020: con- sideration of strain on the part of third parties should be weighed against the consideration of the critical
p.000020: function of the research and the pursuit of truth.
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020: 14 Protection of children
p.000020: Children and adolescents who take part in research are particularly entitled to protection.
p.000020:
p.000020: Research on children and their lives and living conditions is valuable and important. Children and adolescents are key
p.000020: contributors to this research. Their specific needs and interests must be protected in ways supplementary to the
p.000020: general treatment of adult subjects. Children are developing individuals, and they have different needs and abilities
p.000020: at various phases. Researchers must know enough about children to be able to adapt both their methods and the direction
p.000020: of their research to the ages of the participants. Age-specific information must be provided about the project and the
p.000020: consequences of the research, and they must be informed that participation is voluntary and that they may withdraw from
p.000020: the study at any time. Consent is more problematic for research on children than research on adults. Children
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020: 20 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000021:
p.000021: are often more willing to obey authority than adults, and they often feel that they cannot object. Nor are they always
p.000021: able to see the consequences of participating in research.24
p.000021: In general, minors who have turned 15 can consent to researchers collecting and using their personal data. If a child
p.000021: is under the age of 15, researchers must usually obtain consent from their parents or guardians. An exception is made
p.000021: for sensitive personal data, which can only be acquired with the consent of the parents. In such cases, authorisation
p.000021: from the Data Protection Authority or a recommendation from a data protection officer is also required.25
p.000021: At the same time, it is important to treat minors as independent individuals. According to the Children Act, a child
p.000021: who has reached seven years of age, or younger children who are able to form their own opinions on a matter, must be
p.000021: provided with information and the opportunity to express their opinions. When a child has reached twelve years of age,
p.000021: a great deal of weight must be attached to his or her opinions. In addition to the parents or guardians giving formal
p.000021: consent, it is necessary that the children themselves accept par- ticipation to the extent that they are able to do so.
p.000021: There may also be conflicts of interest between children and their parents or guardians. In that event, it is important
p.000021: to clarify the child’s capacity to grant consent on their own behalf. In some cases, it may be right to let children
p.000021: and adolescents take part in the research without the consent of their parents. The requirement of confidentiality
p.000021: particularly applies when children take part in research. However, situations can arise in which researchers are either
p.000021: legally or ethically required to provide confidential information, whether it be to the child’s next-of-kin, adult
p.000021: helpers or the child welfare service. The obligation to notify applies, for example, if researchers learn that children
...
Social / Child
Searching for indicator child:
(return to top)
p.000017: communicate clearly the limits of the pledge of confidentiality.
p.000017: Sometimes a conflict can arise between the duty of confidentiality and the obligation to notify. The research may
p.000017: reveal censurable or illegal situations that can expose researchers to conflicting loyalties, particularly with a view
p.000017: to the promise of confidentiality. Researchers must therefore not allow themselves to become dependent on the
p.000017: participants, and such conflicts can be prevented by explaining the limits on the promise of confidentiality. This also
p.000017: applies to processing of data that is subject to protection of sources.19
p.000017: In given situations, the duty of confidentiality must yield to the duty to prevent a criminal offence.20 Researchers
p.000017: are legally bound to prevent a criminal offence or report it to the police, without regard for the duty of
p.000017: confidentiality. This includes suspicion of espionage, acts of terrorism, murder, rape, incest or domestic violence.21
p.000017: Children are particularly entitled to protection, and when abuse or neglect are suspected, researchers also have a duty
p.000017: of disclosure and must report the matter to the child welfare authorities. This applies to everyone, notwithstanding
p.000017: the duty of confidentiality.22
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: 19 Eivind Smith, Taushetsplikt og kildevern for forskere [Confidentiality and protection of sources for researchers],
p.000017: NESH, Oslo 1998.
p.000017: 20 Section 196 of the General Civil Penal Code.
p.000017: 21 The National Research Ethics Committees, Forskeres taushetsplikt og meldeplikt [Researchers’ duty of
p.000017: confidentiality and duty of notification], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH) and Helene Ingierd (NENT), Oslo 2013.
p.000017: 22 Section 6-4 of the Child Welfare Act.
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: GUIDELINES – NESH 17
p.000018:
p.000018: 10 Limited re-use
p.000018: Identifiable personal data collected for a specific research purpose cannot automatically be used for other research.
p.000018:
p.000018: Generally, re-use of identifiable personal data requires the consent of the participants. This does not apply to
p.000018: anonymised data, acquired for example for use in statistics, where the researcher cannot link persons and data. When
p.000018: the data have been anonymised, the researcher does not know which person the data and the material come from. However,
p.000018: anonymity must not be confused with de-identified data, where personal data are removed, so that no unauthorised
p.000018: persons are able to establish who the research subjects are, but where the researcher is able to link individuals and
p.000018: data.
p.000018: Re-use of such de-identified data requires consent if researchers supplement registry studies with data obtained
p.000018: through active contact with the participants. When re-using and linking this type of data set, for example in registry
p.000018: studies that are large-scale, of a long duration, or which use geodata, it may also be possible to locate or identify
p.000018: individuals indirectly. In such cases, researchers should make renewed attempts to obtain consent, even though this is
p.000018: difficult in practice. If researchers do not find it possible to obtain consent, they have a particular responsibility
...
p.000020: contributors to this research. Their specific needs and interests must be protected in ways supplementary to the
p.000020: general treatment of adult subjects. Children are developing individuals, and they have different needs and abilities
p.000020: at various phases. Researchers must know enough about children to be able to adapt both their methods and the direction
p.000020: of their research to the ages of the participants. Age-specific information must be provided about the project and the
p.000020: consequences of the research, and they must be informed that participation is voluntary and that they may withdraw from
p.000020: the study at any time. Consent is more problematic for research on children than research on adults. Children
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020: 20 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000021:
p.000021: are often more willing to obey authority than adults, and they often feel that they cannot object. Nor are they always
p.000021: able to see the consequences of participating in research.24
p.000021: In general, minors who have turned 15 can consent to researchers collecting and using their personal data. If a child
p.000021: is under the age of 15, researchers must usually obtain consent from their parents or guardians. An exception is made
p.000021: for sensitive personal data, which can only be acquired with the consent of the parents. In such cases, authorisation
p.000021: from the Data Protection Authority or a recommendation from a data protection officer is also required.25
p.000021: At the same time, it is important to treat minors as independent individuals. According to the Children Act, a child
p.000021: who has reached seven years of age, or younger children who are able to form their own opinions on a matter, must be
p.000021: provided with information and the opportunity to express their opinions. When a child has reached twelve years of age,
p.000021: a great deal of weight must be attached to his or her opinions. In addition to the parents or guardians giving formal
p.000021: consent, it is necessary that the children themselves accept par- ticipation to the extent that they are able to do so.
p.000021: There may also be conflicts of interest between children and their parents or guardians. In that event, it is important
p.000021: to clarify the child’s capacity to grant consent on their own behalf. In some cases, it may be right to let children
p.000021: and adolescents take part in the research without the consent of their parents. The requirement of confidentiality
p.000021: particularly applies when children take part in research. However, situations can arise in which researchers are either
p.000021: legally or ethically required to provide confidential information, whether it be to the child’s next-of-kin, adult
p.000021: helpers or the child welfare service. The obligation to notify applies, for example, if researchers learn that children
p.000021: are subject to abuse, assault or neglect (see point 9).
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: 24 The National Research Ethics Committees, Barn i forskning. Etiske dimensjoner [Children in research. Ethical
p.000021: dimensions], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH), Jacob Hølen (NEM) and Helene Ingierd (NESH), Oslo 2013.
p.000021: 25 The Consumer Ombudsman and the Data Protection Authority, Barn og unges personopplysninger: Veiledning for
p.000021: innhenting og bruk [Guidelines for the collection and use of personal data on children and young persons], Oslo 2004.
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: GUIDELINES – NESH 21
p.000022:
p.000022: 15 Respect for privacy and family life
p.000022: Researchers must respect individuals’ privacy and family life. Participants are entitled to check whether confidential
p.000022: information about them is made available to others.
p.000022:
p.000022: Respect for privacy aims at protecting individuals against unwanted interference and expo- sure. This applies not only
...
Searching for indicator children:
(return to top)
p.000002: Other institutions and authorities 8
p.000002: A) Research, society and ethics 10
p.000002: 1 Norms and values of research 10
p.000002: 2 Freedom of research 10
p.000002: 3 Responsibility of research 11
p.000002: 4 Responsibility of institutions 12
p.000002: B) Respect for individuals 12
p.000002: 5 Human dignity
p.000002: 12
p.000002: 6 Privacy
p.000002: 14
p.000002: 7 Duty to inform
p.000002: 14
p.000002: 8 Consent and obligation to notify 15
p.000002: 9 Confidentiality
p.000002: 17
p.000002: 10 Limited re-use
p.000002: 18
p.000002: 11 Storage of personal data 18
p.000002: 12 Responsibility for avoiding harm 19
p.000002: 13 Respect for third parties 20
p.000002: 14 Protection of children 20
p.000002: 15 Respect for privacy and family life 22
p.000002: 16 Respect for the values and motives of others 22
p.000002: 17 Respect for posthumous reputations 23
p.000002: 18 Defining roles and responsibilities 23
p.000002: C) Respect for groups and institutions 24
p.000002: 19 Respect for private interests 24
p.000002: 20 Respect for public administration 24
p.000002: 21 Respect for vulnerable groups 24
p.000002: 22 Preservation of cultural monuments and remains 25
p.000002: 23 Research on other cultures 26
p.000002: 24 Limits on cultural recognition 26
p.000002: 2 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000003:
p.000003: D) The research community 27
p.000003: 25 Co-authorship
p.000003: 27
p.000003: 26 Good citation practice 28
p.000003: 27 Plagiarism
...
p.000015: safeguard the rights of research subjects. Usually, there should be a signed consent form, but sometimes other types of
p.000015: documentation may be more suitable.
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015: GUIDELINES – NESH 15
p.000016:
p.000016: Impaired or absent capacity to consent
p.000016: Freely given and informed consent is difficult to obtain in some types of research. Such research can raise ethical
p.000016: concerns if the need for protection against harm, or the need for freedom, self-determination and privacy are
p.000016: jeopardised to any significant extent. In such cases, researchers have a special responsibility for protecting the
p.000016: integrity of the individ- uals. This may apply, for example, to research involving individuals that either have an
p.000016: impaired or absent capacity to give a free and informed consent.
p.000016: The question of impaired or absent capacity to consent is usually raised in connection with research involving
p.000016: children, the mentally ill, persons with intellectual disabilities, persons suffering from dementia and intoxicated
p.000016: individuals. Individuals unable to give a free and informed consent will generally only be included in research when a)
p.000016: it cannot be conducted on individuals who are able to give consent, and b) it can be shown to be probable that the
p.000016: research in question is of direct or substantial benefit to the individuals or group being studied. In some cases, it
p.000016: may be a matter of research where the knowledge may benefit the group in question, but where any direct benefit to the
p.000016: individuals included is absent, uncertain or in the remote future. A prerequisite for including individuals who cannot
p.000016: give a free and informed consent is that any risk and strain associated with the study are negligible for the
p.000016: individuals included.
p.000016:
p.000016: Research without consent
p.000016: Although a free and informed consent is the general rule, exceptions can be made in situa- tions in which the research
p.000016: does not imply direct contact with the participants, where the data being processed is not particularly sensitive, and
p.000016: where the utility value of the research clearly exceeds any disadvantages for the individuals involved. One example is
...
p.000017: research are closely linked to confidentiality. At the same time, the requirement of confidentiality has a legal aspect
p.000017: associated with protection of personal integrity and privacy, and both the Public Administration Act and the Personal
p.000017: Data Act set limits on the type of confidentiality researchers can promise participants. Researchers must therefore
p.000017: communicate clearly the limits of the pledge of confidentiality.
p.000017: Sometimes a conflict can arise between the duty of confidentiality and the obligation to notify. The research may
p.000017: reveal censurable or illegal situations that can expose researchers to conflicting loyalties, particularly with a view
p.000017: to the promise of confidentiality. Researchers must therefore not allow themselves to become dependent on the
p.000017: participants, and such conflicts can be prevented by explaining the limits on the promise of confidentiality. This also
p.000017: applies to processing of data that is subject to protection of sources.19
p.000017: In given situations, the duty of confidentiality must yield to the duty to prevent a criminal offence.20 Researchers
p.000017: are legally bound to prevent a criminal offence or report it to the police, without regard for the duty of
p.000017: confidentiality. This includes suspicion of espionage, acts of terrorism, murder, rape, incest or domestic violence.21
p.000017: Children are particularly entitled to protection, and when abuse or neglect are suspected, researchers also have a duty
p.000017: of disclosure and must report the matter to the child welfare authorities. This applies to everyone, notwithstanding
p.000017: the duty of confidentiality.22
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: 19 Eivind Smith, Taushetsplikt og kildevern for forskere [Confidentiality and protection of sources for researchers],
p.000017: NESH, Oslo 1998.
p.000017: 20 Section 196 of the General Civil Penal Code.
p.000017: 21 The National Research Ethics Committees, Forskeres taushetsplikt og meldeplikt [Researchers’ duty of
p.000017: confidentiality and duty of notification], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH) and Helene Ingierd (NENT), Oslo 2013.
p.000017: 22 Section 6-4 of the Child Welfare Act.
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: GUIDELINES – NESH 17
p.000018:
p.000018: 10 Limited re-use
p.000018: Identifiable personal data collected for a specific research purpose cannot automatically be used for other research.
p.000018:
p.000018: Generally, re-use of identifiable personal data requires the consent of the participants. This does not apply to
p.000018: anonymised data, acquired for example for use in statistics, where the researcher cannot link persons and data. When
...
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019: 23 The Archives Act.
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019: GUIDELINES – NESH 19
p.000020:
p.000020: 13 Respect for third parties
p.000020: Researchers should consider and anticipate effects on third parties that are not directly included in the research.
p.000020:
p.000020: Interviews, archival studies and observations often result in the researcher gaining access to information about far
p.000020: more individuals than those who are the focus of the study. The research may have an impact on the privacy and close
p.000020: relationships of individuals who are not included in the research, but who are drawn in as parties closely related to
p.000020: the partici- pants. In some cases, for example when a researcher observes groups and communities, it can be difficult
p.000020: to protect the privacy of individuals who have not given consent directly, or who have actively declined, but who
p.000020: nevertheless remain in the situation. Researchers have a responsibility nonetheless to protect the privacy of those
p.000020: individuals who are directly or indirectly affected by the research project.
p.000020: Studies can be conducted in small and transparent communities, and the protection of third parties is especially
p.000020: important in such circumstances. Researchers should take account of the possible negative consequences for third
p.000020: parties. This is particularly important when vulnerable individuals, like children and minors, are indirectly involved
p.000020: in the research.
p.000020: In a society in which research results are used to assess and adjust decisions, it can be very difficult to prevent
p.000020: research from having negative consequences for groups and institutions. Researchers should be aware of potential
p.000020: unintended consequences of their research, for example that other members of a group feel unreasonably exposed. The
p.000020: con- sideration of strain on the part of third parties should be weighed against the consideration of the critical
p.000020: function of the research and the pursuit of truth.
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020: 14 Protection of children
p.000020: Children and adolescents who take part in research are particularly entitled to protection.
p.000020:
p.000020: Research on children and their lives and living conditions is valuable and important. Children and adolescents are key
p.000020: contributors to this research. Their specific needs and interests must be protected in ways supplementary to the
p.000020: general treatment of adult subjects. Children are developing individuals, and they have different needs and abilities
p.000020: at various phases. Researchers must know enough about children to be able to adapt both their methods and the direction
p.000020: of their research to the ages of the participants. Age-specific information must be provided about the project and the
p.000020: consequences of the research, and they must be informed that participation is voluntary and that they may withdraw from
p.000020: the study at any time. Consent is more problematic for research on children than research on adults. Children
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020: 20 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000021:
p.000021: are often more willing to obey authority than adults, and they often feel that they cannot object. Nor are they always
p.000021: able to see the consequences of participating in research.24
p.000021: In general, minors who have turned 15 can consent to researchers collecting and using their personal data. If a child
p.000021: is under the age of 15, researchers must usually obtain consent from their parents or guardians. An exception is made
p.000021: for sensitive personal data, which can only be acquired with the consent of the parents. In such cases, authorisation
p.000021: from the Data Protection Authority or a recommendation from a data protection officer is also required.25
p.000021: At the same time, it is important to treat minors as independent individuals. According to the Children Act, a child
p.000021: who has reached seven years of age, or younger children who are able to form their own opinions on a matter, must be
p.000021: provided with information and the opportunity to express their opinions. When a child has reached twelve years of age,
p.000021: a great deal of weight must be attached to his or her opinions. In addition to the parents or guardians giving formal
p.000021: consent, it is necessary that the children themselves accept par- ticipation to the extent that they are able to do so.
p.000021: There may also be conflicts of interest between children and their parents or guardians. In that event, it is important
p.000021: to clarify the child’s capacity to grant consent on their own behalf. In some cases, it may be right to let children
p.000021: and adolescents take part in the research without the consent of their parents. The requirement of confidentiality
p.000021: particularly applies when children take part in research. However, situations can arise in which researchers are either
p.000021: legally or ethically required to provide confidential information, whether it be to the child’s next-of-kin, adult
p.000021: helpers or the child welfare service. The obligation to notify applies, for example, if researchers learn that children
p.000021: are subject to abuse, assault or neglect (see point 9).
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: 24 The National Research Ethics Committees, Barn i forskning. Etiske dimensjoner [Children in research. Ethical
p.000021: dimensions], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH), Jacob Hølen (NEM) and Helene Ingierd (NESH), Oslo 2013.
p.000021: 25 The Consumer Ombudsman and the Data Protection Authority, Barn og unges personopplysninger: Veiledning for
p.000021: innhenting og bruk [Guidelines for the collection and use of personal data on children and young persons], Oslo 2004.
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: GUIDELINES – NESH 21
p.000022:
p.000022: 15 Respect for privacy and family life
p.000022: Researchers must respect individuals’ privacy and family life. Participants are entitled to check whether confidential
p.000022: information about them is made available to others.
p.000022:
p.000022: Respect for privacy aims at protecting individuals against unwanted interference and expo- sure. This applies not only
p.000022: to emotional issues, but also to questions that involve sickness and health, political and religious opinions, and
p.000022: sexuality.
p.000022: Researchers should be especially attentive when they ask questions regarding intimate matters and they should avoid
p.000022: putting pressure on participants. What participants perceive as sensitive information may vary from one individual or
p.000022: group to the next.
p.000022: It can be difficult to distinguish between the private and the public sphere, for example when conducting research on
p.000022: and via the internet. When using material from such inter- actions, researchers must be duly aware of the fact that
p.000022: people’s understanding of what is private and what is public in such media may vary.26
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 16 Respect for the values and motives of others
p.000022: Researchers must not ascribe irrational or unworthy motives to participants without providing convincing documentation
p.000022: and justification. Researchers must show respect for the values and views of research participants, not least when they
...
Social / Ethnicity
Searching for indicator ethnic:
(return to top)
p.000009: for Research [Personvernombudet for forskning] at the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (formerly NSD) performs this
p.000009: task for many research institutions in Norway.
p.000009: The main task of the data protection officer is to ensure that institutions are able to perform their statutory
p.000009: obligations related to internal control and quality assurance of own research. The data protection officer may also
p.000009: offer guidance and advice on matters regarding privacy. Projects that involve processing personal data may not begin
p.000009: until a data protection officer has reviewed the project.
p.000009: e) According to the Personal Data Act, it is a general rule that the Data Protection Authority [Datatilsynet] must
p.000009: grant a licence for the processing of sensitive personal data, but research projects are exempt from this obligation to
p.000009: obtain a licence if a data protection officer has recommended the project.12 Sensitive personal data include
p.000009: information about a person’s health, race or ethnic background, sexuality, and their political, philosophical or
p.000009: religious beliefs. Some projects that process sensitive personal data are not covered by the exemption in the Personal
p.000009: Data Regulations, nor do they require a license from the Data Protection Authority.13
p.000009: If the project is subject to an obligation to obtain a licence, the Data Protection Official for Research may assist
p.000009: with the writing of the application for a license and help send it to the Data Protection Authority. The Authority’s
p.000009: responsibilities include assessing whether society’s interest in new knowledge clearly outweighs the burdens the
p.000009: research may impose on individuals. The Data Protection Authority may issue a license under the assumption that
p.000009: specific conditions are met. Such conditions will be legally binding on researchers. Projects that are subject to an
p.000009: obligation to obtain a licence cannot be initiated until the Data Protection Authority has given such a licence.
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009: 11 Section 31 of the Personal Data Act; Section 7-12 of the Personal Data Regulations.
...
p.000022: information about them is made available to others.
p.000022:
p.000022: Respect for privacy aims at protecting individuals against unwanted interference and expo- sure. This applies not only
p.000022: to emotional issues, but also to questions that involve sickness and health, political and religious opinions, and
p.000022: sexuality.
p.000022: Researchers should be especially attentive when they ask questions regarding intimate matters and they should avoid
p.000022: putting pressure on participants. What participants perceive as sensitive information may vary from one individual or
p.000022: group to the next.
p.000022: It can be difficult to distinguish between the private and the public sphere, for example when conducting research on
p.000022: and via the internet. When using material from such inter- actions, researchers must be duly aware of the fact that
p.000022: people’s understanding of what is private and what is public in such media may vary.26
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 16 Respect for the values and motives of others
p.000022: Researchers must not ascribe irrational or unworthy motives to participants without providing convincing documentation
p.000022: and justification. Researchers must show respect for the values and views of research participants, not least when they
p.000022: differ from those generally accepted by society at large.
p.000022:
p.000022: Research is often concerned with the behaviour and values of minorities, e.g. religious groups, ethnic minorities,
p.000022: youth groups, or political subcultures. Some persons may find this research to be intrusive or offensive. Researchers
p.000022: must take seriously the participants’ understanding of themselves and avoid representations that diminish their
p.000022: legitimate rights In many research projects in the humanities and social sciences, where actions are often
p.000022: used in explanations, the participants’ motives often play a key role. There is frequently uncertainty associated with
p.000022: exploration of motives, not least when it comes to research on other cultures or historical periods. A clear
p.000022: distinction should therefore be drawn between description and interpretation, or between documentation of actual
p.000022: courses of events and different interpretations of such events.
p.000022: At the same time, the participants’ motives are often directly associated with their social roles. For example,
p.000022: researchers may assume that politicians seek influence, that
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 26 NESH, Ethical Guidelines for Internet Research, Oslo (2003) 2016.
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 22 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000023:
p.000023: business leaders seek profit, or that there are conflicts between generations. Stronger evi- dence is required to
p.000023: ascribe more unusual motives to participants. Special documentation and argumentation are required for providing
p.000023: accounts of actions that ascribe unworthy motives to participants or motives other than those they invoke themselves.
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: 17 Respect for posthumous reputations
p.000023: It is important to act with care when conducting research on deceased persons.
p.000023:
...
Social / Incarcerated
Searching for indicator restricted:
(return to top)
p.000024: wanting information about themselves, their members or their plans to be published.
p.000024:
p.000024: It may be of great interest to the general public to learn about how private companies and interest organisations
p.000024: operate in society. Companies and organisations are under no legal obligation to provide information except where
p.000024: specific statutory provisions apply to certain types of information. Such institutions should nonetheless make their
p.000024: archives available for research. If they deny access, this must be respected.
p.000024: Researchers who choose to undertake research on organisations that are opposed to the research are subject to
p.000024: particular requirements regarding meticulous documentation and use of methods. Situations may arise where researchers
p.000024: have reason to suspect abuse or serious violations of the law. It may still be ethically acceptable to continue the
p.000024: research providing that the abuse cannot be exposed or documented in any other way.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 20 Respect for public administration
p.000024: Public bodies should make themselves available for research into their activities.
p.000024:
p.000024: People have a legitimate interest in how social institutions function. This implies that researchers must have the
p.000024: greatest possible access to public administration and bodies.
p.000024: It should be possible to research public archives. Access may be restricted, with reference to privacy, overriding
p.000024: national interests, or national security. Classified material should be declassified as soon as it is prudent to do so.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 21 Respect for vulnerable groups
p.000024: Researchers have a special responsibility to respect the interests of vulnerable groups throughout the entire research
p.000024: process.
p.000024:
p.000024: Vulnerable and disadvantaged individuals and groups are not always equipped to defend their interests when dealing with
p.000024: researchers. Accordingly, researchers cannot take for granted that ordinary procedures for eliciting information and
p.000024: consent will ensure individuals’ self-determination or protect them from unreasonable strain.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 24 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000025:
p.000025: Individuals who belong to disadvantaged groups may not want to be the subjects of research for fear of being viewed by
p.000025: the general public in an unfavourable light. In such cases, researchers must place particular emphasis on the
p.000025: requirements regarding information and consent. On the other hand, society has a legitimate interest for example in
p.000025: surveying living conditions, measuring the effectiveness of social welfare schemes, or charting the paths in and out of
...
p.000032:
p.000032: 32 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000033:
p.000033: 33 Responsibilities of supervisors and project managers
p.000033: Supervisors and project managers must assume responsibility for the research ethics problems faced by students or
p.000033: project team members.
p.000033:
p.000033: Supervisors and project managers are also responsible for taking account of participants and others who are affected by
p.000033: the projects of students and project team members. They must assume responsibility for dealing with the problems that
p.000033: may arise for those conducting the project, especially if conducting the research become particularly stressful or
p.000033: problematic for them. Supervisors and project managers also have a shared responsibility for dissemi- nating the
p.000033: results of projects. This responsibility also involves dealing with challenges presented by research ethics.
p.000033:
p.000033:
p.000033: E) COMMISSIONED RESEARCH
p.000033:
p.000033: 34 Different types of research
p.000033: Both researchers and research institutions must ensure that the funding and organisa- tion of research is not in
p.000033: conflict with the norms of open, reliable and independent research.
p.000033:
p.000033: An overarching responsibility of research policy is to maintain the balance between dif- ferent types of research, both
p.000033: between different disciplines and between commissioned research and researcher-driven research (pure and applied
p.000033: research). Different types of funding and organisation give rise to different research ethics issues and dilemmas in
p.000033: the relationship between science and society. Many of the challenges that used to be restricted to commissioned
p.000033: research, relating to norms such as openness, accountability and inde- pendence, may be equally relevant today for
p.000033: other types of research as well.
p.000033: Research communities interact with society in general. When society funds research, it is because it expects something
p.000033: in return. Society’s expectations concerning utility and relevance are not irreconcilable with the requirement that
p.000033: research must be free and independent, but this places demands on transparency with respect to terms of contract,
p.000033: ownership, confidentiality and the right to publish.
p.000033: Knowledge is a collective good, and if research becomes too privatised, it will inhibit both the development of
p.000033: knowledge and the contribution of research to society. At the same time, commissioned research, where external
p.000033: principals decide on the subject, are an important part of society’s aggregate knowledge development. For that reason,
p.000033: there must be a balance between commissioned research and researcher-driven research. Research
p.000033:
p.000033:
p.000033:
p.000033: GUIDELINES – NESH 33
p.000034:
p.000034: funders should be aware of established standards for the organisation of research and reporting assignments.36
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 35 Commissioned research
p.000034: Both public and private commissioners have a legitimate right to set the parameters for research assignments, as long
p.000034: as those parameters does not conflict with the other require- ments made with regard to the research. However, that
p.000034: does not exempt researchers and research institutions from their share of the responsibility for the agreements they
p.000034: sign with commissioners.
p.000034:
p.000034: Researchers and research institutions do not merely report their own results; they also repre- sent the credibility of
...
Social / Linguistic Proficiency
Searching for indicator language:
(return to top)
p.000013: recognisable in publications or in other dissemination of research;
p.000013: • when a third party is affected by the research.
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: 7 Duty to inform
p.000013: Researchers must provide participants with adequate information about the field of research, the purpose of the
p.000013: research, who has funded the project, who will receive access to the information, the intended use of the results, and
p.000013: the consequences of participation in the research project.
p.000013:
p.000013: The type of information required depends on the nature of the research; whether it takes the form of field studies,
p.000013: experiments or using the internet. There are various considerations associated with different types of source material
p.000013: and data; whether it is a matter of personal
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: GUIDELINES – NESH 13
p.000014:
p.000014: data, sensitive information, previously acquired material, anonymised material or information acquired from the
p.000014: internet. When collecting and processing personal data, especially sensitive personal data, researchers also have a
p.000014: statutory obligation to notify the subjects or participants in the research and must also obtain their consent (see
p.000014: Introduction and point 8).
p.000014: Researchers must provide information in a neutral manner, so that the subjects are not exposed to undue pressure. The
p.000014: information must be adapted to the participatns’ cultural background and communicated in a language they understand. In
p.000014: some research projects, it may be necessary to use an interpreter to provide the necessary information. It may also be
p.000014: relevant to provide information about possible benefits associated with participating in the research, but this
p.000014: information must be clear and not raise unreasonable expectations on the part of the research subjects. Where relevant,
p.000014: researchers are required to make it clear that participation in the research does not affect their right to public
p.000014: services or the outcome of their cases and applications.
p.000014: One exception from the main rule is when the research is conducted by means of observation in public arenas, on streets
p.000014: and in public squares. Researchers can normally carry out such research without informing the people involved. At the
p.000014: same time, regis- tration of information and interaction using technical equipment (camera, video, tape recorders,
p.000014: etc.) implies that the observation material will be stored. This registration and storage may thus provide the
p.000014: foundation for a personal data register. In general, this requires that people are informed that they are the subjects
p.000014: of research, how long the material will be stored, and who will be using it. Research on and via the internet has a
p.000014: special status, and not everything that is openly available on the internet is public. NESH has therefore developed
p.000014: separate guidelines for internet research.18
p.000014: Another exception is public figures, who may find that the increased attention they meet threatens their individual
p.000014: freedom. However, as they have voluntarily sought public attention, or have accepted positions that entail publicity,
p.000014: their freedom cannot be said to be threatened to the same extent as that of other persons. Public figures must expect
...
p.000037: quality and relevance.
p.000037:
p.000037: Research dissemination makes ethical demands on individuals and institutions alike. Universities and university
p.000037: colleges have a special responsibility to disseminate knowledge, results and scientific norms and values, both in their
p.000037: teaching of students and in relation
p.000037:
p.000037:
p.000037:
p.000037: GUIDELINES – NESH 37
p.000038:
p.000038: to public administration, cultural life and business and industry.37 Institutions should pro- mote dissemination, for
p.000038: example when appointing staff, in teaching, or through financial incentives. Institutions should also encourage
p.000038: dissemination in different arenas and through new kinds of learning, knowledge sharing and discourse, whether it be
p.000038: through the media, lecture series, conferences for non-academics or through public hearings.
p.000038: Dissemination of research is also associated with freedom of expression and the infrastructure requirement in Article
p.000038: 100 of the Norwegian Constitution: «The authorities of the state shall create conditions that facilitate open and
p.000038: enlightened public discourse.»38 Also the academic communities must contribute to these public discourses.
p.000038: Constitutional democracies with well-functioning public administrations and market economies are contin- gent on
p.000038: spheres in civil society that are primarily characterised not by principles of profit- ability and management logic,
p.000038: but by the principle that it is arguments that should count. Universities and university colleges also have a
p.000038: responsibility to maintain and further develop Norwegian as an academic language.39 A Norwegian academic language is
p.000038: important for disseminating results both to those involved and to the general public and in the public
p.000038: discourse.
p.000038: Good dissemination calls for interaction and cooperation between research institutions and other institutions such as
p.000038: the mass media, schools, art institutions, communities with various beliefs and voluntary associations. Dissemination
p.000038: may take place with varying participation by researchers and others (such as journalists and teachers), and may be
p.000038: written, verbal or based on other approaches (such as exhibitions and electronic media). All those who take part in
p.000038: such dissemination are subject to the same norms of research ethics.
p.000038:
p.000038:
p.000038: 43 Interdisciplinary discourse and public deliberation
p.000038: An important part of dissemination of research in a modern society emerges from the interaction between specialists in
p.000038: various academic disciplines and the public discourse.
p.000038:
p.000038: Many of the major challenges facing society related, for example, to ecology, globalisation and human rights, call for
p.000038: interdisciplinary cooperation and the integration of academic knowledge from a number of fields. There is therefore a
p.000038: strong need to translate and commu- nicate knowledge both across different disciplines and to a broader public. The
p.000038: development
p.000038:
p.000038:
p.000038: 37 Section 1-1, 1-3 of the Universities and Colleges Act.
p.000038: 38 Article 100 of the Norwegian Constitution.
p.000038: 39 Section 1-7 of the Universities and Colleges Act.
p.000038:
p.000038:
p.000038:
p.000038: 38 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000039:
p.000039: of multi-disciplinary fora at research institutions provides a good basis both for discourse among specialists and for
...
Social / Marital Status
Searching for indicator single:
(return to top)
p.000034:
p.000034: When research is organised into large, hierarchically managed projects, the relationship between individual researchers
p.000034: and the project management is analogous to the relationship between the researcher/research institution and the
p.000034: commissioner. If researchers experi- ences a conflict between loyalty to the institution or project and an ethically
p.000034: acceptable approach, the basic principle is that the individual researcher has a responsibility for their own
p.000034: participation. Researchers are also responsible for disclosing circumstances that are not acceptable according to
p.000034: research ethics.
p.000034: Copyright and the right to publish must be regulated by explicit agreements. This also applies to the relationship
p.000034: between the commissioner, the research institution and the researcher in connection with commissioned research and
p.000034: reports.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 36 Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, «Standard agreement for research and report assignments», Oslo 2012.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 34 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000035:
p.000035: 37 Independence and conflict of interests
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions should maintain their independence in relation to their principals.
p.000035:
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions must avoid becoming dependent on their com- missioners. Dependence may
p.000035: undermine their impartiality and the scientific quality of the research. This is particularly true if a single
p.000035: commissioner is responsible for a substantial portion of the researcher’s or research institution’s funding. It is
p.000035: therefore important for the researcher/institution and the commissioner not to have convergent interests to the point
p.000035: that they threaten the independence of the research (the vested interest threat). The sale of advisory or consulting
p.000035: services to actors who also have an interest in the research having a particular outcome may increase the vested
p.000035: interest threat.
p.000035: Non-financial factors may also threaten independent research. Personal ties, either through family relations or as a
p.000035: result of long-term connections between the research institution/researcher and those taking part in the research
p.000035: projects may lead to dependence in several ways. These ties may lead to the research being used to promote the views
p.000035: and interests of certain parties (representative party threat), or it may lead to there not being sufficient distance
p.000035: between the researcher and the participants (threat to confidentiality), or it may lead to independence being
p.000035: threatened because the participants are in a position where they can influence the researcher (threat of pressure).
p.000035: In some situations, the role of independent research may come into conflict with other roles the researcher may have,
...
Social / Police Officer
Searching for indicator officer:
(return to top)
p.000008: the duty of confidentiality, but the authority to grant exemption is often delegated to under- lying agencies. A
p.000008: statement confirming an exemption must be obtained from the Council for Confidentiality and Research [Rådet for
p.000008: taushetsplikt], pursuant to the Public Administration Regulations.9 Such a statement is nevertheless unnecessary if
p.000008: the admin- istrative body that reviews the matter of an exemption finds it clear that the application should be granted
p.000008: or denied, or if the researcher plans to directly contact the persons who are entitled to confidentiality.
p.000008: d) The Personal Data Act requires that persons who process personal data protect personal integrity and privacy.10
p.000008: Personal data consists of information and assessments that either directly or indirectly are linkable to a person, for
p.000008: example names, national identification numbers or e-mail addresses, or by compiling background data. Electronic
p.000008: processing of such information is subject to an obligation to notify and in general, this processing must be based on
p.000008: free and informed consent. When an institution has a data protection
p.000008:
p.000008:
p.000008:
p.000008: 7 Section 5 of the Research Ethics Act.
p.000008: 8 Section 9 of the Health Research Act.
p.000008: 9 Section 13 d of the Public Administration Act; see the Public Administration Regulations.
p.000008: 10 Section 1 of the Personal Data Act.
p.000008:
p.000008:
p.000008:
p.000008: 8 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000009:
p.000009: officer, the obligation to notify the Data Protection Authority is replaced by an obliga- tion to notify a data
p.000009: protection officer.11 Some research institutions have local data protection officers, but the Data Protection Official
p.000009: for Research [Personvernombudet for forskning] at the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (formerly NSD) performs this
p.000009: task for many research institutions in Norway.
p.000009: The main task of the data protection officer is to ensure that institutions are able to perform their statutory
p.000009: obligations related to internal control and quality assurance of own research. The data protection officer may also
p.000009: offer guidance and advice on matters regarding privacy. Projects that involve processing personal data may not begin
p.000009: until a data protection officer has reviewed the project.
p.000009: e) According to the Personal Data Act, it is a general rule that the Data Protection Authority [Datatilsynet] must
p.000009: grant a licence for the processing of sensitive personal data, but research projects are exempt from this obligation to
p.000009: obtain a licence if a data protection officer has recommended the project.12 Sensitive personal data include
p.000009: information about a person’s health, race or ethnic background, sexuality, and their political, philosophical or
p.000009: religious beliefs. Some projects that process sensitive personal data are not covered by the exemption in the Personal
p.000009: Data Regulations, nor do they require a license from the Data Protection Authority.13
p.000009: If the project is subject to an obligation to obtain a licence, the Data Protection Official for Research may assist
p.000009: with the writing of the application for a license and help send it to the Data Protection Authority. The Authority’s
p.000009: responsibilities include assessing whether society’s interest in new knowledge clearly outweighs the burdens the
p.000009: research may impose on individuals. The Data Protection Authority may issue a license under the assumption that
p.000009: specific conditions are met. Such conditions will be legally binding on researchers. Projects that are subject to an
...
p.000014: the research when they take part as informants, out of consid- eration for their self-determination and freedom.
p.000014: A third exception is when information cannot be given before the research is initiated, for example if a researcher
p.000014: cannot disclose the real purpose of an experiment. Such excep- tions must be justified by the value of the research and
p.000014: the lack of alternatives, and the researcher must take particular care to comply with respect for human dignity and
p.000014: protection of individuals. It is often possible to give participants general information on the project
p.000014:
p.000014: 18 NESH, Ethical Guidelines for Internet Research, Oslo (2003) 2016.
p.000014:
p.000014:
p.000014:
p.000014: 14 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000015:
p.000015: in advance, and detailed information afterwards, both about the project and about why they were not fully informed
p.000015: beforehand.
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015: 8 Consent and obligation to notify
p.000015: When a research project deals with personal data, researchers are obliged to inform the participants or subjects of
p.000015: research and to obtain their consent. The consent must be freely given, informed, and in an explicit form.
p.000015:
p.000015: The obligation to obtain consent is set out in the Personal Data Act, and all processing of personal data in research
p.000015: must be reported to a data protection officer. When researchers process sensitive personal data, either a license is
p.000015: required from the Data Protection Authority or a recommendation from a data protection officer (see the Introduction).
p.000015: The obligation to obtain consent will prevent violations of personal integrity, and safeguard the freedom and
p.000015: self-determination of the participants. The consent must be based on information about the purpose of the project, the
p.000015: methods, risks, possible dis- comfort, and other consequences of importance to the participants. Consent also makes it
p.000015: possible to conduct research that involves a certain risk of strain.
p.000015: Freely given consent means that the consent has been obtained without external pressure or constraints on individual
p.000015: freedom. Such pressure may arise from the presence of the researcher, or it can be mediated through persons in
p.000015: authority with whom the researcher has been in contact. Rewarding or paying participants may also influence the
p.000015: informants’ motivation to take part in research projects, and may influence the responses provided by the participants,
p.000015: thus constituting a source of error in the data collected.
p.000015: The fact that consent is informed means that a researcher has provided adequate information about what it means to take
...
p.000020: consequences of the research, and they must be informed that participation is voluntary and that they may withdraw from
p.000020: the study at any time. Consent is more problematic for research on children than research on adults. Children
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020: 20 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000021:
p.000021: are often more willing to obey authority than adults, and they often feel that they cannot object. Nor are they always
p.000021: able to see the consequences of participating in research.24
p.000021: In general, minors who have turned 15 can consent to researchers collecting and using their personal data. If a child
p.000021: is under the age of 15, researchers must usually obtain consent from their parents or guardians. An exception is made
p.000021: for sensitive personal data, which can only be acquired with the consent of the parents. In such cases, authorisation
p.000021: from the Data Protection Authority or a recommendation from a data protection officer is also required.25
p.000021: At the same time, it is important to treat minors as independent individuals. According to the Children Act, a child
p.000021: who has reached seven years of age, or younger children who are able to form their own opinions on a matter, must be
p.000021: provided with information and the opportunity to express their opinions. When a child has reached twelve years of age,
p.000021: a great deal of weight must be attached to his or her opinions. In addition to the parents or guardians giving formal
p.000021: consent, it is necessary that the children themselves accept par- ticipation to the extent that they are able to do so.
p.000021: There may also be conflicts of interest between children and their parents or guardians. In that event, it is important
p.000021: to clarify the child’s capacity to grant consent on their own behalf. In some cases, it may be right to let children
...
Searching for indicator police:
(return to top)
p.000017:
p.000017: When researchers promise confidentiality to participants, the pledge implies that the infor- mation will not be passed
p.000017: on in ways that can identify the individuals. Both the credibility of the researchers and the participants’ trust in
p.000017: research are closely linked to confidentiality. At the same time, the requirement of confidentiality has a legal aspect
p.000017: associated with protection of personal integrity and privacy, and both the Public Administration Act and the Personal
p.000017: Data Act set limits on the type of confidentiality researchers can promise participants. Researchers must therefore
p.000017: communicate clearly the limits of the pledge of confidentiality.
p.000017: Sometimes a conflict can arise between the duty of confidentiality and the obligation to notify. The research may
p.000017: reveal censurable or illegal situations that can expose researchers to conflicting loyalties, particularly with a view
p.000017: to the promise of confidentiality. Researchers must therefore not allow themselves to become dependent on the
p.000017: participants, and such conflicts can be prevented by explaining the limits on the promise of confidentiality. This also
p.000017: applies to processing of data that is subject to protection of sources.19
p.000017: In given situations, the duty of confidentiality must yield to the duty to prevent a criminal offence.20 Researchers
p.000017: are legally bound to prevent a criminal offence or report it to the police, without regard for the duty of
p.000017: confidentiality. This includes suspicion of espionage, acts of terrorism, murder, rape, incest or domestic violence.21
p.000017: Children are particularly entitled to protection, and when abuse or neglect are suspected, researchers also have a duty
p.000017: of disclosure and must report the matter to the child welfare authorities. This applies to everyone, notwithstanding
p.000017: the duty of confidentiality.22
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: 19 Eivind Smith, Taushetsplikt og kildevern for forskere [Confidentiality and protection of sources for researchers],
p.000017: NESH, Oslo 1998.
p.000017: 20 Section 196 of the General Civil Penal Code.
p.000017: 21 The National Research Ethics Committees, Forskeres taushetsplikt og meldeplikt [Researchers’ duty of
p.000017: confidentiality and duty of notification], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH) and Helene Ingierd (NENT), Oslo 2013.
p.000017: 22 Section 6-4 of the Child Welfare Act.
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: GUIDELINES – NESH 17
p.000018:
p.000018: 10 Limited re-use
p.000018: Identifiable personal data collected for a specific research purpose cannot automatically be used for other research.
p.000018:
...
Social / Racial Minority
Searching for indicator minority:
(return to top)
p.000025: 2013.
p.000025:
p.000025:
p.000025:
p.000025: GUIDELINES – NESH 25
p.000026:
p.000026: Researchers and research institutions must not be involved in looting, theft or dubious trade in protected artefacts.
p.000026: Respect for the provenance of the research material requires particular attention.30 Researchers, museums and research
p.000026: institutions must show due care and not acquire (for themselves or others) protected objects and cultural history
p.000026: source material that have not been procured in a transparent, honest and verifiable manner for research purposes.
p.000026: Research on material whose provenance is disputed should be avoided. When conducting research on such material,
p.000026: research institutions and professionals have a particular respon- sibility for transparency regarding provenance.
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026: 23 Research on other cultures
p.000026: A particular requirement of research on other cultures is that there ought to be dialogue with representatives of the
p.000026: culture being studied.
p.000026:
p.000026: When conducting research on other cultures, it is important to have knowledge of local traditions, traditional
p.000026: knowledge and social matters. As far as possible, researchers should enter into a dialogue with the local inhabitants,
p.000026: representatives of the culture in question and the local authorities. An interest in local co-determination or control
p.000026: may come into conflict with the research requirements regarding quality and impartiality. This places great demands on
p.000026: the initiation, planning and execution of research projects. When conducting research on other cultures, either in
p.000026: other countries or in minority cultures, researchers should avoid using classifications or designations that allow
p.000026: unreasonable generalisation.
p.000026: Similar considerations also apply to historical research where time has passed since the events in question.
p.000026: Researchers should avoid devaluating people from past cultures and historical periods. Here, as under other
p.000026: circumstances, researchers in the humanities and social sciences must make a clear distinction between documentation
p.000026: and evaluation.
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026: 24 Limits on cultural recognition
p.000026: Researchers must strike a balance between recognising cultural differences and recognising other fundamental values and
p.000026: general human rights.
p.000026:
p.000026: Respect for and loyalty to the cultures in which the research is being conducted do not mean that aspects such as
p.000026: discrimination and culturally motivated abuse must be accepted.
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026: 30 Section 23a of the Cultural Heritage Act.
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026: 26 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000027:
p.000027: When undertaking a normative analysis of such situations, the researcher must make a clear distinction between a
p.000027: description of norms and practices in the culture being studied and the normative discussions of these factors related
p.000027: to specific values.
p.000027: The researcher must be especially cautious when researching phenomena like cul- turally motivated violation of life and
p.000027: health or breaches of other human rights.
p.000027:
p.000027:
p.000027: D) THE RESEARCH COMMUNITY
p.000027:
...
Searching for indicator race:
(return to top)
p.000009: for Research [Personvernombudet for forskning] at the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (formerly NSD) performs this
p.000009: task for many research institutions in Norway.
p.000009: The main task of the data protection officer is to ensure that institutions are able to perform their statutory
p.000009: obligations related to internal control and quality assurance of own research. The data protection officer may also
p.000009: offer guidance and advice on matters regarding privacy. Projects that involve processing personal data may not begin
p.000009: until a data protection officer has reviewed the project.
p.000009: e) According to the Personal Data Act, it is a general rule that the Data Protection Authority [Datatilsynet] must
p.000009: grant a licence for the processing of sensitive personal data, but research projects are exempt from this obligation to
p.000009: obtain a licence if a data protection officer has recommended the project.12 Sensitive personal data include
p.000009: information about a person’s health, race or ethnic background, sexuality, and their political, philosophical or
p.000009: religious beliefs. Some projects that process sensitive personal data are not covered by the exemption in the Personal
p.000009: Data Regulations, nor do they require a license from the Data Protection Authority.13
p.000009: If the project is subject to an obligation to obtain a licence, the Data Protection Official for Research may assist
p.000009: with the writing of the application for a license and help send it to the Data Protection Authority. The Authority’s
p.000009: responsibilities include assessing whether society’s interest in new knowledge clearly outweighs the burdens the
p.000009: research may impose on individuals. The Data Protection Authority may issue a license under the assumption that
p.000009: specific conditions are met. Such conditions will be legally binding on researchers. Projects that are subject to an
p.000009: obligation to obtain a licence cannot be initiated until the Data Protection Authority has given such a licence.
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
...
Social / Religion
Searching for indicator religious:
(return to top)
p.000009: task for many research institutions in Norway.
p.000009: The main task of the data protection officer is to ensure that institutions are able to perform their statutory
p.000009: obligations related to internal control and quality assurance of own research. The data protection officer may also
p.000009: offer guidance and advice on matters regarding privacy. Projects that involve processing personal data may not begin
p.000009: until a data protection officer has reviewed the project.
p.000009: e) According to the Personal Data Act, it is a general rule that the Data Protection Authority [Datatilsynet] must
p.000009: grant a licence for the processing of sensitive personal data, but research projects are exempt from this obligation to
p.000009: obtain a licence if a data protection officer has recommended the project.12 Sensitive personal data include
p.000009: information about a person’s health, race or ethnic background, sexuality, and their political, philosophical or
p.000009: religious beliefs. Some projects that process sensitive personal data are not covered by the exemption in the Personal
p.000009: Data Regulations, nor do they require a license from the Data Protection Authority.13
p.000009: If the project is subject to an obligation to obtain a licence, the Data Protection Official for Research may assist
p.000009: with the writing of the application for a license and help send it to the Data Protection Authority. The Authority’s
p.000009: responsibilities include assessing whether society’s interest in new knowledge clearly outweighs the burdens the
p.000009: research may impose on individuals. The Data Protection Authority may issue a license under the assumption that
p.000009: specific conditions are met. Such conditions will be legally binding on researchers. Projects that are subject to an
p.000009: obligation to obtain a licence cannot be initiated until the Data Protection Authority has given such a licence.
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009: 11 Section 31 of the Personal Data Act; Section 7-12 of the Personal Data Regulations.
p.000009: 12 Section 33 subsection 1 of the Personal Data Act; Section 7-27 of the Personal Data Regulations. 13 Projects that
...
p.000010: research can never fully achieve this goal. Most conclusions are contingent and limited. Nevertheless, the norms of
p.000010: science have a value in themselves as guidelines and regulatory principles for the research community’s collective
p.000010: pursuit for truth.
p.000010: In the humanities and social sciences, involvement and interpretation are often integral parts of the research process.
p.000010: Different academic approaches and theoretical positions may also allow for different, but nonetheless reasonable,
p.000010: interpretations of the same material. Consequently, it is important to reflect on and account for how one’s own values
p.000010: and attitudes affect the choice of topic, data sources and interpretations. Integrity in documentation, consistency in
p.000010: argumentation, impartiality in assessment and openness regarding uncer- tainty are common obligations in research
p.000010: ethics, irrespective of the values, positions or perspectives of the researchers.
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010: 2 Freedom of research
p.000010: Both researchers and research institutions are responsible for preserving the freedom and independence of research,
p.000010: especially when the topic is controversial or when strategic or commercial considerations impose pressure and
p.000010: constraints on research.
p.000010:
p.000010: Scientific norms regarding originality, openness and trustworthiness may conflict with the desire of other parties to
p.000010: prevent or govern research. Research must be safeguarded against internal or external pressure that limits the
p.000010: exploration of well-defined problems that may intersect financial, political, social, cultural or religious interests
p.000010: and traditions. This is part of the reason why academic freedom was made statutory in 2007, ordering institutions to
p.000010: promote and protect academic freedom.14 However, the independence of research exists as a norm independently of this
p.000010: codification, while at the same time the law now states that teaching and research must comply with recognised
p.000010: scientific and ethical principles.
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010: 14 Section 1-5 of the Universities and Colleges Act.
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010: 10 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000011:
p.000011: It is the soundness and relevance of the arguments and the quality of the documentation that should provide the
p.000011: foundation for research based conclusions – and for knowledge production in research in general – not any established
p.000011: interests and traditions in or outside the research community.
p.000011: The duty and obligation of openness and publication means that neither researchers nor research institutions may
p.000011: withhold or selectively report results and conclusions. Any attempts to impose or dictate what results the research
p.000011: should lead to, are illegitimate. This calls for arrangements to ensure both the independence of institutions and the
p.000011: independence of researchers within the institutions. Research presupposes the freedom to seek, produce and disseminate
p.000011: scientific knowledge to the wider public.
p.000011: The level of independence varies between basic, applied and commissioned research. All research must nonetheless be
p.000011: protected from pressure that endangers good and respon- sible research. In addition, commissioned research outside the
p.000011: university and university college sector must also have procedures for protecting the integrity of research, as set out
...
p.000021: are subject to abuse, assault or neglect (see point 9).
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: 24 The National Research Ethics Committees, Barn i forskning. Etiske dimensjoner [Children in research. Ethical
p.000021: dimensions], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH), Jacob Hølen (NEM) and Helene Ingierd (NESH), Oslo 2013.
p.000021: 25 The Consumer Ombudsman and the Data Protection Authority, Barn og unges personopplysninger: Veiledning for
p.000021: innhenting og bruk [Guidelines for the collection and use of personal data on children and young persons], Oslo 2004.
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: GUIDELINES – NESH 21
p.000022:
p.000022: 15 Respect for privacy and family life
p.000022: Researchers must respect individuals’ privacy and family life. Participants are entitled to check whether confidential
p.000022: information about them is made available to others.
p.000022:
p.000022: Respect for privacy aims at protecting individuals against unwanted interference and expo- sure. This applies not only
p.000022: to emotional issues, but also to questions that involve sickness and health, political and religious opinions, and
p.000022: sexuality.
p.000022: Researchers should be especially attentive when they ask questions regarding intimate matters and they should avoid
p.000022: putting pressure on participants. What participants perceive as sensitive information may vary from one individual or
p.000022: group to the next.
p.000022: It can be difficult to distinguish between the private and the public sphere, for example when conducting research on
p.000022: and via the internet. When using material from such inter- actions, researchers must be duly aware of the fact that
p.000022: people’s understanding of what is private and what is public in such media may vary.26
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 16 Respect for the values and motives of others
p.000022: Researchers must not ascribe irrational or unworthy motives to participants without providing convincing documentation
p.000022: and justification. Researchers must show respect for the values and views of research participants, not least when they
p.000022: differ from those generally accepted by society at large.
p.000022:
p.000022: Research is often concerned with the behaviour and values of minorities, e.g. religious groups, ethnic minorities,
p.000022: youth groups, or political subcultures. Some persons may find this research to be intrusive or offensive. Researchers
p.000022: must take seriously the participants’ understanding of themselves and avoid representations that diminish their
p.000022: legitimate rights In many research projects in the humanities and social sciences, where actions are often
p.000022: used in explanations, the participants’ motives often play a key role. There is frequently uncertainty associated with
p.000022: exploration of motives, not least when it comes to research on other cultures or historical periods. A clear
p.000022: distinction should therefore be drawn between description and interpretation, or between documentation of actual
p.000022: courses of events and different interpretations of such events.
p.000022: At the same time, the participants’ motives are often directly associated with their social roles. For example,
p.000022: researchers may assume that politicians seek influence, that
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 26 NESH, Ethical Guidelines for Internet Research, Oslo (2003) 2016.
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 22 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000023:
p.000023: business leaders seek profit, or that there are conflicts between generations. Stronger evi- dence is required to
p.000023: ascribe more unusual motives to participants. Special documentation and argumentation are required for providing
p.000023: accounts of actions that ascribe unworthy motives to participants or motives other than those they invoke themselves.
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: 17 Respect for posthumous reputations
...
Social / Student
Searching for indicator student:
(return to top)
p.000002: 17 Respect for posthumous reputations 23
p.000002: 18 Defining roles and responsibilities 23
p.000002: C) Respect for groups and institutions 24
p.000002: 19 Respect for private interests 24
p.000002: 20 Respect for public administration 24
p.000002: 21 Respect for vulnerable groups 24
p.000002: 22 Preservation of cultural monuments and remains 25
p.000002: 23 Research on other cultures 26
p.000002: 24 Limits on cultural recognition 26
p.000002: 2 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000003:
p.000003: D) The research community 27
p.000003: 25 Co-authorship
p.000003: 27
p.000003: 26 Good citation practice 28
p.000003: 27 Plagiarism
p.000003: 29
p.000003: 28 Scientific integrity
p.000003: 29
p.000003: 29 Data sharing
p.000003: 30
p.000003: 30 Impartiality
p.000003: 30
p.000003: 31 Relations with colleagues 31
p.000003: 32 The student-supervisor relationship 32
p.000003: 33 Responsibilities of supervisors and project managers 33
p.000003: E) Commissioned research 33
p.000003: 34 Different types of research 33
p.000003: 35 Commissioned research 34
p.000003: 36 The responsibility of researchers in large projects 34
p.000003: 37 Independence and conflict of interests 35
p.000003: 38 Transparency in research funding 35
p.000003: 39 Presentation and use of results 36
p.000003: 40 Right and duty to publish 36
p.000003: F) Dissemination of research 37
p.000003: 41 Dissemination as an academic responsibility 37
p.000003: 42 Requirements for individuals and institutions 37
p.000003: 43 Interdisciplinary discourse and public deliberation 38
p.000003: 44 Participation in public debate 39
p.000003: 45 Accountability in dissemination 40
...
p.000028: qualify for co-authorship.
p.000028: An agreement must be made as early as possible in the research process, not least in large and interdisciplinary
p.000028: research projects, as to who will be listed as the co-authors of a publication, and how responsibilities and tasks are
p.000028: to be distributed among the authors.
p.000028:
p.000028:
p.000028: 26 Good citation practice
p.000028: All researchers and students are obliged to follow good citation practice. This is a prerequisite for critical
p.000028: examination and important for enabling further research.
p.000028:
p.000028: Researchers and students are under an obligation to provide accurate references to the literature they use, whether
p.000028: this is primary or secondary literature. This must be accounted for explicitly, also when re-using text from one’s own
p.000028: publications (so-called «duplication» or more misleadingly referred to as «self-plagiarism») in the form of proper
p.000028: citation, for example in a preface or in footnotes. When researchers and students obtain information from sources
p.000028: outside their research – such as public documents or the internet – they must provide accurate references that make it
p.000028: possible to trace the information back to the source. References should usually specify chapters or pages, so that
p.000028: other persons can check the quotes and references. This enables critical examination of assertions and arguments,
p.000028: including of how the sources are used.
p.000028: Both scientific disciplines and research institutions are responsible for establishing and communicating rules for good
p.000028: citation practice, as well as for creating understanding of these norms, ensuring compliance, and reacting to
p.000028: misconduct. Each researcher or student must conduct their research with integrity, and handle their sources honestly.
p.000028: Supervisors have a special responsibility for following up students’ knowledge of and attitudes towards research
p.000028: ethics, so that they may exercise good citation practice in future work.32
p.000028:
p.000028: 32 «God skikk. Om bruk av litteratur og kilder i allmenne, historiske framstillinger» [Good practice. About the use of
p.000028: literature and sources in general historical accounts], report commissioned by the Norwegian Publishers’ Association,
p.000028: the Norwegian Historical Association and the Norwegian Non-Fiction Writers and Translators Association, Oslo 2006.
p.000028:
p.000028:
p.000028:
p.000028: 28 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000029:
p.000029: 27 Plagiarism
p.000029: Plagiarism is unacceptable and constitutes a serious breach of recognised norms of research ethics.
p.000029:
p.000029: A plagiarist undermines not only his or her own reputation as a researcher, but also the credibility of the research.
p.000029: Both researchers and research institutions are responsible for preventing plagiarism.
p.000029: Plagiarism in research ethics is taking something from someone else and presenting it as one’s own without correctly
p.000029: citing their sources. Plagiarism violates the duty of truth- fulness in science, and the requirement of originality,
p.000029: humility and collegiality. Researchers who build on the work of others must cite their sources in accordance with good
p.000029: practice.
p.000029: The most obvious type of plagiarism is pure duplication. Plagiarism can nonetheless take other forms, for example the
...
p.000031: information and constructive criticism that their group’s research is as good as possible. Research communities must
p.000031: maintain high methodological standards and encourage fair debate on the applications and limitations of various methods
p.000031: and analytical techniques.
p.000031: Good research cultures are characterised by researchers who read each other’s work and give one another positive and
p.000031: negative criticism. It is a breach of ethical norms if researchers keep serious criticism of existing research to
p.000031: themselves, and do not present it in relevant circles to ensure that problematics are considered from all angles. This
p.000031: is consistent with the scientific norm of systematic and organised scepticism. Relevant circles may extend to a broader
p.000031: public than the specialist community.
p.000031:
p.000031:
p.000031: 35 Section 6 of the Public Administration Act.
p.000031:
p.000031:
p.000031:
p.000031: GUIDELINES – NESH 31
p.000032:
p.000032: Most disciplines are characterised by competing schools of thought and disagreement on fundamental questions of
p.000032: scientific theory. Those responsible for the academic assessment of the work of others must therefore be willing to
p.000032: seriously consider arguments and ways of thinking that are recognised in other research traditions than their own.
p.000032: Academic assessments must be characterised by professional carefulness, fairness and openness. Researchers frequently
p.000032: participate in evaluations for academic posts. They evaluate master’s and doctoral theses, project applications,
p.000032: journal articles and similar. In such contexts, the assessor must review their own impartiality and work professionally
p.000032: and objectively.
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032: 32 The student-supervisor relationship
p.000032: Supervisors are obliged to act in the students’ best interests and not to take advantage of their dependence. This
p.000032: applies to academic results and personal matters.
p.000032:
p.000032: Supervisors must be conscious of the asymmetry of the supervisory situation, and not take advantage of their academic
p.000032: authority or use their authority in a manner liable to cause the student offence. Supervisors must not take advantage
p.000032: of students’ dependence.
p.000032: If a supervisor wishes to use in his or her own research material from work that the student has not yet completed, the
p.000032: supervisor and the student must make an agreement to this effect. If the student has collected the material personally,
p.000032: it should only be used after the student is finished with the material, normally after taking the examination. The
p.000032: institution should draw up a standard agreement for this situation. Supervisors must employ good citation practice when
p.000032: using a student’s material and work. Supervisors must also take note of how others use students’ work before it is
p.000032: completed, and if relevant how the supervisor’s contribution should be indicated. Similarly, students should employ
p.000032: good citation practice in relation to their supervisors.
p.000032: In a supervisory situation, double relationships may arise, leading to compromised impartiality when the candidate’s
p.000032: work is to be assessed. The supervisor’s integrity must be protected as well as the candidate’s. It must not be
p.000032: possible for anyone to cast doubt as to where the line goes between private and professional matters, nor as to a
p.000032: supervisor’s impartiality. If the relationship between supervisor and candidate becomes overly close, the general rule
p.000032: is that the supervisor should withdraw from the position.
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032: 32 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000033:
p.000033: 33 Responsibilities of supervisors and project managers
p.000033: Supervisors and project managers must assume responsibility for the research ethics problems faced by students or
p.000033: project team members.
p.000033:
p.000033: Supervisors and project managers are also responsible for taking account of participants and others who are affected by
p.000033: the projects of students and project team members. They must assume responsibility for dealing with the problems that
p.000033: may arise for those conducting the project, especially if conducting the research become particularly stressful or
p.000033: problematic for them. Supervisors and project managers also have a shared responsibility for dissemi- nating the
...
Social / Threat of Stigma
Searching for indicator threat:
(return to top)
p.000034: acceptable approach, the basic principle is that the individual researcher has a responsibility for their own
p.000034: participation. Researchers are also responsible for disclosing circumstances that are not acceptable according to
p.000034: research ethics.
p.000034: Copyright and the right to publish must be regulated by explicit agreements. This also applies to the relationship
p.000034: between the commissioner, the research institution and the researcher in connection with commissioned research and
p.000034: reports.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 36 Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, «Standard agreement for research and report assignments», Oslo 2012.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 34 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000035:
p.000035: 37 Independence and conflict of interests
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions should maintain their independence in relation to their principals.
p.000035:
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions must avoid becoming dependent on their com- missioners. Dependence may
p.000035: undermine their impartiality and the scientific quality of the research. This is particularly true if a single
p.000035: commissioner is responsible for a substantial portion of the researcher’s or research institution’s funding. It is
p.000035: therefore important for the researcher/institution and the commissioner not to have convergent interests to the point
p.000035: that they threaten the independence of the research (the vested interest threat). The sale of advisory or consulting
p.000035: services to actors who also have an interest in the research having a particular outcome may increase the vested
p.000035: interest threat.
p.000035: Non-financial factors may also threaten independent research. Personal ties, either through family relations or as a
p.000035: result of long-term connections between the research institution/researcher and those taking part in the research
p.000035: projects may lead to dependence in several ways. These ties may lead to the research being used to promote the views
p.000035: and interests of certain parties (representative party threat), or it may lead to there not being sufficient distance
p.000035: between the researcher and the participants (threat to confidentiality), or it may lead to independence being
p.000035: threatened because the participants are in a position where they can influence the researcher (threat of pressure).
p.000035: In some situations, the role of independent research may come into conflict with other roles the researcher may have,
p.000035: for example as adviser or consultant. If a researcher accepts an assignment that may undermine the institution’s
p.000035: credibility, it is necessary to report the situation at the very least. In some situations, the conflict between roles
p.000035: will be so strong that the roles should not be combined.
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035: 38 Transparency in research funding
p.000035: Both researchers and commissioners have a duty to make it publicly known who is funding the research.
p.000035:
p.000035: It must be clear who is funding the research. Transparency concerning funding makes it easier for researchers to
p.000035: protect themselves against undue pressure and thus ensure the freedom and independence of the research. Moreover,
p.000035: commissioners have a reasonable claim to have their funding of research publicly known.
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035:
p.000035: GUIDELINES – NESH 35
p.000036:
p.000036: When researchers are going to publish and use results, they have an independent responsi- bility to be open and
p.000036: transparent about all ties (commissioners and funding etc.) that might have a bearing on the credibility of the
p.000036: research/reporting that has been conducted.
p.000036:
p.000036:
p.000036: 39 Presentation and use of results
p.000036: Both researchers and commissioners have a responsibility to prevent research results from being presented in a
p.000036: misleading manner. It is unethical to delimit the subject of the research with a view to producing particularly
p.000036: desirable results, or to present research results in an intentionally skewed manner.
p.000036:
...
Social / Threat of Violence
Searching for indicator violence:
(return to top)
p.000017: research are closely linked to confidentiality. At the same time, the requirement of confidentiality has a legal aspect
p.000017: associated with protection of personal integrity and privacy, and both the Public Administration Act and the Personal
p.000017: Data Act set limits on the type of confidentiality researchers can promise participants. Researchers must therefore
p.000017: communicate clearly the limits of the pledge of confidentiality.
p.000017: Sometimes a conflict can arise between the duty of confidentiality and the obligation to notify. The research may
p.000017: reveal censurable or illegal situations that can expose researchers to conflicting loyalties, particularly with a view
p.000017: to the promise of confidentiality. Researchers must therefore not allow themselves to become dependent on the
p.000017: participants, and such conflicts can be prevented by explaining the limits on the promise of confidentiality. This also
p.000017: applies to processing of data that is subject to protection of sources.19
p.000017: In given situations, the duty of confidentiality must yield to the duty to prevent a criminal offence.20 Researchers
p.000017: are legally bound to prevent a criminal offence or report it to the police, without regard for the duty of
p.000017: confidentiality. This includes suspicion of espionage, acts of terrorism, murder, rape, incest or domestic violence.21
p.000017: Children are particularly entitled to protection, and when abuse or neglect are suspected, researchers also have a duty
p.000017: of disclosure and must report the matter to the child welfare authorities. This applies to everyone, notwithstanding
p.000017: the duty of confidentiality.22
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: 19 Eivind Smith, Taushetsplikt og kildevern for forskere [Confidentiality and protection of sources for researchers],
p.000017: NESH, Oslo 1998.
p.000017: 20 Section 196 of the General Civil Penal Code.
p.000017: 21 The National Research Ethics Committees, Forskeres taushetsplikt og meldeplikt [Researchers’ duty of
p.000017: confidentiality and duty of notification], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH) and Helene Ingierd (NENT), Oslo 2013.
p.000017: 22 Section 6-4 of the Child Welfare Act.
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: GUIDELINES – NESH 17
p.000018:
p.000018: 10 Limited re-use
p.000018: Identifiable personal data collected for a specific research purpose cannot automatically be used for other research.
p.000018:
p.000018: Generally, re-use of identifiable personal data requires the consent of the participants. This does not apply to
p.000018: anonymised data, acquired for example for use in statistics, where the researcher cannot link persons and data. When
...
Social / Victim of Abuse
Searching for indicator abuse:
(return to top)
p.000017: Data Act set limits on the type of confidentiality researchers can promise participants. Researchers must therefore
p.000017: communicate clearly the limits of the pledge of confidentiality.
p.000017: Sometimes a conflict can arise between the duty of confidentiality and the obligation to notify. The research may
p.000017: reveal censurable or illegal situations that can expose researchers to conflicting loyalties, particularly with a view
p.000017: to the promise of confidentiality. Researchers must therefore not allow themselves to become dependent on the
p.000017: participants, and such conflicts can be prevented by explaining the limits on the promise of confidentiality. This also
p.000017: applies to processing of data that is subject to protection of sources.19
p.000017: In given situations, the duty of confidentiality must yield to the duty to prevent a criminal offence.20 Researchers
p.000017: are legally bound to prevent a criminal offence or report it to the police, without regard for the duty of
p.000017: confidentiality. This includes suspicion of espionage, acts of terrorism, murder, rape, incest or domestic violence.21
p.000017: Children are particularly entitled to protection, and when abuse or neglect are suspected, researchers also have a duty
p.000017: of disclosure and must report the matter to the child welfare authorities. This applies to everyone, notwithstanding
p.000017: the duty of confidentiality.22
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: 19 Eivind Smith, Taushetsplikt og kildevern for forskere [Confidentiality and protection of sources for researchers],
p.000017: NESH, Oslo 1998.
p.000017: 20 Section 196 of the General Civil Penal Code.
p.000017: 21 The National Research Ethics Committees, Forskeres taushetsplikt og meldeplikt [Researchers’ duty of
p.000017: confidentiality and duty of notification], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH) and Helene Ingierd (NENT), Oslo 2013.
p.000017: 22 Section 6-4 of the Child Welfare Act.
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: GUIDELINES – NESH 17
p.000018:
p.000018: 10 Limited re-use
p.000018: Identifiable personal data collected for a specific research purpose cannot automatically be used for other research.
p.000018:
p.000018: Generally, re-use of identifiable personal data requires the consent of the participants. This does not apply to
p.000018: anonymised data, acquired for example for use in statistics, where the researcher cannot link persons and data. When
p.000018: the data have been anonymised, the researcher does not know which person the data and the material come from. However,
p.000018: anonymity must not be confused with de-identified data, where personal data are removed, so that no unauthorised
p.000018: persons are able to establish who the research subjects are, but where the researcher is able to link individuals and
p.000018: data.
p.000018: Re-use of such de-identified data requires consent if researchers supplement registry studies with data obtained
p.000018: through active contact with the participants. When re-using and linking this type of data set, for example in registry
p.000018: studies that are large-scale, of a long duration, or which use geodata, it may also be possible to locate or identify
p.000018: individuals indirectly. In such cases, researchers should make renewed attempts to obtain consent, even though this is
p.000018: difficult in practice. If researchers do not find it possible to obtain consent, they have a particular responsibility
p.000018: to explain why the research is of such great benifit that it justifies deviating from this principle. In such cases,
p.000018: researchers have a general responsibility to inform the persons involved and the general public (see point 7).
p.000018:
p.000018:
p.000018: 11 Storage of personal data
p.000018: Data related to identifiable individuals must be stored responsibly. Such data must not be stored any longer than what
p.000018: is necessary to achieve the objective for which it was collected.
p.000018:
p.000018: Data protection involves not only the protection of individuals against abuse of personal data, but also of citizens in
p.000018: relation to the State. This is why strict rules govern the estab- lishment of public personal data registers. However,
p.000018: this must be balanced against the benefits achieved through research on registry data. It is also important to preserve
p.000018: mate- rial for future generations, but research institutions must follow the rules regarding proper storage. It is
p.000018: vital to establish and observe good routines for ensuring the quality of data registers and for any re-use and deletion
p.000018: of registers or other data, which may be linked to individuals (see the Personal Data Act).
p.000018: Storage of personal data normally triggers an obligation to obtain consent. The legis- lation places strict
p.000018: requirements on safe storage of lists of names or other data that permit
p.000018:
p.000018:
p.000018:
p.000018: 18 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000019:
p.000019: the identification of individuals. If storage of such data is necessary, the identifiable personal data must be stored
p.000019: securely and separately from other research data. The other material stored may contain a reference number to link it
p.000019: to the list of personal data. All research material must be kept securely, and inaccessible to unauthorised persons.
p.000019: It must be clearly decided and communicated to the participants in advance whether or not the material is to be
p.000019: destroyed at the end of the project. It must also be explained plainly how, and in what form, the material will be
p.000019: stored to make it possible to verify analyses and conclusions or for other researchers to re-use the material. The
p.000019: material must be stored securely at a dedicated institution like the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (formerly NSD)
p.000019: or the National Archives of Norway.
...
p.000021: consent, it is necessary that the children themselves accept par- ticipation to the extent that they are able to do so.
p.000021: There may also be conflicts of interest between children and their parents or guardians. In that event, it is important
p.000021: to clarify the child’s capacity to grant consent on their own behalf. In some cases, it may be right to let children
p.000021: and adolescents take part in the research without the consent of their parents. The requirement of confidentiality
p.000021: particularly applies when children take part in research. However, situations can arise in which researchers are either
p.000021: legally or ethically required to provide confidential information, whether it be to the child’s next-of-kin, adult
p.000021: helpers or the child welfare service. The obligation to notify applies, for example, if researchers learn that children
p.000021: are subject to abuse, assault or neglect (see point 9).
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: 24 The National Research Ethics Committees, Barn i forskning. Etiske dimensjoner [Children in research. Ethical
p.000021: dimensions], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH), Jacob Hølen (NEM) and Helene Ingierd (NESH), Oslo 2013.
p.000021: 25 The Consumer Ombudsman and the Data Protection Authority, Barn og unges personopplysninger: Veiledning for
p.000021: innhenting og bruk [Guidelines for the collection and use of personal data on children and young persons], Oslo 2004.
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: GUIDELINES – NESH 21
p.000022:
p.000022: 15 Respect for privacy and family life
p.000022: Researchers must respect individuals’ privacy and family life. Participants are entitled to check whether confidential
p.000022: information about them is made available to others.
p.000022:
p.000022: Respect for privacy aims at protecting individuals against unwanted interference and expo- sure. This applies not only
p.000022: to emotional issues, but also to questions that involve sickness and health, political and religious opinions, and
p.000022: sexuality.
p.000022: Researchers should be especially attentive when they ask questions regarding intimate matters and they should avoid
...
p.000023: (some) participants or students. Parallel roles may serve a valuable purpose in research, but the use of information
p.000023: obtained by virtue of such parallel roles also requires a free and informed consent if used for research purposes.
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: 27 The National Committee for Research Ethics on Human Remains, Etiske retningslinjer for forskning på menneskelige
p.000023: levninger [Ethical Guidelines for Research on Human Remains], Oslo 2013.
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: GUIDELINES – NESH 23
p.000024:
p.000024: C) RESPECT FOR GROUPS AND INSTITUTIONS
p.000024:
p.000024: 19 Respect for private interests
p.000024: Researchers must respect the legitimate reasons that private companies, interest organi- sations etc. may have for not
p.000024: wanting information about themselves, their members or their plans to be published.
p.000024:
p.000024: It may be of great interest to the general public to learn about how private companies and interest organisations
p.000024: operate in society. Companies and organisations are under no legal obligation to provide information except where
p.000024: specific statutory provisions apply to certain types of information. Such institutions should nonetheless make their
p.000024: archives available for research. If they deny access, this must be respected.
p.000024: Researchers who choose to undertake research on organisations that are opposed to the research are subject to
p.000024: particular requirements regarding meticulous documentation and use of methods. Situations may arise where researchers
p.000024: have reason to suspect abuse or serious violations of the law. It may still be ethically acceptable to continue the
p.000024: research providing that the abuse cannot be exposed or documented in any other way.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 20 Respect for public administration
p.000024: Public bodies should make themselves available for research into their activities.
p.000024:
p.000024: People have a legitimate interest in how social institutions function. This implies that researchers must have the
p.000024: greatest possible access to public administration and bodies.
p.000024: It should be possible to research public archives. Access may be restricted, with reference to privacy, overriding
p.000024: national interests, or national security. Classified material should be declassified as soon as it is prudent to do so.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 21 Respect for vulnerable groups
p.000024: Researchers have a special responsibility to respect the interests of vulnerable groups throughout the entire research
p.000024: process.
p.000024:
p.000024: Vulnerable and disadvantaged individuals and groups are not always equipped to defend their interests when dealing with
p.000024: researchers. Accordingly, researchers cannot take for granted that ordinary procedures for eliciting information and
p.000024: consent will ensure individuals’ self-determination or protect them from unreasonable strain.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 24 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000025:
...
p.000026: culture being studied.
p.000026:
p.000026: When conducting research on other cultures, it is important to have knowledge of local traditions, traditional
p.000026: knowledge and social matters. As far as possible, researchers should enter into a dialogue with the local inhabitants,
p.000026: representatives of the culture in question and the local authorities. An interest in local co-determination or control
p.000026: may come into conflict with the research requirements regarding quality and impartiality. This places great demands on
p.000026: the initiation, planning and execution of research projects. When conducting research on other cultures, either in
p.000026: other countries or in minority cultures, researchers should avoid using classifications or designations that allow
p.000026: unreasonable generalisation.
p.000026: Similar considerations also apply to historical research where time has passed since the events in question.
p.000026: Researchers should avoid devaluating people from past cultures and historical periods. Here, as under other
p.000026: circumstances, researchers in the humanities and social sciences must make a clear distinction between documentation
p.000026: and evaluation.
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026: 24 Limits on cultural recognition
p.000026: Researchers must strike a balance between recognising cultural differences and recognising other fundamental values and
p.000026: general human rights.
p.000026:
p.000026: Respect for and loyalty to the cultures in which the research is being conducted do not mean that aspects such as
p.000026: discrimination and culturally motivated abuse must be accepted.
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026: 30 Section 23a of the Cultural Heritage Act.
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026: 26 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000027:
p.000027: When undertaking a normative analysis of such situations, the researcher must make a clear distinction between a
p.000027: description of norms and practices in the culture being studied and the normative discussions of these factors related
p.000027: to specific values.
p.000027: The researcher must be especially cautious when researching phenomena like cul- turally motivated violation of life and
p.000027: health or breaches of other human rights.
p.000027:
p.000027:
p.000027: D) THE RESEARCH COMMUNITY
p.000027:
p.000027: 25 Co-authorship
p.000027: Researchers must observe good publication practice, respect the contributions of other researchers, and observe
p.000027: recognised standards of authorship and cooperation.
p.000027:
p.000027: Academic publishing is critical for ensuring that research is open and accountable. At the same time, publishing raises
p.000027: different ethical challenges and dilemmas. The research com- munity is characterised by strong competition and great
p.000027: pressure to publish, which often puts pressure on recognised norms of research ethics. For example, the norm of
p.000027: originality may easily conflict with the norm of humility, and differences in authority and power may easily come into
p.000027: conflict with integrity and impartiality. Co-authorship is also linked to the distribution of responsibilities among
p.000027: different contributors.
p.000027: In principle, four criteria define rightful authorship. They must all be met, as stated in the recommendations of the
...
Social / Youth/Minors
Searching for indicator minor:
(return to top)
p.000019: stored to make it possible to verify analyses and conclusions or for other researchers to re-use the material. The
p.000019: material must be stored securely at a dedicated institution like the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (formerly NSD)
p.000019: or the National Archives of Norway.
p.000019: Generally, it is important to ensure that public archives and private archives of value to research are kept for
p.000019: posterity and made available for research. The National Archives play an important role here.23
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019: 12 Responsibility for avoiding harm
p.000019: Researchers are responsible for ensuring that participants are not exposed to serious physical harm or other severe or
p.000019: unreasonable strain as result of the research.
p.000019:
p.000019: In humanities and social science research, there is usually little risk of participants being exposed to serious
p.000019: physical harm. However, serious mental strain is a possibility. This may be more difficult to define and predict, and
p.000019: it can be difficult to assess the long-term effects, if any. «Strain» is used here in a broad sense, and it covers both
p.000019: everyday discomfort, risk of retraumatisation, and also more serious mental strain which the research may cause the
p.000019: participants. Researchers nevertheless have responsibility for participants not being subjected to serious or
p.000019: unreasonable pain or stress.
p.000019: The risk of causing minor strain must be balanced against both the benifit of the research for society and the value
p.000019: for the participants. Researchers must justify such benifit and value as specifically as possible, also to the parties
p.000019: involved (through information retrospectively). Researchers should also ensure that individuals involved are offered
p.000019: professional follow-up in order to process any problems that have arisen as a result of participation in the project.
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019: 23 The Archives Act.
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019: GUIDELINES – NESH 19
p.000020:
p.000020: 13 Respect for third parties
p.000020: Researchers should consider and anticipate effects on third parties that are not directly included in the research.
p.000020:
p.000020: Interviews, archival studies and observations often result in the researcher gaining access to information about far
p.000020: more individuals than those who are the focus of the study. The research may have an impact on the privacy and close
p.000020: relationships of individuals who are not included in the research, but who are drawn in as parties closely related to
p.000020: the partici- pants. In some cases, for example when a researcher observes groups and communities, it can be difficult
p.000020: to protect the privacy of individuals who have not given consent directly, or who have actively declined, but who
p.000020: nevertheless remain in the situation. Researchers have a responsibility nonetheless to protect the privacy of those
p.000020: individuals who are directly or indirectly affected by the research project.
...
Searching for indicator youth:
(return to top)
p.000022: information about them is made available to others.
p.000022:
p.000022: Respect for privacy aims at protecting individuals against unwanted interference and expo- sure. This applies not only
p.000022: to emotional issues, but also to questions that involve sickness and health, political and religious opinions, and
p.000022: sexuality.
p.000022: Researchers should be especially attentive when they ask questions regarding intimate matters and they should avoid
p.000022: putting pressure on participants. What participants perceive as sensitive information may vary from one individual or
p.000022: group to the next.
p.000022: It can be difficult to distinguish between the private and the public sphere, for example when conducting research on
p.000022: and via the internet. When using material from such inter- actions, researchers must be duly aware of the fact that
p.000022: people’s understanding of what is private and what is public in such media may vary.26
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 16 Respect for the values and motives of others
p.000022: Researchers must not ascribe irrational or unworthy motives to participants without providing convincing documentation
p.000022: and justification. Researchers must show respect for the values and views of research participants, not least when they
p.000022: differ from those generally accepted by society at large.
p.000022:
p.000022: Research is often concerned with the behaviour and values of minorities, e.g. religious groups, ethnic minorities,
p.000022: youth groups, or political subcultures. Some persons may find this research to be intrusive or offensive. Researchers
p.000022: must take seriously the participants’ understanding of themselves and avoid representations that diminish their
p.000022: legitimate rights In many research projects in the humanities and social sciences, where actions are often
p.000022: used in explanations, the participants’ motives often play a key role. There is frequently uncertainty associated with
p.000022: exploration of motives, not least when it comes to research on other cultures or historical periods. A clear
p.000022: distinction should therefore be drawn between description and interpretation, or between documentation of actual
p.000022: courses of events and different interpretations of such events.
p.000022: At the same time, the participants’ motives are often directly associated with their social roles. For example,
p.000022: researchers may assume that politicians seek influence, that
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 26 NESH, Ethical Guidelines for Internet Research, Oslo (2003) 2016.
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 22 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000023:
p.000023: business leaders seek profit, or that there are conflicts between generations. Stronger evi- dence is required to
p.000023: ascribe more unusual motives to participants. Special documentation and argumentation are required for providing
p.000023: accounts of actions that ascribe unworthy motives to participants or motives other than those they invoke themselves.
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: 17 Respect for posthumous reputations
p.000023: It is important to act with care when conducting research on deceased persons.
p.000023:
...
Social / education
Searching for indicator education:
(return to top)
p.000003: F) Dissemination of research 37
p.000003: 41 Dissemination as an academic responsibility 37
p.000003: 42 Requirements for individuals and institutions 37
p.000003: 43 Interdisciplinary discourse and public deliberation 38
p.000003: 44 Participation in public debate 39
p.000003: 45 Accountability in dissemination 40
p.000003: 46 Reporting results to participants 40
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003: GUIDELINES – NESH 3
p.000004:
p.000004: PREFACE
p.000004:
p.000004: The three National Research Ethics Committees (NEM, NENT and NESH) were established in 1990, based on the Proposition
p.000004: to the Storting No. 28 (1988–1989) Om forskning. In 2007, the Research Ethics Act provided a legal mandate for the
p.000004: three committees and also for the establishment of a National Commission for the Investigation of Research Misconduct.
p.000004: With effect from 1 January 2013, the Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees (FEK) was established as an
p.000004: independent administrative agency under the Ministry of Education and Research. The three committees and the commission
p.000004: are part of the admin- istrative agency, and they all have a central role promoting research ethics in the national
p.000004: research system.
p.000004: The National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH) is an impartial advisory
p.000004: body established to provide guidelines for research ethics and to promote good and responsible research.
p.000004: The first version of NESH’s guidelines was adopted in 1993 and later amended in 1999 and 2006. The present round of
p.000004: revision has been discussed in NESH since 2013, and a new version was sent on national consultation in May 2015. This
p.000004: is the fourth edition of NESH’s Guidelines for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences, Humanities, Law and Theology.1
p.000004: The main change in this edition is that the distinction between law and ethics is defined more precisely, particularly
p.000004: in the introduction. Also, the institutional division of labour is clarified in the introduction. Thus, the guidelines
p.000004: now mainly consist of ethical advice and guidance for good scientific practice. Two new guidelines have been incorpo-
p.000004: rated regarding co-authorship and impartiality. Also, the order of guidelines 25–28 has been reversed, so that the
p.000004: guidelines regarding 25) Co-authorship and 26) Good citation practice now appear before the guidelines regarding 27)
p.000004: Plagiarism and 28) Scientific integrity.
p.000004:
p.000004: Oslo, June 2016
p.000004:
...
p.000006:
p.000006: 1) norms that constitute good scientific practice, related to the quest for accurate, adequate and relevant knowledge
p.000006: (academic freedom, originality, openness, trustworthiness etc.)
p.000006: 2) norms that regulate the research community (integrity, accountability, impartiality, criticism etc.)
p.000006: 3) the relationship to people who take part in the research (respect, human dignity, confi- dentiality, free and
p.000006: informed consent etc.)
p.000006: 4) the relationship to the rest of society (independence, conflicts of interest, social respon- sibility, dissemination
p.000006: of research etc.)
p.000006:
p.000006: The first two groups of ethical norms are internal, linked to the self-regulation of the research community, while the
p.000006: latter two groups are external, linked to the relationship between research and society.2 Sometimes the lines between
p.000006: these norms are blurred; for example, accountability is a requirement for trustworthiness. In other cases, norms are in
p.000006: opposition to each other, making it necessary to balance different considerations; for example weighing society’s need
p.000006: for new knowledge against the possible strain imposed on people involved and other parties affected. In some projects,
p.000006: the research also raises completely new questions, for example associated with research using the internet,
p.000006: where the recognised norms and guidelines are not always adequate.3 In such cases, researchers and the research
p.000006: community have a particular responsibility to clarify ethical dilemmas and exercise good judgement.
p.000006:
p.000006: Ethical guidelines and legislation
p.000006: Universities and university colleges have a statutory responsibility for ensuring that research, education and academic
p.000006: and artistic development are of high quality «and conducted in accordance with recognised scientific, artistic,
p.000006: pedagogical and ethical prin- ciples».4 There is also an Act relating to ethics and integrity in research (the
p.000006: Research
p.000006:
p.000006:
p.000006:
p.000006: 2 Internationally the first two are usually linked to the term Research Integrity (RI), while the latter two are
p.000006: linked to the wider term Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI).
p.000006: 3 NESH, Ethical Guidelines for Internet Research, Oslo (2003) 2016. See also Ethical Guidelines for Research on Human
p.000006: Remains, Oslo, 2013, drawn up by the National Committee for Research Ethics on Human Remains, which is a subordinate
p.000006: committee to NESH.
p.000006: 4 Section 1-5 of the Universities and Colleges Act.
p.000006:
p.000006:
p.000006:
p.000006: 6 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000007:
p.000007: Ethics Act), which «seeks to ensure that all research carried out by public and private institutions is conducted in
p.000007: accordance with recognised ethical standards».5
p.000007: The guidelines for research ethics do not serve the same role or function as legislation. The guidelines primarily
p.000007: serve as tools for researchers and the research community. They identify relevant factors that researchers should take
p.000007: into account, while acknowledging that researchers often have to weigh such factors against each other, as well as
p.000007: against other requirements and obligations.
...
p.000010: promote and protect academic freedom.14 However, the independence of research exists as a norm independently of this
p.000010: codification, while at the same time the law now states that teaching and research must comply with recognised
p.000010: scientific and ethical principles.
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010: 14 Section 1-5 of the Universities and Colleges Act.
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010: 10 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000011:
p.000011: It is the soundness and relevance of the arguments and the quality of the documentation that should provide the
p.000011: foundation for research based conclusions – and for knowledge production in research in general – not any established
p.000011: interests and traditions in or outside the research community.
p.000011: The duty and obligation of openness and publication means that neither researchers nor research institutions may
p.000011: withhold or selectively report results and conclusions. Any attempts to impose or dictate what results the research
p.000011: should lead to, are illegitimate. This calls for arrangements to ensure both the independence of institutions and the
p.000011: independence of researchers within the institutions. Research presupposes the freedom to seek, produce and disseminate
p.000011: scientific knowledge to the wider public.
p.000011: The level of independence varies between basic, applied and commissioned research. All research must nonetheless be
p.000011: protected from pressure that endangers good and respon- sible research. In addition, commissioned research outside the
p.000011: university and university college sector must also have procedures for protecting the integrity of research, as set out
p.000011: in the Ministry of Education and Research’s «Standard agreement for research and report assignments» (2012).15
p.000011:
p.000011:
p.000011: 3 Responsibility of research
p.000011: Responsible research requires freedom from control and constraints, while trust in research requires the exercise of
p.000011: responsibility by both researchers and research institutions.
p.000011:
p.000011: Scientific, ethical and legal norms and values regulate the responsibility of research. Research also has a social
p.000011: responsibility, whether it be instrumental as a foundation for societal decisions, critical as a source of correctives
p.000011: and alternative choices of action, or deliberative as a supplier of research-based knowledge to the public discourse.
p.000011: Great demands are placed on the justifications of the researchers for their choice of questions, methods and analytical
p.000011: perspectives, and also on the quality of the documentation used to support conclusions, so that preconceived notions
p.000011: and unwitting opinions have minimal influence on the research. The methodological requirements posed by the research
p.000011: community in respect of argumentation, reasoning, documentation and willingness to revise opinions in the light of
p.000011: well-founded criticism may serve as a model for how to deal with disagreement in other segments of society.
p.000011:
p.000011: 15 The Ministry of Education and Research, «Standard agreement for research and report assignments», Oslo 2012. See
p.000011: also the report from the National Research Ethics Committees, Oppdragsforskning: åpen het, kvalitet, etterrettelighet,
p.000011: Oslo 2003 [Commissioned research: transparency, quality, accountability].
p.000011:
p.000011:
p.000011:
p.000011: GUIDELINES – NESH 11
p.000012:
p.000012: Research is valuable, but it can also cause harm. Good and responsible research also includes assessing unintended and
p.000012: undesirable consequences. Researchers must make sure that the research does not violate laws and regulations, or
p.000012: represent a risk to poeple, society and nature
p.000012: – in accordance with the principles of sustainability and precaution in research ethics.16
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012: 4 Responsibility of institutions
p.000012: Research institutions must guarantee that research is good and responsible by preventing misconduct and promoting the
p.000012: guidelines for research ethics.
p.000012:
p.000012: The institutions must facilitate the development and maintenance of good scientific practice. They should communicate
p.000012: the guidelines for research ethics to their employees and stu- dents, and also provide training in research ethics and
p.000012: the relevant rules of law that govern research. This would facilitate individual reflection on research ethics and good
...
p.000034: the research community as a reliable source of knowledge. The com- missioner has a right to steer or influence the
p.000034: subject and issues addressed, but not the choice of method, results or conclusions drawn by the researcher on the basis
p.000034: of the results. Both researchers and research institutions have a right and a duty to point out the uncertainties and
p.000034: limitations of the research, for example when the results are to be used in policy decisions.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 36 The responsibility of researchers in large projects
p.000034: Researchers who take part in large research projects have a shared responsibility for those projects. It should be
p.000034: clear how an individual researcher has contributed to a research project.
p.000034:
p.000034: When research is organised into large, hierarchically managed projects, the relationship between individual researchers
p.000034: and the project management is analogous to the relationship between the researcher/research institution and the
p.000034: commissioner. If researchers experi- ences a conflict between loyalty to the institution or project and an ethically
p.000034: acceptable approach, the basic principle is that the individual researcher has a responsibility for their own
p.000034: participation. Researchers are also responsible for disclosing circumstances that are not acceptable according to
p.000034: research ethics.
p.000034: Copyright and the right to publish must be regulated by explicit agreements. This also applies to the relationship
p.000034: between the commissioner, the research institution and the researcher in connection with commissioned research and
p.000034: reports.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 36 Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, «Standard agreement for research and report assignments», Oslo 2012.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 34 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000035:
p.000035: 37 Independence and conflict of interests
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions should maintain their independence in relation to their principals.
p.000035:
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions must avoid becoming dependent on their com- missioners. Dependence may
p.000035: undermine their impartiality and the scientific quality of the research. This is particularly true if a single
p.000035: commissioner is responsible for a substantial portion of the researcher’s or research institution’s funding. It is
p.000035: therefore important for the researcher/institution and the commissioner not to have convergent interests to the point
p.000035: that they threaten the independence of the research (the vested interest threat). The sale of advisory or consulting
p.000035: services to actors who also have an interest in the research having a particular outcome may increase the vested
p.000035: interest threat.
p.000035: Non-financial factors may also threaten independent research. Personal ties, either through family relations or as a
p.000035: result of long-term connections between the research institution/researcher and those taking part in the research
p.000035: projects may lead to dependence in several ways. These ties may lead to the research being used to promote the views
...
p.000040: Researchers have a special obligation to report results back to the participants in a compre- hensible and acceptable
p.000040: manner.
p.000040:
p.000040: Participants in research have a right to receive something in return. This also applies to research where large groups
p.000040: of informants are involved. Dissemination of research may help to meet this requirement when direct contact with each
p.000040: participant is not possible.
p.000040: Participants must also have the opportunity to correct misunderstandings where this is possible. Dialogue between
p.000040: researchers and participants in the course of the research project may often strengthen the research. Researchers must
p.000040: present the results so that key findings and insights are communicated in a manner that can be understood by the
p.000040: participants.
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040:
p.000040: 40 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000041:
p.000041:
p.000041:
p.000041:
p.000041:
p.000041:
p.000041: The Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees
p.000041: Kongens gate 14, 0153 Oslo, Norway
p.000041: Tel.: 0047 23 31 83 00
p.000041: www.etikkom.no
p.000041:
p.000041: ISBN 978-82-7682-077-5
p.000041:
p.000041:
p.000041:
p.000041:
p.000041:
p.000041:
p.000041:
p.000041:
p.000041: The National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH) is part of the Norwegian
p.000041: National Research Ethics Committees, an independent administrative agency under the Ministry of Education and Research.
p.000041: NESH is an impartial advisory body providing guidance and advice on research ethics, and the guidelines are important
...
Searching for indicator educational:
(return to top)
p.000029: early in one’s own text and then making extensive further use of it without subsequent citation may also be plagiarism.
p.000029: It is important to distinguish between direct quotes and paraphrasing in footnotes and endnotes as well as in the text.
p.000029: Paraphrasing must not be so close to the original text that it in reality constitutes a quote. If several paraphrases
p.000029: are connected, the entire interpretation and argumentation may be based on the work of others. If so, this may also
p.000029: constitute plagiarism.
p.000029:
p.000029:
p.000029: 28 Scientific integrity
p.000029: Both researchers and research institutions must promote norms for good scientific practice.
p.000029:
p.000029: Scientific integrity is about maintaining and complying with good scientific practice.
p.000029: Misconduct is serious breach of good scientific practice associated with the collective commitment to the pursuit for
p.000029: truth. Researchers have an obligation to truthfulness, and scientific misconduct implies misleading others through
p.000029: lying, concealment or distortion. The most serious examples of misconduct are fabrication and falsification of data and
p.000029: plagiarism.33 The norm of scientific integrity applies in full to all types of research and in every stage of the
p.000029: research process.
p.000029: Institutions are required to have routines that promote integrity and prevent misconduct. Institutions must also have
p.000029: procedures for handling suspicions and accusations of scientific misconduct.
p.000029:
p.000029:
p.000029: 33 Section 5 of the Research Ethics Act.
p.000029:
p.000029:
p.000029:
p.000029: GUIDELINES – NESH 29
p.000030:
p.000030: Universities, university colleges and other educational institutions have a special responsi- bility to ensure that
p.000030: students and others receive training in research ethics and scientific integrity. This means that norms for good
p.000030: citation practice and good scientific practice must be communicated in teaching and supervision throughout students’
p.000030: academic careers, and that established researchers should serve as good role models in their teaching and research.
p.000030:
p.000030:
p.000030: 29 Data sharing
p.000030: Research material should be made available to other researchers for secondary analysis and further use.
p.000030:
p.000030: Sharing of research data is often a prerequisite for building up knowledge, comparing results and critically testing
p.000030: the work of others. Improved openness and quality assurance can be achieved by sharing data.34 At the same time, data
p.000030: sharing gives rise to ethical challenges relating to privacy and confidentiality. Therefore, the norm of transparency
p.000030: and data-sharing, particularly in large-scale registry research, should be balanced against other considerations and
p.000030: requirements of research ethics.
p.000030: Generally, those responsible for collecting material have the priority right to use it in analyses and in publications.
p.000030: Data acquired with the aid of public funding must be made publicly available after a short period.
p.000030:
p.000030:
p.000030: 30 Impartiality
p.000030: Both researchers and research institutions are obliged to report and consider possible conflicts of interest and of
p.000030: roles.
p.000030:
p.000030: All researchers are obliged to respect the requirements regarding their own impartiality and that of others. Partiality
...
Social / employees
Searching for indicator employees:
(return to top)
p.000011: well-founded criticism may serve as a model for how to deal with disagreement in other segments of society.
p.000011:
p.000011: 15 The Ministry of Education and Research, «Standard agreement for research and report assignments», Oslo 2012. See
p.000011: also the report from the National Research Ethics Committees, Oppdragsforskning: åpen het, kvalitet, etterrettelighet,
p.000011: Oslo 2003 [Commissioned research: transparency, quality, accountability].
p.000011:
p.000011:
p.000011:
p.000011: GUIDELINES – NESH 11
p.000012:
p.000012: Research is valuable, but it can also cause harm. Good and responsible research also includes assessing unintended and
p.000012: undesirable consequences. Researchers must make sure that the research does not violate laws and regulations, or
p.000012: represent a risk to poeple, society and nature
p.000012: – in accordance with the principles of sustainability and precaution in research ethics.16
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012: 4 Responsibility of institutions
p.000012: Research institutions must guarantee that research is good and responsible by preventing misconduct and promoting the
p.000012: guidelines for research ethics.
p.000012:
p.000012: The institutions must facilitate the development and maintenance of good scientific practice. They should communicate
p.000012: the guidelines for research ethics to their employees and stu- dents, and also provide training in research ethics and
p.000012: the relevant rules of law that govern research. This would facilitate individual reflection on research ethics and good
p.000012: discussions in the research communities about norms and dilemmas related to research ethics.
p.000012: The institutions must ensure that they manage the guiding and advisory function of research ethics properly, so that
p.000012: the distribution of roles and responsibilities is clear. In this context, the guidelines for research ethics will be an
p.000012: important tool for preventing undesirable practice and ensuring that research is good and responsible. The institutions
p.000012: should also have clear procedures for handling suspicions and accusations of serious breaches of good scientific
p.000012: practice, for example by establishing misconduct committees with responsibility for oversight and investigation.
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012: B) RESPECT FOR INDIVIDUALS
p.000012:
p.000012: 5 Human dignity
p.000012: Researchers must base their work on a fundamental respect for human dignity.
p.000012:
p.000012: Human dignity is closely linked to individual inviolability. Respect for human dignity and personal integrity is
p.000012: formalised and laid down in a series of international laws and conven- tions on human rights.17 In research ethics,
p.000012: this means that individuals have interests and integrity, which cannot be set aside in research in order to achieve
p.000012: greater understanding
p.000012:
...
Social / parents
Searching for indicator parents:
(return to top)
p.000020: general treatment of adult subjects. Children are developing individuals, and they have different needs and abilities
p.000020: at various phases. Researchers must know enough about children to be able to adapt both their methods and the direction
p.000020: of their research to the ages of the participants. Age-specific information must be provided about the project and the
p.000020: consequences of the research, and they must be informed that participation is voluntary and that they may withdraw from
p.000020: the study at any time. Consent is more problematic for research on children than research on adults. Children
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020: 20 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000021:
p.000021: are often more willing to obey authority than adults, and they often feel that they cannot object. Nor are they always
p.000021: able to see the consequences of participating in research.24
p.000021: In general, minors who have turned 15 can consent to researchers collecting and using their personal data. If a child
p.000021: is under the age of 15, researchers must usually obtain consent from their parents or guardians. An exception is made
p.000021: for sensitive personal data, which can only be acquired with the consent of the parents. In such cases, authorisation
p.000021: from the Data Protection Authority or a recommendation from a data protection officer is also required.25
p.000021: At the same time, it is important to treat minors as independent individuals. According to the Children Act, a child
p.000021: who has reached seven years of age, or younger children who are able to form their own opinions on a matter, must be
p.000021: provided with information and the opportunity to express their opinions. When a child has reached twelve years of age,
p.000021: a great deal of weight must be attached to his or her opinions. In addition to the parents or guardians giving formal
p.000021: consent, it is necessary that the children themselves accept par- ticipation to the extent that they are able to do so.
p.000021: There may also be conflicts of interest between children and their parents or guardians. In that event, it is important
p.000021: to clarify the child’s capacity to grant consent on their own behalf. In some cases, it may be right to let children
p.000021: and adolescents take part in the research without the consent of their parents. The requirement of confidentiality
p.000021: particularly applies when children take part in research. However, situations can arise in which researchers are either
p.000021: legally or ethically required to provide confidential information, whether it be to the child’s next-of-kin, adult
p.000021: helpers or the child welfare service. The obligation to notify applies, for example, if researchers learn that children
p.000021: are subject to abuse, assault or neglect (see point 9).
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: 24 The National Research Ethics Committees, Barn i forskning. Etiske dimensjoner [Children in research. Ethical
p.000021: dimensions], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH), Jacob Hølen (NEM) and Helene Ingierd (NESH), Oslo 2013.
p.000021: 25 The Consumer Ombudsman and the Data Protection Authority, Barn og unges personopplysninger: Veiledning for
p.000021: innhenting og bruk [Guidelines for the collection and use of personal data on children and young persons], Oslo 2004.
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: GUIDELINES – NESH 21
p.000022:
p.000022: 15 Respect for privacy and family life
...
Social / philosophical differences/differences of opinion
Searching for indicator opinion:
(return to top)
p.000037: endeavour to ensure that the public has access to results. Any restrictions on the right to publish must be stipulated
p.000037: by contract at the start of the project.
p.000037:
p.000037:
p.000037: F) DISSEMINATION OF RESEARCH
p.000037:
p.000037: 41 Dissemination as an academic responsibility
p.000037: Researchers and research institutions are obliged to disseminate scientific knowledge to a broader audience outside the
p.000037: research community.
p.000037:
p.000037: Dissemination of research involves communicating scientific results, methods and values from specialised research
p.000037: fields to people outside the disciplines. Dissemination may be aimed at researchers in other disciplines, or at a
p.000037: broader audience. It may be a matter of disseminating established insights into the discipline, or results from more
p.000037: recent research.
p.000037: The relationship between research and reporting is especially close in the humanities and social sciences, where a
p.000037: scholarly publication often also is a form of dissemination. In some cases there is not even a clear line between
p.000037: research and dissemination, because the knowledge is mediated as part of a public debate which in turn influences the
p.000037: research questions and answers.
p.000037: One of the main reasons for dissemination of research is to satisfy the intellectual curiosity of the general public.
p.000037: Dissemination is also important for a well-functioning democratic society. Dissemination should contribute to
p.000037: maintaining and developing cultural traditions, to informing public opinion and to the dissemination of knowledge of
p.000037: relevance to society. Society has invested large sums in research, and therefore has a right to share the results.
p.000037:
p.000037:
p.000037: 42 Requirements for individuals and institutions
p.000037: Research institutions must create conditions for extensive and broad dissemination of research characterised by high
p.000037: quality and relevance.
p.000037:
p.000037: Research dissemination makes ethical demands on individuals and institutions alike. Universities and university
p.000037: colleges have a special responsibility to disseminate knowledge, results and scientific norms and values, both in their
p.000037: teaching of students and in relation
p.000037:
p.000037:
p.000037:
p.000037: GUIDELINES – NESH 37
p.000038:
p.000038: to public administration, cultural life and business and industry.37 Institutions should pro- mote dissemination, for
p.000038: example when appointing staff, in teaching, or through financial incentives. Institutions should also encourage
p.000038: dissemination in different arenas and through new kinds of learning, knowledge sharing and discourse, whether it be
p.000038: through the media, lecture series, conferences for non-academics or through public hearings.
p.000038: Dissemination of research is also associated with freedom of expression and the infrastructure requirement in Article
p.000038: 100 of the Norwegian Constitution: «The authorities of the state shall create conditions that facilitate open and
p.000038: enlightened public discourse.»38 Also the academic communities must contribute to these public discourses.
p.000038: Constitutional democracies with well-functioning public administrations and market economies are contin- gent on
...
p.000038: 39 Section 1-7 of the Universities and Colleges Act.
p.000038:
p.000038:
p.000038:
p.000038: 38 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000039:
p.000039: of multi-disciplinary fora at research institutions provides a good basis both for discourse among specialists and for
p.000039: dissemination to the broader public.
p.000039: Interdisciplinary discourse can define the basic demands made of a culture of academic discourse. Researchers must
p.000039: express themselves clearly enough for colleagues from other fields and other participants in the discourse to take a
p.000039: reasoned position on their assertions. As in the case of internal academic discussions, renderings of the contributions
p.000039: of others must not be tendentious and persons with other opinions must not have unreasonable views falsely attributed
p.000039: to them.
p.000039: Dissemination should be clear and plainly express both academic uncertainty and the limitations of individual
p.000039: disciplines. Researchers should express clearly the limitations from the perspective of their own discipline and
p.000039: expertise in the field in question, which may make it easier for readers and the general public to determine whether
p.000039: other disciplinary perspectives could lead to other interpretations. Such interdisciplinary and inter-institutional
p.000039: discussions can serve as a sort of extended peer review.
p.000039:
p.000039:
p.000039: 44 Participation in public debate
p.000039: Researchers should contribute scientific arguments to the public debate. Researchers should express themselves fairly
p.000039: and clearly in order to avoid tendentious interpretations of research results.
p.000039:
p.000039: When researchers take part in public debate, they are using academic expertise as a basis for contributions to the
p.000039: formation of public opinion. They may contribute information in an area that is being debated, they may take a reasoned
p.000039: position on controversial topics, or they may seek to introduce new topics onto the public agenda.
p.000039: Researchers have a responsibility to express themselves clearly and precisely, so that their research cannot be
p.000039: interpreted tendentiously and misused in political, cultural, social and economic contexts. Researchers should also
p.000039: engage in discussions about reasonable interpretations and justifiable use of research results. Other organisations and
p.000039: institutions, such as public relations departments, the mass media, political parties, interest organisations,
p.000039: enterprises and administrative bodies also have a responsibility to conduct themselves reasonably and acceptably in
p.000039: this context.
p.000039: Participation in public debates places great demands on fairness, reasoning and clarity. There may be grey areas
p.000039: between participation as a researcher and participation as a citizen. Researchers should state their discipline and not
p.000039: only their degree or position, when acting in the capacity of expert. When academics take part as citizens, they should
p.000039: not use their titles or refer to special academic expertise.
p.000039:
p.000039:
p.000039:
p.000039: GUIDELINES – NESH 39
p.000040:
p.000040: 45 Accountability in dissemination
p.000040: The requirement of accountability is equally stringent in dissemination as in publication.
p.000040:
p.000040: The audience of popularised academic presentations cannot be expected to be able to verify assertions made by
...
General/Other / Dependent
Searching for indicator dependent:
(return to top)
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016: 16 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000017:
p.000017: 9 Confidentiality
p.000017: Generally, researchers must process data acquired about personal matters confidentially. Personal data must normally be
p.000017: de-identified, while publication and dissemination of the research material must normally be anonymised. In certain
p.000017: situations, researchers must nonetheless balance confidentiality and the obligation to notify.
p.000017:
p.000017: When researchers promise confidentiality to participants, the pledge implies that the infor- mation will not be passed
p.000017: on in ways that can identify the individuals. Both the credibility of the researchers and the participants’ trust in
p.000017: research are closely linked to confidentiality. At the same time, the requirement of confidentiality has a legal aspect
p.000017: associated with protection of personal integrity and privacy, and both the Public Administration Act and the Personal
p.000017: Data Act set limits on the type of confidentiality researchers can promise participants. Researchers must therefore
p.000017: communicate clearly the limits of the pledge of confidentiality.
p.000017: Sometimes a conflict can arise between the duty of confidentiality and the obligation to notify. The research may
p.000017: reveal censurable or illegal situations that can expose researchers to conflicting loyalties, particularly with a view
p.000017: to the promise of confidentiality. Researchers must therefore not allow themselves to become dependent on the
p.000017: participants, and such conflicts can be prevented by explaining the limits on the promise of confidentiality. This also
p.000017: applies to processing of data that is subject to protection of sources.19
p.000017: In given situations, the duty of confidentiality must yield to the duty to prevent a criminal offence.20 Researchers
p.000017: are legally bound to prevent a criminal offence or report it to the police, without regard for the duty of
p.000017: confidentiality. This includes suspicion of espionage, acts of terrorism, murder, rape, incest or domestic violence.21
p.000017: Children are particularly entitled to protection, and when abuse or neglect are suspected, researchers also have a duty
p.000017: of disclosure and must report the matter to the child welfare authorities. This applies to everyone, notwithstanding
p.000017: the duty of confidentiality.22
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: 19 Eivind Smith, Taushetsplikt og kildevern for forskere [Confidentiality and protection of sources for researchers],
p.000017: NESH, Oslo 1998.
p.000017: 20 Section 196 of the General Civil Penal Code.
p.000017: 21 The National Research Ethics Committees, Forskeres taushetsplikt og meldeplikt [Researchers’ duty of
...
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 36 The responsibility of researchers in large projects
p.000034: Researchers who take part in large research projects have a shared responsibility for those projects. It should be
p.000034: clear how an individual researcher has contributed to a research project.
p.000034:
p.000034: When research is organised into large, hierarchically managed projects, the relationship between individual researchers
p.000034: and the project management is analogous to the relationship between the researcher/research institution and the
p.000034: commissioner. If researchers experi- ences a conflict between loyalty to the institution or project and an ethically
p.000034: acceptable approach, the basic principle is that the individual researcher has a responsibility for their own
p.000034: participation. Researchers are also responsible for disclosing circumstances that are not acceptable according to
p.000034: research ethics.
p.000034: Copyright and the right to publish must be regulated by explicit agreements. This also applies to the relationship
p.000034: between the commissioner, the research institution and the researcher in connection with commissioned research and
p.000034: reports.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 36 Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, «Standard agreement for research and report assignments», Oslo 2012.
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034:
p.000034: 34 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000035:
p.000035: 37 Independence and conflict of interests
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions should maintain their independence in relation to their principals.
p.000035:
p.000035: Both researchers and research institutions must avoid becoming dependent on their com- missioners. Dependence may
p.000035: undermine their impartiality and the scientific quality of the research. This is particularly true if a single
p.000035: commissioner is responsible for a substantial portion of the researcher’s or research institution’s funding. It is
p.000035: therefore important for the researcher/institution and the commissioner not to have convergent interests to the point
p.000035: that they threaten the independence of the research (the vested interest threat). The sale of advisory or consulting
p.000035: services to actors who also have an interest in the research having a particular outcome may increase the vested
p.000035: interest threat.
p.000035: Non-financial factors may also threaten independent research. Personal ties, either through family relations or as a
p.000035: result of long-term connections between the research institution/researcher and those taking part in the research
p.000035: projects may lead to dependence in several ways. These ties may lead to the research being used to promote the views
p.000035: and interests of certain parties (representative party threat), or it may lead to there not being sufficient distance
p.000035: between the researcher and the participants (threat to confidentiality), or it may lead to independence being
...
General/Other / Impaired Autonomy
Searching for indicator autonomy:
(return to top)
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012: B) RESPECT FOR INDIVIDUALS
p.000012:
p.000012: 5 Human dignity
p.000012: Researchers must base their work on a fundamental respect for human dignity.
p.000012:
p.000012: Human dignity is closely linked to individual inviolability. Respect for human dignity and personal integrity is
p.000012: formalised and laid down in a series of international laws and conven- tions on human rights.17 In research ethics,
p.000012: this means that individuals have interests and integrity, which cannot be set aside in research in order to achieve
p.000012: greater understanding
p.000012:
p.000012: 16 NENT, Førevar prinsippet: Mellom forskning og politikk [The precautionary principle: Between research and
p.000012: politics], NENT publication no. 11, Oslo 1997.
p.000012: 17 Article 102 of the Norwegian Constitution.
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012: 12 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000013:
p.000013: or to benefit society in other ways. Researchers must protect personal integrity, preserve individual freedom and
p.000013: self-determination, respect privacy and family life, and safeguard against harm and unreasonable strain. While research
p.000013: may help promote human dignity, it can also threaten it. Researchers must therefore show respect for human dignity in
p.000013: their choice of topic, in relation to the research subjects, and when reporting and publishing research results.
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: 6 Privacy
p.000013: Researchers must respect the participants’ autonomy, integrity, freedom and right of co-determination.
p.000013:
p.000013: From a legal perspective, the protection of privacy is linked to the processing of personal data. Thus, research must
p.000013: be conducted in accordance with basic considerations for data protection, such as personal integrity, privacy and
p.000013: responsible use and storage of personal data. However, privacy also has a wider scope in research ethics, and
p.000013: researchers must exercise due caution and responsibility
p.000013: • when self-respect or other values of importance to individuals are at stake;
p.000013: • when individuals have little influence on the decision to participate in research, for example in connection with
p.000013: research using the internet or at an institution;
p.000013: • when individuals have impaired or absent capacity to protect their own needs and interests;
p.000013: • when individuals actively contribute in acquiring data for research, for example by agreeing to be observed or
p.000013: interviewed;
p.000013: • when individuals can be identified, directly or indirectly, either as participants or as part of communities
p.000013: recognisable in publications or in other dissemination of research;
p.000013: • when a third party is affected by the research.
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: 7 Duty to inform
p.000013: Researchers must provide participants with adequate information about the field of research, the purpose of the
...
General/Other / Relationship to Authority
Searching for indicator authority:
(return to top)
p.000007: 6 The Personal Data Act.
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007: GUIDELINES – NESH 7
p.000008:
p.000008: Other institutions and authorities
p.000008: In cases that not only deal with research ethics, but also legislation and rights, there is an overlap between NESH and
p.000008: several other authorities that deal with special considerations and requirements. Even though others deal with the
p.000008: legal aspects of such cases, research ethics is always a supplementary consideration.
p.000008:
p.000008: a) The National Commission for the Investigation of Research Misconduct oversees integrity in research. The Commission
p.000008: [Granskningsutvalget] assesses and handles specific cases where serious breaches of good scientific practice are
p.000008: suspected, as defined in the Research Ethics Act.7
p.000008: b) Medical and health-related research projects intended to develop new knowledge about illness and health must be
p.000008: reviewed in accordance with the Health Research Act. Such projects require prior approval by a Regional Committee for
p.000008: Medical and Health Research Ethics (REK).8
p.000008: c) Personal data collected by the public administration is normally subject to confidenti- ality. The Public
p.000008: Administration Act allows exemption from the duty of confidentiality regarding information for use in research under
p.000008: certain circumstances, and within the Act’s field of application. The individual ministry may grant an exemption from
p.000008: the duty of confidentiality, but the authority to grant exemption is often delegated to under- lying agencies. A
p.000008: statement confirming an exemption must be obtained from the Council for Confidentiality and Research [Rådet for
p.000008: taushetsplikt], pursuant to the Public Administration Regulations.9 Such a statement is nevertheless unnecessary if
p.000008: the admin- istrative body that reviews the matter of an exemption finds it clear that the application should be granted
p.000008: or denied, or if the researcher plans to directly contact the persons who are entitled to confidentiality.
p.000008: d) The Personal Data Act requires that persons who process personal data protect personal integrity and privacy.10
p.000008: Personal data consists of information and assessments that either directly or indirectly are linkable to a person, for
p.000008: example names, national identification numbers or e-mail addresses, or by compiling background data. Electronic
p.000008: processing of such information is subject to an obligation to notify and in general, this processing must be based on
p.000008: free and informed consent. When an institution has a data protection
p.000008:
p.000008:
p.000008:
p.000008: 7 Section 5 of the Research Ethics Act.
p.000008: 8 Section 9 of the Health Research Act.
p.000008: 9 Section 13 d of the Public Administration Act; see the Public Administration Regulations.
p.000008: 10 Section 1 of the Personal Data Act.
p.000008:
p.000008:
p.000008:
p.000008: 8 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000009:
p.000009: officer, the obligation to notify the Data Protection Authority is replaced by an obliga- tion to notify a data
p.000009: protection officer.11 Some research institutions have local data protection officers, but the Data Protection Official
p.000009: for Research [Personvernombudet for forskning] at the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (formerly NSD) performs this
p.000009: task for many research institutions in Norway.
p.000009: The main task of the data protection officer is to ensure that institutions are able to perform their statutory
p.000009: obligations related to internal control and quality assurance of own research. The data protection officer may also
p.000009: offer guidance and advice on matters regarding privacy. Projects that involve processing personal data may not begin
p.000009: until a data protection officer has reviewed the project.
p.000009: e) According to the Personal Data Act, it is a general rule that the Data Protection Authority [Datatilsynet] must
p.000009: grant a licence for the processing of sensitive personal data, but research projects are exempt from this obligation to
p.000009: obtain a licence if a data protection officer has recommended the project.12 Sensitive personal data include
p.000009: information about a person’s health, race or ethnic background, sexuality, and their political, philosophical or
p.000009: religious beliefs. Some projects that process sensitive personal data are not covered by the exemption in the Personal
p.000009: Data Regulations, nor do they require a license from the Data Protection Authority.13
p.000009: If the project is subject to an obligation to obtain a licence, the Data Protection Official for Research may assist
p.000009: with the writing of the application for a license and help send it to the Data Protection Authority. The Authority’s
p.000009: responsibilities include assessing whether society’s interest in new knowledge clearly outweighs the burdens the
p.000009: research may impose on individuals. The Data Protection Authority may issue a license under the assumption that
p.000009: specific conditions are met. Such conditions will be legally binding on researchers. Projects that are subject to an
p.000009: obligation to obtain a licence cannot be initiated until the Data Protection Authority has given such a licence.
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009: 11 Section 31 of the Personal Data Act; Section 7-12 of the Personal Data Regulations.
p.000009: 12 Section 33 subsection 1 of the Personal Data Act; Section 7-27 of the Personal Data Regulations. 13 Projects that
p.000009: trigger an obligation to obtain a licence include projects that process sensitive personal data and
p.000009: - Are of a large scale (over 5 000 persons) and of a long duration (over 15 years), and/or
p.000009: - Use large data sets that have not been adequately anonymized or pseudonymised, and/or
p.000009: - Make non-response analyses not based on consent, and/or
p.000009: - Use data from the pseudonymous health registers (IPLOS and NorPD [Reseptregisteret]).
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009: GUIDELINES – NESH 9
p.000010:
p.000010: A) RESEARCH, SOCIETY AND ETHICS
p.000010:
p.000010: 1 Norms and values of research
p.000010: Researchers are obliged to comply with recognised norms of research ethics.
p.000010:
p.000010: Research is a quest for new and improved or deeper insight. It is a systematic and socially organised activity governed
p.000010: by various specific and values. The most fundamental obligation of science is the pursuit for truth. At the same time,
p.000010: research can never fully achieve this goal. Most conclusions are contingent and limited. Nevertheless, the norms of
p.000010: science have a value in themselves as guidelines and regulatory principles for the research community’s collective
p.000010: pursuit for truth.
p.000010: In the humanities and social sciences, involvement and interpretation are often integral parts of the research process.
...
p.000014: cannot disclose the real purpose of an experiment. Such excep- tions must be justified by the value of the research and
p.000014: the lack of alternatives, and the researcher must take particular care to comply with respect for human dignity and
p.000014: protection of individuals. It is often possible to give participants general information on the project
p.000014:
p.000014: 18 NESH, Ethical Guidelines for Internet Research, Oslo (2003) 2016.
p.000014:
p.000014:
p.000014:
p.000014: 14 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000015:
p.000015: in advance, and detailed information afterwards, both about the project and about why they were not fully informed
p.000015: beforehand.
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015: 8 Consent and obligation to notify
p.000015: When a research project deals with personal data, researchers are obliged to inform the participants or subjects of
p.000015: research and to obtain their consent. The consent must be freely given, informed, and in an explicit form.
p.000015:
p.000015: The obligation to obtain consent is set out in the Personal Data Act, and all processing of personal data in research
p.000015: must be reported to a data protection officer. When researchers process sensitive personal data, either a license is
p.000015: required from the Data Protection Authority or a recommendation from a data protection officer (see the Introduction).
p.000015: The obligation to obtain consent will prevent violations of personal integrity, and safeguard the freedom and
p.000015: self-determination of the participants. The consent must be based on information about the purpose of the project, the
p.000015: methods, risks, possible dis- comfort, and other consequences of importance to the participants. Consent also makes it
p.000015: possible to conduct research that involves a certain risk of strain.
p.000015: Freely given consent means that the consent has been obtained without external pressure or constraints on individual
p.000015: freedom. Such pressure may arise from the presence of the researcher, or it can be mediated through persons in
p.000015: authority with whom the researcher has been in contact. Rewarding or paying participants may also influence the
p.000015: informants’ motivation to take part in research projects, and may influence the responses provided by the participants,
p.000015: thus constituting a source of error in the data collected.
p.000015: The fact that consent is informed means that a researcher has provided adequate information about what it means to take
p.000015: part in a research project. The need for clear information is particularly great when the research involves a risk of
p.000015: strain (see point 7).
p.000015: That the consent is given in an explicit form means that the participants clearly state that they understand what it
p.000015: actually means to take part in the research project. They must have real opportunities to refrain from taking part
p.000015: without this presenting an disadvantage, and they must be fully aware that they can end their participation at any time
p.000015: without this having any negative consequences. Researchers must ensure that the participants have actually understood
p.000015: this information. This responsibility does not end even if an agreement has been signed, requiring researchers to be
p.000015: alert at all times.
p.000015: It should also be possible to document the consent, both to substantiate the researcher’s responsibility and to
p.000015: safeguard the rights of research subjects. Usually, there should be a signed consent form, but sometimes other types of
p.000015: documentation may be more suitable.
...
p.000020: 14 Protection of children
p.000020: Children and adolescents who take part in research are particularly entitled to protection.
p.000020:
p.000020: Research on children and their lives and living conditions is valuable and important. Children and adolescents are key
p.000020: contributors to this research. Their specific needs and interests must be protected in ways supplementary to the
p.000020: general treatment of adult subjects. Children are developing individuals, and they have different needs and abilities
p.000020: at various phases. Researchers must know enough about children to be able to adapt both their methods and the direction
p.000020: of their research to the ages of the participants. Age-specific information must be provided about the project and the
p.000020: consequences of the research, and they must be informed that participation is voluntary and that they may withdraw from
p.000020: the study at any time. Consent is more problematic for research on children than research on adults. Children
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020: 20 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000021:
p.000021: are often more willing to obey authority than adults, and they often feel that they cannot object. Nor are they always
p.000021: able to see the consequences of participating in research.24
p.000021: In general, minors who have turned 15 can consent to researchers collecting and using their personal data. If a child
p.000021: is under the age of 15, researchers must usually obtain consent from their parents or guardians. An exception is made
p.000021: for sensitive personal data, which can only be acquired with the consent of the parents. In such cases, authorisation
p.000021: from the Data Protection Authority or a recommendation from a data protection officer is also required.25
p.000021: At the same time, it is important to treat minors as independent individuals. According to the Children Act, a child
p.000021: who has reached seven years of age, or younger children who are able to form their own opinions on a matter, must be
p.000021: provided with information and the opportunity to express their opinions. When a child has reached twelve years of age,
p.000021: a great deal of weight must be attached to his or her opinions. In addition to the parents or guardians giving formal
p.000021: consent, it is necessary that the children themselves accept par- ticipation to the extent that they are able to do so.
p.000021: There may also be conflicts of interest between children and their parents or guardians. In that event, it is important
p.000021: to clarify the child’s capacity to grant consent on their own behalf. In some cases, it may be right to let children
p.000021: and adolescents take part in the research without the consent of their parents. The requirement of confidentiality
p.000021: particularly applies when children take part in research. However, situations can arise in which researchers are either
p.000021: legally or ethically required to provide confidential information, whether it be to the child’s next-of-kin, adult
p.000021: helpers or the child welfare service. The obligation to notify applies, for example, if researchers learn that children
p.000021: are subject to abuse, assault or neglect (see point 9).
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: 24 The National Research Ethics Committees, Barn i forskning. Etiske dimensjoner [Children in research. Ethical
p.000021: dimensions], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH), Jacob Hølen (NEM) and Helene Ingierd (NESH), Oslo 2013.
p.000021: 25 The Consumer Ombudsman and the Data Protection Authority, Barn og unges personopplysninger: Veiledning for
p.000021: innhenting og bruk [Guidelines for the collection and use of personal data on children and young persons], Oslo 2004.
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: GUIDELINES – NESH 21
p.000022:
p.000022: 15 Respect for privacy and family life
p.000022: Researchers must respect individuals’ privacy and family life. Participants are entitled to check whether confidential
p.000022: information about them is made available to others.
p.000022:
p.000022: Respect for privacy aims at protecting individuals against unwanted interference and expo- sure. This applies not only
p.000022: to emotional issues, but also to questions that involve sickness and health, political and religious opinions, and
p.000022: sexuality.
p.000022: Researchers should be especially attentive when they ask questions regarding intimate matters and they should avoid
p.000022: putting pressure on participants. What participants perceive as sensitive information may vary from one individual or
p.000022: group to the next.
p.000022: It can be difficult to distinguish between the private and the public sphere, for example when conducting research on
p.000022: and via the internet. When using material from such inter- actions, researchers must be duly aware of the fact that
p.000022: people’s understanding of what is private and what is public in such media may vary.26
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 16 Respect for the values and motives of others
...
p.000026: general human rights.
p.000026:
p.000026: Respect for and loyalty to the cultures in which the research is being conducted do not mean that aspects such as
p.000026: discrimination and culturally motivated abuse must be accepted.
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026: 30 Section 23a of the Cultural Heritage Act.
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026: 26 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000027:
p.000027: When undertaking a normative analysis of such situations, the researcher must make a clear distinction between a
p.000027: description of norms and practices in the culture being studied and the normative discussions of these factors related
p.000027: to specific values.
p.000027: The researcher must be especially cautious when researching phenomena like cul- turally motivated violation of life and
p.000027: health or breaches of other human rights.
p.000027:
p.000027:
p.000027: D) THE RESEARCH COMMUNITY
p.000027:
p.000027: 25 Co-authorship
p.000027: Researchers must observe good publication practice, respect the contributions of other researchers, and observe
p.000027: recognised standards of authorship and cooperation.
p.000027:
p.000027: Academic publishing is critical for ensuring that research is open and accountable. At the same time, publishing raises
p.000027: different ethical challenges and dilemmas. The research com- munity is characterised by strong competition and great
p.000027: pressure to publish, which often puts pressure on recognised norms of research ethics. For example, the norm of
p.000027: originality may easily conflict with the norm of humility, and differences in authority and power may easily come into
p.000027: conflict with integrity and impartiality. Co-authorship is also linked to the distribution of responsibilities among
p.000027: different contributors.
p.000027: In principle, four criteria define rightful authorship. They must all be met, as stated in the recommendations of the
p.000027: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE):
p.000027:
p.000027: 1 The researcher must have made a substantial contribution to the conception and design
p.000027: or the data acquisition or the data analysis and interpretation; and
p.000027: 2 the researcher must have contributed to drafting the manuscript or critical revision of the intellectual content of
p.000027: the publication; and
p.000027: 3 the researcher must have approved the final version before publication; and
p.000027: 4 the researcher must be able to accept responsibility for and be accountable for the work as a whole (albeit not
p.000027: necessarily all technical details) unless otherwise specified.31
p.000027:
p.000027: It is common practice in the humanities and social sciences to require that co-authors have actually helped write and
p.000027: complete the manuscript. Only those who have actually contributed to the analysis and writing of a scientific work may
p.000027: be credited as co-authors. In other
p.000027:
p.000027:
p.000027: 31 www.icmje.org/recommendations/.
p.000027:
p.000027:
p.000027:
p.000027: GUIDELINES – NESH 27
p.000028:
p.000028: words, it is not enough to have contributed to the intellectual work with the article in a broad sense, for example a
p.000028: combination of data acquisition, critical revision and approval of the end product. Other contributors must be credited
p.000028: or thanked in footnotes or a closing note (Acknowledgements).
...
p.000031: themselves, and do not present it in relevant circles to ensure that problematics are considered from all angles. This
p.000031: is consistent with the scientific norm of systematic and organised scepticism. Relevant circles may extend to a broader
p.000031: public than the specialist community.
p.000031:
p.000031:
p.000031: 35 Section 6 of the Public Administration Act.
p.000031:
p.000031:
p.000031:
p.000031: GUIDELINES – NESH 31
p.000032:
p.000032: Most disciplines are characterised by competing schools of thought and disagreement on fundamental questions of
p.000032: scientific theory. Those responsible for the academic assessment of the work of others must therefore be willing to
p.000032: seriously consider arguments and ways of thinking that are recognised in other research traditions than their own.
p.000032: Academic assessments must be characterised by professional carefulness, fairness and openness. Researchers frequently
p.000032: participate in evaluations for academic posts. They evaluate master’s and doctoral theses, project applications,
p.000032: journal articles and similar. In such contexts, the assessor must review their own impartiality and work professionally
p.000032: and objectively.
p.000032:
p.000032:
p.000032: 32 The student-supervisor relationship
p.000032: Supervisors are obliged to act in the students’ best interests and not to take advantage of their dependence. This
p.000032: applies to academic results and personal matters.
p.000032:
p.000032: Supervisors must be conscious of the asymmetry of the supervisory situation, and not take advantage of their academic
p.000032: authority or use their authority in a manner liable to cause the student offence. Supervisors must not take advantage
p.000032: of students’ dependence.
p.000032: If a supervisor wishes to use in his or her own research material from work that the student has not yet completed, the
p.000032: supervisor and the student must make an agreement to this effect. If the student has collected the material personally,
p.000032: it should only be used after the student is finished with the material, normally after taking the examination. The
p.000032: institution should draw up a standard agreement for this situation. Supervisors must employ good citation practice when
p.000032: using a student’s material and work. Supervisors must also take note of how others use students’ work before it is
p.000032: completed, and if relevant how the supervisor’s contribution should be indicated. Similarly, students should employ
p.000032: good citation practice in relation to their supervisors.
p.000032: In a supervisory situation, double relationships may arise, leading to compromised impartiality when the candidate’s
p.000032: work is to be assessed. The supervisor’s integrity must be protected as well as the candidate’s. It must not be
p.000032: possible for anyone to cast doubt as to where the line goes between private and professional matters, nor as to a
p.000032: supervisor’s impartiality. If the relationship between supervisor and candidate becomes overly close, the general rule
p.000032: is that the supervisor should withdraw from the position.
p.000032:
p.000032:
...
General/Other / cultural difference
Searching for indicator culturally:
(return to top)
p.000026: culture being studied.
p.000026:
p.000026: When conducting research on other cultures, it is important to have knowledge of local traditions, traditional
p.000026: knowledge and social matters. As far as possible, researchers should enter into a dialogue with the local inhabitants,
p.000026: representatives of the culture in question and the local authorities. An interest in local co-determination or control
p.000026: may come into conflict with the research requirements regarding quality and impartiality. This places great demands on
p.000026: the initiation, planning and execution of research projects. When conducting research on other cultures, either in
p.000026: other countries or in minority cultures, researchers should avoid using classifications or designations that allow
p.000026: unreasonable generalisation.
p.000026: Similar considerations also apply to historical research where time has passed since the events in question.
p.000026: Researchers should avoid devaluating people from past cultures and historical periods. Here, as under other
p.000026: circumstances, researchers in the humanities and social sciences must make a clear distinction between documentation
p.000026: and evaluation.
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026: 24 Limits on cultural recognition
p.000026: Researchers must strike a balance between recognising cultural differences and recognising other fundamental values and
p.000026: general human rights.
p.000026:
p.000026: Respect for and loyalty to the cultures in which the research is being conducted do not mean that aspects such as
p.000026: discrimination and culturally motivated abuse must be accepted.
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026: 30 Section 23a of the Cultural Heritage Act.
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026:
p.000026: 26 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000027:
p.000027: When undertaking a normative analysis of such situations, the researcher must make a clear distinction between a
p.000027: description of norms and practices in the culture being studied and the normative discussions of these factors related
p.000027: to specific values.
p.000027: The researcher must be especially cautious when researching phenomena like cul- turally motivated violation of life and
p.000027: health or breaches of other human rights.
p.000027:
p.000027:
p.000027: D) THE RESEARCH COMMUNITY
p.000027:
p.000027: 25 Co-authorship
p.000027: Researchers must observe good publication practice, respect the contributions of other researchers, and observe
p.000027: recognised standards of authorship and cooperation.
p.000027:
p.000027: Academic publishing is critical for ensuring that research is open and accountable. At the same time, publishing raises
p.000027: different ethical challenges and dilemmas. The research com- munity is characterised by strong competition and great
p.000027: pressure to publish, which often puts pressure on recognised norms of research ethics. For example, the norm of
p.000027: originality may easily conflict with the norm of humility, and differences in authority and power may easily come into
p.000027: conflict with integrity and impartiality. Co-authorship is also linked to the distribution of responsibilities among
p.000027: different contributors.
...
Orphaned Trigger Words
p.000002: 15 Respect for privacy and family life 22
p.000002: 16 Respect for the values and motives of others 22
p.000002: 17 Respect for posthumous reputations 23
p.000002: 18 Defining roles and responsibilities 23
p.000002: C) Respect for groups and institutions 24
p.000002: 19 Respect for private interests 24
p.000002: 20 Respect for public administration 24
p.000002: 21 Respect for vulnerable groups 24
p.000002: 22 Preservation of cultural monuments and remains 25
p.000002: 23 Research on other cultures 26
p.000002: 24 Limits on cultural recognition 26
p.000002: 2 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000003:
p.000003: D) The research community 27
p.000003: 25 Co-authorship
p.000003: 27
p.000003: 26 Good citation practice 28
p.000003: 27 Plagiarism
p.000003: 29
p.000003: 28 Scientific integrity
p.000003: 29
p.000003: 29 Data sharing
p.000003: 30
p.000003: 30 Impartiality
p.000003: 30
p.000003: 31 Relations with colleagues 31
p.000003: 32 The student-supervisor relationship 32
p.000003: 33 Responsibilities of supervisors and project managers 33
p.000003: E) Commissioned research 33
p.000003: 34 Different types of research 33
p.000003: 35 Commissioned research 34
p.000003: 36 The responsibility of researchers in large projects 34
p.000003: 37 Independence and conflict of interests 35
p.000003: 38 Transparency in research funding 35
p.000003: 39 Presentation and use of results 36
p.000003: 40 Right and duty to publish 36
p.000003: F) Dissemination of research 37
p.000003: 41 Dissemination as an academic responsibility 37
p.000003: 42 Requirements for individuals and institutions 37
p.000003: 43 Interdisciplinary discourse and public deliberation 38
p.000003: 44 Participation in public debate 39
p.000003: 45 Accountability in dissemination 40
p.000003: 46 Reporting results to participants 40
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003:
p.000003: GUIDELINES – NESH 3
p.000004:
p.000004: PREFACE
p.000004:
p.000004: The three National Research Ethics Committees (NEM, NENT and NESH) were established in 1990, based on the Proposition
p.000004: to the Storting No. 28 (1988–1989) Om forskning. In 2007, the Research Ethics Act provided a legal mandate for the
p.000004: three committees and also for the establishment of a National Commission for the Investigation of Research Misconduct.
p.000004: With effect from 1 January 2013, the Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees (FEK) was established as an
p.000004: independent administrative agency under the Ministry of Education and Research. The three committees and the commission
p.000004: are part of the admin- istrative agency, and they all have a central role promoting research ethics in the national
p.000004: research system.
...
p.000006: and artistic development are of high quality «and conducted in accordance with recognised scientific, artistic,
p.000006: pedagogical and ethical prin- ciples».4 There is also an Act relating to ethics and integrity in research (the
p.000006: Research
p.000006:
p.000006:
p.000006:
p.000006: 2 Internationally the first two are usually linked to the term Research Integrity (RI), while the latter two are
p.000006: linked to the wider term Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI).
p.000006: 3 NESH, Ethical Guidelines for Internet Research, Oslo (2003) 2016. See also Ethical Guidelines for Research on Human
p.000006: Remains, Oslo, 2013, drawn up by the National Committee for Research Ethics on Human Remains, which is a subordinate
p.000006: committee to NESH.
p.000006: 4 Section 1-5 of the Universities and Colleges Act.
p.000006:
p.000006:
p.000006:
p.000006: 6 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000007:
p.000007: Ethics Act), which «seeks to ensure that all research carried out by public and private institutions is conducted in
p.000007: accordance with recognised ethical standards».5
p.000007: The guidelines for research ethics do not serve the same role or function as legislation. The guidelines primarily
p.000007: serve as tools for researchers and the research community. They identify relevant factors that researchers should take
p.000007: into account, while acknowledging that researchers often have to weigh such factors against each other, as well as
p.000007: against other requirements and obligations.
p.000007: Even though the distinction between law and ethics is often unclear, they are funda- mentally different. They are both
p.000007: normative, but ethical norms are formulated as guidelines rather than prescriptions and prohibitions. The guidelines
p.000007: for research ethics are intended to serve an advisory, guiding and preventive function. They state what researchers
p.000007: should take into consideration and do for their research to be responsible. Accordingly, research ethics is in
p.000007: accordance with the principle of academic freedom self-regulation. This is why the primary responsibility for research
p.000007: ethics lies with researchers and research institutions. Without this freedom and responsibility, research ethics loses
p.000007: much of its moral value.
p.000007: Some of the ethical norms laid down in the guidelines for research ethics can also be found in the legislation. For
p.000007: example, the requirement of privacy and the consideration of human dignity has a legal basis in the Personal Data Act
p.000007: and is also covered by the guidelines for research ethics (Part B).6 If researchers fail to observe the statutory
p.000007: require- ments, they may be subject to penalties and other sanctions. Such reactions will then ensue because the
p.000007: researchers have broken the law, not because they have acted in conflict with the guidelines for research ethics.
p.000007: NESH thus issues guidelines for research ethics, but it is not a supervisory or controlling body, nor does it have a
p.000007: judicial function or power to impose sanctions. Neither does NESH give prior approval of research projects. NESH’s role
p.000007: in following up the guidelines is primarily to respond to inquires about specific research plans and to provide
p.000007: assessments and advice when researchers have to weigh and balance different research ethics considerations. Secondly,
p.000007: NESH makes statements on individual cases that raise questions of principle regarding research ethics. Thirdly, NESH
p.000007: may address current and important matters of research ethics on its own initiative. Finally, NESH will also con-
p.000007: tribute to the efforts to prevent scientific misconduct.
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007: 5 Section 1 of the Research Ethics Act.
p.000007: 6 The Personal Data Act.
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007:
p.000007: GUIDELINES – NESH 7
p.000008:
p.000008: Other institutions and authorities
p.000008: In cases that not only deal with research ethics, but also legislation and rights, there is an overlap between NESH and
p.000008: several other authorities that deal with special considerations and requirements. Even though others deal with the
p.000008: legal aspects of such cases, research ethics is always a supplementary consideration.
p.000008:
p.000008: a) The National Commission for the Investigation of Research Misconduct oversees integrity in research. The Commission
p.000008: [Granskningsutvalget] assesses and handles specific cases where serious breaches of good scientific practice are
p.000008: suspected, as defined in the Research Ethics Act.7
p.000008: b) Medical and health-related research projects intended to develop new knowledge about illness and health must be
p.000008: reviewed in accordance with the Health Research Act. Such projects require prior approval by a Regional Committee for
p.000008: Medical and Health Research Ethics (REK).8
p.000008: c) Personal data collected by the public administration is normally subject to confidenti- ality. The Public
p.000008: Administration Act allows exemption from the duty of confidentiality regarding information for use in research under
p.000008: certain circumstances, and within the Act’s field of application. The individual ministry may grant an exemption from
p.000008: the duty of confidentiality, but the authority to grant exemption is often delegated to under- lying agencies. A
p.000008: statement confirming an exemption must be obtained from the Council for Confidentiality and Research [Rådet for
p.000008: taushetsplikt], pursuant to the Public Administration Regulations.9 Such a statement is nevertheless unnecessary if
p.000008: the admin- istrative body that reviews the matter of an exemption finds it clear that the application should be granted
p.000008: or denied, or if the researcher plans to directly contact the persons who are entitled to confidentiality.
p.000008: d) The Personal Data Act requires that persons who process personal data protect personal integrity and privacy.10
p.000008: Personal data consists of information and assessments that either directly or indirectly are linkable to a person, for
p.000008: example names, national identification numbers or e-mail addresses, or by compiling background data. Electronic
p.000008: processing of such information is subject to an obligation to notify and in general, this processing must be based on
p.000008: free and informed consent. When an institution has a data protection
p.000008:
p.000008:
p.000008:
p.000008: 7 Section 5 of the Research Ethics Act.
p.000008: 8 Section 9 of the Health Research Act.
p.000008: 9 Section 13 d of the Public Administration Act; see the Public Administration Regulations.
p.000008: 10 Section 1 of the Personal Data Act.
p.000008:
p.000008:
p.000008:
p.000008: 8 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000009:
p.000009: officer, the obligation to notify the Data Protection Authority is replaced by an obliga- tion to notify a data
p.000009: protection officer.11 Some research institutions have local data protection officers, but the Data Protection Official
p.000009: for Research [Personvernombudet for forskning] at the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (formerly NSD) performs this
p.000009: task for many research institutions in Norway.
p.000009: The main task of the data protection officer is to ensure that institutions are able to perform their statutory
p.000009: obligations related to internal control and quality assurance of own research. The data protection officer may also
p.000009: offer guidance and advice on matters regarding privacy. Projects that involve processing personal data may not begin
p.000009: until a data protection officer has reviewed the project.
p.000009: e) According to the Personal Data Act, it is a general rule that the Data Protection Authority [Datatilsynet] must
p.000009: grant a licence for the processing of sensitive personal data, but research projects are exempt from this obligation to
p.000009: obtain a licence if a data protection officer has recommended the project.12 Sensitive personal data include
p.000009: information about a person’s health, race or ethnic background, sexuality, and their political, philosophical or
p.000009: religious beliefs. Some projects that process sensitive personal data are not covered by the exemption in the Personal
p.000009: Data Regulations, nor do they require a license from the Data Protection Authority.13
p.000009: If the project is subject to an obligation to obtain a licence, the Data Protection Official for Research may assist
p.000009: with the writing of the application for a license and help send it to the Data Protection Authority. The Authority’s
p.000009: responsibilities include assessing whether society’s interest in new knowledge clearly outweighs the burdens the
p.000009: research may impose on individuals. The Data Protection Authority may issue a license under the assumption that
p.000009: specific conditions are met. Such conditions will be legally binding on researchers. Projects that are subject to an
p.000009: obligation to obtain a licence cannot be initiated until the Data Protection Authority has given such a licence.
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009: 11 Section 31 of the Personal Data Act; Section 7-12 of the Personal Data Regulations.
p.000009: 12 Section 33 subsection 1 of the Personal Data Act; Section 7-27 of the Personal Data Regulations. 13 Projects that
p.000009: trigger an obligation to obtain a licence include projects that process sensitive personal data and
p.000009: - Are of a large scale (over 5 000 persons) and of a long duration (over 15 years), and/or
p.000009: - Use large data sets that have not been adequately anonymized or pseudonymised, and/or
p.000009: - Make non-response analyses not based on consent, and/or
p.000009: - Use data from the pseudonymous health registers (IPLOS and NorPD [Reseptregisteret]).
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009:
p.000009: GUIDELINES – NESH 9
p.000010:
p.000010: A) RESEARCH, SOCIETY AND ETHICS
p.000010:
p.000010: 1 Norms and values of research
p.000010: Researchers are obliged to comply with recognised norms of research ethics.
p.000010:
p.000010: Research is a quest for new and improved or deeper insight. It is a systematic and socially organised activity governed
p.000010: by various specific and values. The most fundamental obligation of science is the pursuit for truth. At the same time,
p.000010: research can never fully achieve this goal. Most conclusions are contingent and limited. Nevertheless, the norms of
p.000010: science have a value in themselves as guidelines and regulatory principles for the research community’s collective
p.000010: pursuit for truth.
p.000010: In the humanities and social sciences, involvement and interpretation are often integral parts of the research process.
p.000010: Different academic approaches and theoretical positions may also allow for different, but nonetheless reasonable,
p.000010: interpretations of the same material. Consequently, it is important to reflect on and account for how one’s own values
p.000010: and attitudes affect the choice of topic, data sources and interpretations. Integrity in documentation, consistency in
p.000010: argumentation, impartiality in assessment and openness regarding uncer- tainty are common obligations in research
p.000010: ethics, irrespective of the values, positions or perspectives of the researchers.
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010: 2 Freedom of research
p.000010: Both researchers and research institutions are responsible for preserving the freedom and independence of research,
p.000010: especially when the topic is controversial or when strategic or commercial considerations impose pressure and
p.000010: constraints on research.
p.000010:
p.000010: Scientific norms regarding originality, openness and trustworthiness may conflict with the desire of other parties to
p.000010: prevent or govern research. Research must be safeguarded against internal or external pressure that limits the
p.000010: exploration of well-defined problems that may intersect financial, political, social, cultural or religious interests
p.000010: and traditions. This is part of the reason why academic freedom was made statutory in 2007, ordering institutions to
p.000010: promote and protect academic freedom.14 However, the independence of research exists as a norm independently of this
p.000010: codification, while at the same time the law now states that teaching and research must comply with recognised
p.000010: scientific and ethical principles.
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010: 14 Section 1-5 of the Universities and Colleges Act.
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010:
p.000010: 10 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000011:
p.000011: It is the soundness and relevance of the arguments and the quality of the documentation that should provide the
p.000011: foundation for research based conclusions – and for knowledge production in research in general – not any established
p.000011: interests and traditions in or outside the research community.
p.000011: The duty and obligation of openness and publication means that neither researchers nor research institutions may
p.000011: withhold or selectively report results and conclusions. Any attempts to impose or dictate what results the research
p.000011: should lead to, are illegitimate. This calls for arrangements to ensure both the independence of institutions and the
p.000011: independence of researchers within the institutions. Research presupposes the freedom to seek, produce and disseminate
p.000011: scientific knowledge to the wider public.
p.000011: The level of independence varies between basic, applied and commissioned research. All research must nonetheless be
p.000011: protected from pressure that endangers good and respon- sible research. In addition, commissioned research outside the
p.000011: university and university college sector must also have procedures for protecting the integrity of research, as set out
p.000011: in the Ministry of Education and Research’s «Standard agreement for research and report assignments» (2012).15
p.000011:
p.000011:
p.000011: 3 Responsibility of research
p.000011: Responsible research requires freedom from control and constraints, while trust in research requires the exercise of
p.000011: responsibility by both researchers and research institutions.
p.000011:
p.000011: Scientific, ethical and legal norms and values regulate the responsibility of research. Research also has a social
p.000011: responsibility, whether it be instrumental as a foundation for societal decisions, critical as a source of correctives
p.000011: and alternative choices of action, or deliberative as a supplier of research-based knowledge to the public discourse.
p.000011: Great demands are placed on the justifications of the researchers for their choice of questions, methods and analytical
p.000011: perspectives, and also on the quality of the documentation used to support conclusions, so that preconceived notions
p.000011: and unwitting opinions have minimal influence on the research. The methodological requirements posed by the research
p.000011: community in respect of argumentation, reasoning, documentation and willingness to revise opinions in the light of
p.000011: well-founded criticism may serve as a model for how to deal with disagreement in other segments of society.
p.000011:
p.000011: 15 The Ministry of Education and Research, «Standard agreement for research and report assignments», Oslo 2012. See
p.000011: also the report from the National Research Ethics Committees, Oppdragsforskning: åpen het, kvalitet, etterrettelighet,
p.000011: Oslo 2003 [Commissioned research: transparency, quality, accountability].
p.000011:
p.000011:
p.000011:
p.000011: GUIDELINES – NESH 11
p.000012:
p.000012: Research is valuable, but it can also cause harm. Good and responsible research also includes assessing unintended and
p.000012: undesirable consequences. Researchers must make sure that the research does not violate laws and regulations, or
p.000012: represent a risk to poeple, society and nature
p.000012: – in accordance with the principles of sustainability and precaution in research ethics.16
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012: 4 Responsibility of institutions
p.000012: Research institutions must guarantee that research is good and responsible by preventing misconduct and promoting the
p.000012: guidelines for research ethics.
p.000012:
p.000012: The institutions must facilitate the development and maintenance of good scientific practice. They should communicate
p.000012: the guidelines for research ethics to their employees and stu- dents, and also provide training in research ethics and
p.000012: the relevant rules of law that govern research. This would facilitate individual reflection on research ethics and good
p.000012: discussions in the research communities about norms and dilemmas related to research ethics.
p.000012: The institutions must ensure that they manage the guiding and advisory function of research ethics properly, so that
p.000012: the distribution of roles and responsibilities is clear. In this context, the guidelines for research ethics will be an
p.000012: important tool for preventing undesirable practice and ensuring that research is good and responsible. The institutions
p.000012: should also have clear procedures for handling suspicions and accusations of serious breaches of good scientific
p.000012: practice, for example by establishing misconduct committees with responsibility for oversight and investigation.
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012: B) RESPECT FOR INDIVIDUALS
p.000012:
p.000012: 5 Human dignity
p.000012: Researchers must base their work on a fundamental respect for human dignity.
p.000012:
p.000012: Human dignity is closely linked to individual inviolability. Respect for human dignity and personal integrity is
p.000012: formalised and laid down in a series of international laws and conven- tions on human rights.17 In research ethics,
p.000012: this means that individuals have interests and integrity, which cannot be set aside in research in order to achieve
p.000012: greater understanding
p.000012:
p.000012: 16 NENT, Førevar prinsippet: Mellom forskning og politikk [The precautionary principle: Between research and
p.000012: politics], NENT publication no. 11, Oslo 1997.
p.000012: 17 Article 102 of the Norwegian Constitution.
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012:
p.000012: 12 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000013:
p.000013: or to benefit society in other ways. Researchers must protect personal integrity, preserve individual freedom and
p.000013: self-determination, respect privacy and family life, and safeguard against harm and unreasonable strain. While research
p.000013: may help promote human dignity, it can also threaten it. Researchers must therefore show respect for human dignity in
p.000013: their choice of topic, in relation to the research subjects, and when reporting and publishing research results.
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: 6 Privacy
p.000013: Researchers must respect the participants’ autonomy, integrity, freedom and right of co-determination.
p.000013:
p.000013: From a legal perspective, the protection of privacy is linked to the processing of personal data. Thus, research must
p.000013: be conducted in accordance with basic considerations for data protection, such as personal integrity, privacy and
p.000013: responsible use and storage of personal data. However, privacy also has a wider scope in research ethics, and
p.000013: researchers must exercise due caution and responsibility
p.000013: • when self-respect or other values of importance to individuals are at stake;
p.000013: • when individuals have little influence on the decision to participate in research, for example in connection with
p.000013: research using the internet or at an institution;
p.000013: • when individuals have impaired or absent capacity to protect their own needs and interests;
p.000013: • when individuals actively contribute in acquiring data for research, for example by agreeing to be observed or
p.000013: interviewed;
p.000013: • when individuals can be identified, directly or indirectly, either as participants or as part of communities
p.000013: recognisable in publications or in other dissemination of research;
p.000013: • when a third party is affected by the research.
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: 7 Duty to inform
p.000013: Researchers must provide participants with adequate information about the field of research, the purpose of the
p.000013: research, who has funded the project, who will receive access to the information, the intended use of the results, and
p.000013: the consequences of participation in the research project.
p.000013:
p.000013: The type of information required depends on the nature of the research; whether it takes the form of field studies,
p.000013: experiments or using the internet. There are various considerations associated with different types of source material
p.000013: and data; whether it is a matter of personal
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013:
p.000013: GUIDELINES – NESH 13
p.000014:
p.000014: data, sensitive information, previously acquired material, anonymised material or information acquired from the
p.000014: internet. When collecting and processing personal data, especially sensitive personal data, researchers also have a
p.000014: statutory obligation to notify the subjects or participants in the research and must also obtain their consent (see
p.000014: Introduction and point 8).
p.000014: Researchers must provide information in a neutral manner, so that the subjects are not exposed to undue pressure. The
p.000014: information must be adapted to the participatns’ cultural background and communicated in a language they understand. In
p.000014: some research projects, it may be necessary to use an interpreter to provide the necessary information. It may also be
p.000014: relevant to provide information about possible benefits associated with participating in the research, but this
p.000014: information must be clear and not raise unreasonable expectations on the part of the research subjects. Where relevant,
p.000014: researchers are required to make it clear that participation in the research does not affect their right to public
p.000014: services or the outcome of their cases and applications.
p.000014: One exception from the main rule is when the research is conducted by means of observation in public arenas, on streets
p.000014: and in public squares. Researchers can normally carry out such research without informing the people involved. At the
p.000014: same time, regis- tration of information and interaction using technical equipment (camera, video, tape recorders,
p.000014: etc.) implies that the observation material will be stored. This registration and storage may thus provide the
p.000014: foundation for a personal data register. In general, this requires that people are informed that they are the subjects
p.000014: of research, how long the material will be stored, and who will be using it. Research on and via the internet has a
p.000014: special status, and not everything that is openly available on the internet is public. NESH has therefore developed
p.000014: separate guidelines for internet research.18
p.000014: Another exception is public figures, who may find that the increased attention they meet threatens their individual
p.000014: freedom. However, as they have voluntarily sought public attention, or have accepted positions that entail publicity,
p.000014: their freedom cannot be said to be threatened to the same extent as that of other persons. Public figures must expect
p.000014: the public aspects of their work to be the subject of research. They should nonetheless be informed of the purpose of
p.000014: the research when they take part as informants, out of consid- eration for their self-determination and freedom.
p.000014: A third exception is when information cannot be given before the research is initiated, for example if a researcher
p.000014: cannot disclose the real purpose of an experiment. Such excep- tions must be justified by the value of the research and
p.000014: the lack of alternatives, and the researcher must take particular care to comply with respect for human dignity and
p.000014: protection of individuals. It is often possible to give participants general information on the project
p.000014:
p.000014: 18 NESH, Ethical Guidelines for Internet Research, Oslo (2003) 2016.
p.000014:
p.000014:
p.000014:
p.000014: 14 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000015:
p.000015: in advance, and detailed information afterwards, both about the project and about why they were not fully informed
p.000015: beforehand.
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015: 8 Consent and obligation to notify
p.000015: When a research project deals with personal data, researchers are obliged to inform the participants or subjects of
p.000015: research and to obtain their consent. The consent must be freely given, informed, and in an explicit form.
p.000015:
p.000015: The obligation to obtain consent is set out in the Personal Data Act, and all processing of personal data in research
p.000015: must be reported to a data protection officer. When researchers process sensitive personal data, either a license is
p.000015: required from the Data Protection Authority or a recommendation from a data protection officer (see the Introduction).
p.000015: The obligation to obtain consent will prevent violations of personal integrity, and safeguard the freedom and
p.000015: self-determination of the participants. The consent must be based on information about the purpose of the project, the
p.000015: methods, risks, possible dis- comfort, and other consequences of importance to the participants. Consent also makes it
p.000015: possible to conduct research that involves a certain risk of strain.
p.000015: Freely given consent means that the consent has been obtained without external pressure or constraints on individual
p.000015: freedom. Such pressure may arise from the presence of the researcher, or it can be mediated through persons in
p.000015: authority with whom the researcher has been in contact. Rewarding or paying participants may also influence the
p.000015: informants’ motivation to take part in research projects, and may influence the responses provided by the participants,
p.000015: thus constituting a source of error in the data collected.
p.000015: The fact that consent is informed means that a researcher has provided adequate information about what it means to take
p.000015: part in a research project. The need for clear information is particularly great when the research involves a risk of
p.000015: strain (see point 7).
p.000015: That the consent is given in an explicit form means that the participants clearly state that they understand what it
p.000015: actually means to take part in the research project. They must have real opportunities to refrain from taking part
p.000015: without this presenting an disadvantage, and they must be fully aware that they can end their participation at any time
p.000015: without this having any negative consequences. Researchers must ensure that the participants have actually understood
p.000015: this information. This responsibility does not end even if an agreement has been signed, requiring researchers to be
p.000015: alert at all times.
p.000015: It should also be possible to document the consent, both to substantiate the researcher’s responsibility and to
p.000015: safeguard the rights of research subjects. Usually, there should be a signed consent form, but sometimes other types of
p.000015: documentation may be more suitable.
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015:
p.000015: GUIDELINES – NESH 15
p.000016:
p.000016: Impaired or absent capacity to consent
p.000016: Freely given and informed consent is difficult to obtain in some types of research. Such research can raise ethical
p.000016: concerns if the need for protection against harm, or the need for freedom, self-determination and privacy are
p.000016: jeopardised to any significant extent. In such cases, researchers have a special responsibility for protecting the
p.000016: integrity of the individ- uals. This may apply, for example, to research involving individuals that either have an
p.000016: impaired or absent capacity to give a free and informed consent.
p.000016: The question of impaired or absent capacity to consent is usually raised in connection with research involving
p.000016: children, the mentally ill, persons with intellectual disabilities, persons suffering from dementia and intoxicated
p.000016: individuals. Individuals unable to give a free and informed consent will generally only be included in research when a)
p.000016: it cannot be conducted on individuals who are able to give consent, and b) it can be shown to be probable that the
p.000016: research in question is of direct or substantial benefit to the individuals or group being studied. In some cases, it
p.000016: may be a matter of research where the knowledge may benefit the group in question, but where any direct benefit to the
p.000016: individuals included is absent, uncertain or in the remote future. A prerequisite for including individuals who cannot
p.000016: give a free and informed consent is that any risk and strain associated with the study are negligible for the
p.000016: individuals included.
p.000016:
p.000016: Research without consent
p.000016: Although a free and informed consent is the general rule, exceptions can be made in situa- tions in which the research
p.000016: does not imply direct contact with the participants, where the data being processed is not particularly sensitive, and
p.000016: where the utility value of the research clearly exceeds any disadvantages for the individuals involved. One example is
p.000016: the use of existing registry data, where it is not feasible to obtain consent from all of the persons covered by the
p.000016: registers. In such cases, researchers have a special responsibility to explain in detail the potential beneficial value
p.000016: of the results, and for informing the parties involved and the general public about the purpose and results of the
p.000016: project, for example through the internet or other media like newspapers, radio and television (see also point 10).
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016:
p.000016: 16 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000017:
p.000017: 9 Confidentiality
p.000017: Generally, researchers must process data acquired about personal matters confidentially. Personal data must normally be
p.000017: de-identified, while publication and dissemination of the research material must normally be anonymised. In certain
p.000017: situations, researchers must nonetheless balance confidentiality and the obligation to notify.
p.000017:
p.000017: When researchers promise confidentiality to participants, the pledge implies that the infor- mation will not be passed
p.000017: on in ways that can identify the individuals. Both the credibility of the researchers and the participants’ trust in
p.000017: research are closely linked to confidentiality. At the same time, the requirement of confidentiality has a legal aspect
p.000017: associated with protection of personal integrity and privacy, and both the Public Administration Act and the Personal
p.000017: Data Act set limits on the type of confidentiality researchers can promise participants. Researchers must therefore
p.000017: communicate clearly the limits of the pledge of confidentiality.
p.000017: Sometimes a conflict can arise between the duty of confidentiality and the obligation to notify. The research may
p.000017: reveal censurable or illegal situations that can expose researchers to conflicting loyalties, particularly with a view
p.000017: to the promise of confidentiality. Researchers must therefore not allow themselves to become dependent on the
p.000017: participants, and such conflicts can be prevented by explaining the limits on the promise of confidentiality. This also
p.000017: applies to processing of data that is subject to protection of sources.19
p.000017: In given situations, the duty of confidentiality must yield to the duty to prevent a criminal offence.20 Researchers
p.000017: are legally bound to prevent a criminal offence or report it to the police, without regard for the duty of
p.000017: confidentiality. This includes suspicion of espionage, acts of terrorism, murder, rape, incest or domestic violence.21
p.000017: Children are particularly entitled to protection, and when abuse or neglect are suspected, researchers also have a duty
p.000017: of disclosure and must report the matter to the child welfare authorities. This applies to everyone, notwithstanding
p.000017: the duty of confidentiality.22
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: 19 Eivind Smith, Taushetsplikt og kildevern for forskere [Confidentiality and protection of sources for researchers],
p.000017: NESH, Oslo 1998.
p.000017: 20 Section 196 of the General Civil Penal Code.
p.000017: 21 The National Research Ethics Committees, Forskeres taushetsplikt og meldeplikt [Researchers’ duty of
p.000017: confidentiality and duty of notification], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH) and Helene Ingierd (NENT), Oslo 2013.
p.000017: 22 Section 6-4 of the Child Welfare Act.
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017:
p.000017: GUIDELINES – NESH 17
p.000018:
p.000018: 10 Limited re-use
p.000018: Identifiable personal data collected for a specific research purpose cannot automatically be used for other research.
p.000018:
p.000018: Generally, re-use of identifiable personal data requires the consent of the participants. This does not apply to
p.000018: anonymised data, acquired for example for use in statistics, where the researcher cannot link persons and data. When
p.000018: the data have been anonymised, the researcher does not know which person the data and the material come from. However,
p.000018: anonymity must not be confused with de-identified data, where personal data are removed, so that no unauthorised
p.000018: persons are able to establish who the research subjects are, but where the researcher is able to link individuals and
p.000018: data.
p.000018: Re-use of such de-identified data requires consent if researchers supplement registry studies with data obtained
p.000018: through active contact with the participants. When re-using and linking this type of data set, for example in registry
p.000018: studies that are large-scale, of a long duration, or which use geodata, it may also be possible to locate or identify
p.000018: individuals indirectly. In such cases, researchers should make renewed attempts to obtain consent, even though this is
p.000018: difficult in practice. If researchers do not find it possible to obtain consent, they have a particular responsibility
p.000018: to explain why the research is of such great benifit that it justifies deviating from this principle. In such cases,
p.000018: researchers have a general responsibility to inform the persons involved and the general public (see point 7).
p.000018:
p.000018:
p.000018: 11 Storage of personal data
p.000018: Data related to identifiable individuals must be stored responsibly. Such data must not be stored any longer than what
p.000018: is necessary to achieve the objective for which it was collected.
p.000018:
p.000018: Data protection involves not only the protection of individuals against abuse of personal data, but also of citizens in
p.000018: relation to the State. This is why strict rules govern the estab- lishment of public personal data registers. However,
p.000018: this must be balanced against the benefits achieved through research on registry data. It is also important to preserve
p.000018: mate- rial for future generations, but research institutions must follow the rules regarding proper storage. It is
p.000018: vital to establish and observe good routines for ensuring the quality of data registers and for any re-use and deletion
p.000018: of registers or other data, which may be linked to individuals (see the Personal Data Act).
p.000018: Storage of personal data normally triggers an obligation to obtain consent. The legis- lation places strict
p.000018: requirements on safe storage of lists of names or other data that permit
p.000018:
p.000018:
p.000018:
p.000018: 18 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000019:
p.000019: the identification of individuals. If storage of such data is necessary, the identifiable personal data must be stored
p.000019: securely and separately from other research data. The other material stored may contain a reference number to link it
p.000019: to the list of personal data. All research material must be kept securely, and inaccessible to unauthorised persons.
p.000019: It must be clearly decided and communicated to the participants in advance whether or not the material is to be
p.000019: destroyed at the end of the project. It must also be explained plainly how, and in what form, the material will be
p.000019: stored to make it possible to verify analyses and conclusions or for other researchers to re-use the material. The
p.000019: material must be stored securely at a dedicated institution like the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (formerly NSD)
p.000019: or the National Archives of Norway.
p.000019: Generally, it is important to ensure that public archives and private archives of value to research are kept for
p.000019: posterity and made available for research. The National Archives play an important role here.23
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019: 12 Responsibility for avoiding harm
p.000019: Researchers are responsible for ensuring that participants are not exposed to serious physical harm or other severe or
p.000019: unreasonable strain as result of the research.
p.000019:
p.000019: In humanities and social science research, there is usually little risk of participants being exposed to serious
p.000019: physical harm. However, serious mental strain is a possibility. This may be more difficult to define and predict, and
p.000019: it can be difficult to assess the long-term effects, if any. «Strain» is used here in a broad sense, and it covers both
p.000019: everyday discomfort, risk of retraumatisation, and also more serious mental strain which the research may cause the
p.000019: participants. Researchers nevertheless have responsibility for participants not being subjected to serious or
p.000019: unreasonable pain or stress.
p.000019: The risk of causing minor strain must be balanced against both the benifit of the research for society and the value
p.000019: for the participants. Researchers must justify such benifit and value as specifically as possible, also to the parties
p.000019: involved (through information retrospectively). Researchers should also ensure that individuals involved are offered
p.000019: professional follow-up in order to process any problems that have arisen as a result of participation in the project.
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019: 23 The Archives Act.
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019:
p.000019: GUIDELINES – NESH 19
p.000020:
p.000020: 13 Respect for third parties
p.000020: Researchers should consider and anticipate effects on third parties that are not directly included in the research.
p.000020:
p.000020: Interviews, archival studies and observations often result in the researcher gaining accessXtoXinformation about far
p.000020: more individuals than those who are the focus of the study. The research may have an impact on the privacy and close
p.000020: relationships of individuals who are not included in the research, but who are drawn in as parties closely related to
p.000020: the partici- pants. In some cases, for example when a researcher observes groups and communities, it can be difficult
p.000020: to protect the privacy of individuals who have not given consent directly, or who have actively declined, but who
p.000020: nevertheless remain in the situation. Researchers have a responsibility nonetheless to protect the privacy of those
p.000020: individuals who are directly or indirectly affected by the research project.
p.000020: Studies can be conducted in small and transparent communities, and the protection of third parties is especially
p.000020: important in such circumstances. Researchers should take account of the possible negative consequences for third
p.000020: parties. This is particularly important when vulnerable individuals, like children and minors, are indirectly involved
p.000020: in the research.
p.000020: In a society in which research results are used to assess and adjust decisions, it can be very difficult to prevent
p.000020: research from having negative consequences for groups and institutions. Researchers should be aware of potential
p.000020: unintended consequences of their research, for example that other members of a group feel unreasonably exposed. The
p.000020: con- sideration of strain on the part of third parties should be weighed against the consideration of the critical
p.000020: function of the research and the pursuit of truth.
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020: 14 Protection of children
p.000020: Children and adolescents who take part in research are particularly entitled to protection.
p.000020:
p.000020: Research on children and their lives and living conditions is valuable and important. Children and adolescents are key
p.000020: contributors to this research. Their specific needs and interests must be protected in ways supplementary to the
p.000020: general treatment of adult subjects. Children are developing individuals, and they have different needs and abilities
p.000020: at various phases. Researchers must know enough about children to be able to adapt both their methods and the direction
p.000020: of their research to the ages of the participants. Age-specific information must be provided about the project and the
p.000020: consequences of the research, and they must be informed that participation is voluntary and that they may withdraw from
p.000020: the study at any time. Consent is more problematic for research on children than research on adults. Children
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020:
p.000020: 20 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000021:
p.000021: are often more willing to obey authority than adults, and they often feel that they cannot object. Nor are they always
p.000021: able to see the consequences of participating in research.24
p.000021: In general, minors who have turned 15 can consent to researchers collecting and using their personal data. If a child
p.000021: is under the age of 15, researchers must usually obtain consent from their parents or guardians. An exception is made
p.000021: for sensitive personal data, which can only be acquired with the consent of the parents. In such cases, authorisation
p.000021: from the Data Protection Authority or a recommendation from a data protection officer is also required.25
p.000021: At the same time, it is important to treat minors as independent individuals. According to the Children Act, a child
p.000021: who has reached seven years of age, or younger children who are able to form their own opinions on a matter, must be
p.000021: provided with information and the opportunity to express their opinions. When a child has reached twelve years of age,
p.000021: a great deal of weight must be attached to his or her opinions. In addition to the parents or guardians giving formal
p.000021: consent, it is necessary that the children themselves accept par- ticipation to the extent that they are able to do so.
p.000021: There may also be conflicts of interest between children and their parents or guardians. In that event, it is important
p.000021: to clarify the child’s capacity to grant consent on their own behalf. In some cases, it may be right to let children
p.000021: and adolescents take part in the research without the consent of their parents. The requirement of confidentiality
p.000021: particularly applies when children take part in research. However, situations can arise in which researchers are either
p.000021: legally or ethically required to provide confidential information, whether it be to the child’s next-of-kin, adult
p.000021: helpers or the child welfare service. The obligation to notify applies, for example, if researchers learn that children
p.000021: are subject to abuse, assault or neglect (see point 9).
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: 24 The National Research Ethics Committees, Barn i forskning. Etiske dimensjoner [Children in research. Ethical
p.000021: dimensions], edited by Hallvard Fossheim (NESH), Jacob Hølen (NEM) and Helene Ingierd (NESH), Oslo 2013.
p.000021: 25 The Consumer Ombudsman and the Data Protection Authority, Barn og unges personopplysninger: Veiledning for
p.000021: innhenting og bruk [Guidelines for the collection and use of personal data on children and young persons], Oslo 2004.
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021:
p.000021: GUIDELINES – NESH 21
p.000022:
p.000022: 15 Respect for privacy and family life
p.000022: Researchers must respect individuals’ privacy and family life. Participants are entitled to check whether confidential
p.000022: information about them is made available to others.
p.000022:
p.000022: Respect for privacy aims at protecting individuals against unwanted interference and expo- sure. This applies not only
p.000022: to emotional issues, but also to questions that involve sickness and health, political and religious opinions, and
p.000022: sexuality.
p.000022: Researchers should be especially attentive when they ask questions regarding intimate matters and they should avoid
p.000022: putting pressure on participants. What participants perceive as sensitive information may vary from one individual or
p.000022: group to the next.
p.000022: It can be difficult to distinguish between the private and the public sphere, for example when conducting research on
p.000022: and via the internet. When using material from such inter- actions, researchers must be duly aware of the fact that
p.000022: people’s understanding of what is private and what is public in such media may vary.26
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 16 Respect for the values and motives of others
p.000022: Researchers must not ascribe irrational or unworthy motives to participants without providing convincing documentation
p.000022: and justification. Researchers must show respect for the values and views of research participants, not least when they
p.000022: differ from those generally accepted by society at large.
p.000022:
p.000022: Research is often concerned with the behaviour and values of minorities, e.g. religious groups, ethnic minorities,
p.000022: youth groups, or political subcultures. Some persons may find this research to be intrusive or offensive. Researchers
p.000022: must take seriously the participants’ understanding of themselves and avoid representations that diminish their
p.000022: legitimate rights In many research projects in the humanities and social sciences, where actions are often
p.000022: used in explanations, the participants’ motives often play a key role. There is frequently uncertainty associated with
p.000022: exploration of motives, not least when it comes to research on other cultures or historical periods. A clear
p.000022: distinction should therefore be drawn between description and interpretation, or between documentation of actual
p.000022: courses of events and different interpretations of such events.
p.000022: At the same time, the participants’ motives are often directly associated with their social roles. For example,
p.000022: researchers may assume that politicians seek influence, that
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 26 NESH, Ethical Guidelines for Internet Research, Oslo (2003) 2016.
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022:
p.000022: 22 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000023:
p.000023: business leaders seek profit, or that there are conflicts between generations. Stronger evi- dence is required to
p.000023: ascribe more unusual motives to participants. Special documentation and argumentation are required for providing
p.000023: accounts of actions that ascribe unworthy motives to participants or motives other than those they invoke themselves.
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: 17 Respect for posthumous reputations
p.000023: It is important to act with care when conducting research on deceased persons.
p.000023:
p.000023: Respect, documentation and accountability are also required when conducting research on deceased persons. Out of
p.000023: respect for the deceased and their beraved, researchers should choose their words with care. Archives and documents
p.000023: left behind by deceased persons may also contain sensitive personal data, and researchers must handle information about
p.000023: deceased persons and their descendants with care and respect. Research on graves and human remains must be conducted
p.000023: with respect by the researchers.27
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: 18 Defining roles and responsibilities
p.000023: Researchers are responsible for explaining to the participants the limitations, expectations and requirements
p.000023: associated with their role as researchers.
p.000023:
p.000023: In situations where researchers relate to participants in a variety of capacities, they are responsible for defining
p.000023: the limits of their role and responsibility as a researcher. Examples are a combination of the roles of researcher and
p.000023: therapist when evaluating possible courses of treatment or the roles of researcher and teacher in a teaching situation.
p.000023: Participant observation in fieldwork may also lead researchers to establish friendships and close rela- tionships with
p.000023: (some) participants or students. Parallel roles may serve a valuable purpose in research, but the use of information
p.000023: obtained by virtue of such parallel roles also requires a free and informed consent if used for research purposes.
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: 27 The National Committee for Research Ethics on Human Remains, Etiske retningslinjer for forskning på menneskelige
p.000023: levninger [Ethical Guidelines for Research on Human Remains], Oslo 2013.
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023:
p.000023: GUIDELINES – NESH 23
p.000024:
p.000024: C) RESPECT FOR GROUPS AND INSTITUTIONS
p.000024:
p.000024: 19 Respect for private interests
p.000024: Researchers must respect the legitimate reasons that private companies, interest organi- sations etc. may have for not
p.000024: wanting information about themselves, their members or their plans to be published.
p.000024:
p.000024: It may be of great interest to the general public to learn about how private companies and interest organisations
p.000024: operate in society. Companies and organisations are under no legal obligation to provide information except where
p.000024: specific statutory provisions apply to certain types of information. Such institutions should nonetheless make their
p.000024: archives available for research. If they deny access, this must be respected.
p.000024: Researchers who choose to undertake research on organisations that are opposed to the research are subject to
p.000024: particular requirements regarding meticulous documentation and use of methods. Situations may arise where researchers
p.000024: have reason to suspect abuse or serious violations of the law. It may still be ethically acceptable to continue the
p.000024: research providing that the abuse cannot be exposed or documented in any other way.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 20 Respect for public administration
p.000024: Public bodies should make themselves available for research into their activities.
p.000024:
p.000024: People have a legitimate interest in how social institutions function. This implies that researchers must have the
p.000024: greatest possible access to public administration and bodies.
p.000024: It should be possible to research public archives. Access may be restricted, with reference to privacy, overriding
p.000024: national interests, or national security. Classified material should be declassified as soon as it is prudent to do so.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 21 Respect for vulnerable groups
p.000024: Researchers have a special responsibility to respect the interests of vulnerable groups throughout the entire research
p.000024: process.
p.000024:
p.000024: Vulnerable and disadvantaged individuals and groups are not always equipped to defend their interests when dealing with
p.000024: researchers. Accordingly, researchers cannot take for granted that ordinary procedures for eliciting information and
p.000024: consent will ensure individuals’ self-determination or protect them from unreasonable strain.
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024:
p.000024: 24 GUIDELINES – NESH
p.000025:
p.000025: Individuals who belong to disadvantaged groups may not want to be the subjects of research for fear of being viewed by
p.000025: the general public in an unfavourable light. In such cases, researchers must place particular emphasis on the
p.000025: requirements regarding information and consent. On the other hand, society has a legitimate interest for example in
p.000025: surveying living conditions, measuring the effectiveness of socialXwelfare schemes, or charting the paths in and out of
p.000025: destructive and anti-social behaviour. Protecting a vulnerable group is occa- sionally counter-productive. In reality,
p.000025: such efforts may serve to protect society at large from gaining insight into processes that lead to discrimination and
p.000025: rejection.
p.000025: Researchers who collect information about the characteristics and behaviour of indi- viduals and groups should be
p.000025: cautious about using classifications or designations that give rise to unreasonable generalisation, and which in
p.000025: practice result in the stigmatisation of particular social groups.
p.000025:
p.000025:
...
Appendix
Indicator List
| Indicator | Vulnerability |
|---|
| abuse | Victim of Abuse |
| access | Access to Social Goods |
| access to information | Access to information |
| age | Age |
| authority | Relationship to Authority |
| autonomy | Impaired Autonomy |
| child | Child |
| children | Child |
| criminal | criminal |
| culturally | cultural difference |
| dependence | Drug Dependence |
| dependent | Dependent |
| education | education |
| educational | education |
| employees | employees |
| ethnic | Ethnicity |
| family | Motherhood/Family |
| ill | ill |
| illegal | Illegal Activity |
| illness | Physically Disabled |
| impaired | Cognitive Impairment |
| influence | Drug Usage |
| intoxicated | Intoxication |
| language | Linguistic Proficiency |
| mentally | Mentally Disabled |
| minor | Youth/Minors |
| minority | Racial Minority |
| officer | Police Officer |
| opinion | philosophical differences/differences of opinion |
| parents | parents |
| party | political affiliation |
| police | Police Officer |
| political | political affiliation |
| race | Racial Minority |
| religious | Religion |
| restricted | Incarcerated |
| single | Marital Status |
| social welfare | Access to Social Goods |
| student | Student |
| threat | Threat of Stigma |
| violence | Threat of Violence |
| vulnerable | vulnerable |
| youth | Youth/Minors |
Indicator Peers (Indicators in Same Vulnerability)
| Indicator | Peers |
|---|
| access | ['socialXwelfare'] |
| child | ['children'] |
| children | ['child'] |
| education | ['educational'] |
| educational | ['education'] |
| minor | ['youth'] |
| minority | ['race'] |
| officer | ['police'] |
| party | ['political'] |
| police | ['officer'] |
| political | ['party'] |
| race | ['minority'] |
| social welfare | ['access'] |
| youth | ['minor'] |
Trigger Words
capacity
consent
cultural
developing
ethics
harm
protect
protection
risk
self-determination
sensitive
welfare
Applicable Type / Vulnerability / Indicator Overlay for this Input