Research Ethics

Participants should understand, in a manner appropriate to the study, who is conducting it, why they were selected, what will be requested, expected duration, risks and benefits, how information will be used, whether recording or recontact is requested, and that participation is voluntary.

• Clear and appropriate language.
• Opportunity to ask questions.
• No false implication that participation determines service or assistance.
• Consent documentation proportionate to risk.
• Renewed consent where purpose or use changes materially.

• No pressure arising from need, employment, or institutional relationships.
• Participants may refuse participation or a question without unjustified penalty.
• Interviews may end when fatigue, distress, or danger arises.
• Explain what can be withdrawn after collection and what cannot be separated after anonymization.

Potential harm includes psychological, social, political, security, legal, and economic risk—not only physical harm. Questions, interview location, contact method, researcher identity, recording, storage, reporting, and consequences of third-party discovery are reviewed.

• Clear justification for inclusion and absence of a lower-risk source.
• Guardian permission where required and child assent according to age and capacity.
• Trained researchers and appropriate language.
• Clear safeguarding and referral procedures.
• No unnecessary details that expose a child or family.
• Attention to authority, dependency, and aid relationships.

Research may reveal violence, protection, health, misconduct, or immediate risk. Sensitive questions require a plan specifying what is collected, who may access it, confidentiality limits, referral, response to direct danger, and conditions for stopping the interview.

• Use a location and contact method that do not expose participation.
• Avoid unnecessary names or identifying details in notes.
• Separate contact information from responses.
• Use codes and restricted permissions.
• Transfer files through appropriate channels.
• Prevent small cells or detailed reporting from identifying people.

Reasonable compensation for time or cost may be appropriate, but should not be so large that it induces acceptance of risks a person would ordinarily reject. Compensation is explained before participation and not tied to a particular response.

Deception is considered only in very limited circumstances where scientifically necessary, no practical alternative exists, risk is acceptable, review is appropriate, and debriefing is provided. It is not used to conceal a commercial or political sponsor for influence or marketing collection.

Review is proportionate to risk and may involve documented internal review, independent review, or a competent committee. Material changes to population, topic, collection mode, use, or risk require renewed review.

• Assess participant and researcher risk.
• Use communication, movement, and stop-work plans.
• Do not interview in the presence of a person threatening privacy.
• Do not pressure researchers to meet quotas in unsafe conditions.
• Report incidents without automatic blame.

Participants should be able to ask questions, complain, or request no further contact. Complaints are reviewed in good faith, complainant identity is restricted, retaliation is prohibited, and corrective action is taken where necessary.

Submit a complaint or concern

• Identity of the organization and researcher and the general purpose.
• What participation involves, duration, and mode.
• Voluntariness and the right to refuse or stop.
• Expected risks and benefits and absence of guaranteed direct benefit.
• Data collected and how they are protected and used.
• Recording, images, or location where applicable.
• Contact for questions or complaints.

Consent may be written, verbal, or electronic depending on risk and context. A signature is not an end in itself where it increases danger; the essential requirement is understanding and free choice. The version, date, and method are documented.

Deception is used only exceptionally where a legitimate purpose cannot reasonably be achieved otherwise, after reviewing harm, alternatives, and debriefing. It is not used to conceal risks or collect sensitive data that participants did not agree to provide.

• Confirm that the participant can speak safely and privately.
• Do not expose a sensitive subject in a visible notification without permission.
• Provide a rapid way to end contact.
• Do not record screen or audio without clear permission.
• Consider connectivity cost and appropriate reimbursement.

Researchers are trained to recognize distress, pause, skip, or stop, and avoid promises they cannot fulfil. Where disclosures of danger or violence are possible, the protocol defines confidentiality limits and safe referral without turning researchers into unqualified service providers.

1. Protect the person and stop the activity creating risk.
2. Inform the designated responsible person using minimum necessary data.
3. Record the event, time, and action.
4. Assess whether part of the research should pause or change.
5. Consider notification, support, or referral under the plan.
6. Review cause and prevent recurrence.

Permission from a leader or institution does not replace individual consent. Community consultation may help understand risk, language, and timing while preventing organizational or family gatekeepers from compelling participation or revealing individual choices.

Participants may be reimbursed for time, transport, or connectivity in a proportionate manner. The amount should not impair free choice and should not be conditional on answering every question or completing an interview the participant wishes to end.

Recruitment is separated from managerial authority or service allocation where possible. Refusal must not affect employment, assistance, or institutional relationships, and managers or providers should not know who participated or what they said unless strictly necessary and disclosed.

A study may require enhanced internal review, an independent committee, or academic or regulatory approval depending on risk, commissioner, and jurisdiction. Absence of a formal committee is not a reason to omit risk, consent, and safeguarding review.

• Ask questions about the study and contact channels.
• Request no further contact.
• Withdraw linkable material before the point at which withdrawal is no longer feasible, where the design permits.
• Complain without retaliation.
• Request information on data use and applicable privacy rights.