What Constitutes Research Ethics in Sport and Exercise Science?

Abstract

Prior to any research data collection a proposal outlining methods and protocols is required to undergo ethical scrutiny. The issues surrounding a research ethics review process within sport and exercise science departments are not dissimilar to other subject areas. In particular, the ethical review process may be unclear to the researcher and can either present a difficult and time-consuming challenge or be merely perceived as a tick-box exercise. The aim of this study was to explore and compare research ethics processes and decisions within sport and exercise science departments and institutions across the UK.

Participants were asked to provide decisions and justification of those decisions on ten typical sports and exercise science proposals. Results found that all respondents cited evidence of informed consent and subject information sheets, detailed methodology and data protection procedures as highly important across all scenarios. Additionally it was found that similar processes occur regarding research ethical scrutiny and similar decisions are made at the departmental level. However, confidence fluctuates for individuals when reviewing in non-specialist subject areas and qualitative data collected calls for more research ethics training.

Keywords

ethics process ethical decision-making ethics awareness professional guidelines informed consent subject information sheets

References

Kidd

Finlayson

. Navigating uncharted water: research ethics and emotional engagement in human inquiry. J Psych Ment Hlth Nurs 2006; 13: 423–428.

Malouffe

Schutte

. Academic psychologists’ perspectives on the human research ethics review process. Aust Psychol 2005; 40: 57–62.

Halse

Honey

. Unravelling ethics: illuminating the moral dilemmas of research ethics. J Women Cult Soc 2005; 30: 2141–2162.

Pothier

Bredenkamp

. A plea for consistency in ethical review. Res Ethics Rev 2006; 2: 109–110.

Henley

. Reporting ethical processes in journals. Ind J Med Sci 2008; 62: 127–129.

Henley

Frank

. Reporting ethical protections in physical therapy research. Phys Ther 2006; 86: 499–509.

Davidson

Garton

Joyce

. Survey of ethics education in Australian university schools and departments of psychology. Aust Psychol 2003; 38: 216–222.

Larkin

de Casterlé

Schotsmans

. A relational ethical dialogue with research ethics committees. Nurs Ethics 2008; 15: 234–242.

Homan

. Problems with codes. Res Ethics Rev 2006; 2: 98–103.

10.

Hoeyer

Dahlager

Lynoe

. Conflicting notions of research ethics: the mutually challenging traditions of social scientists and medical researchers. Soc Sci Med 2005; 61: 1741–1749.

11.

Jordan

Greenwell

Geist

. Coaches’ perceptions of conference code of ethics. Phys Educator 2004; 61: 131–145.

12.

Turale

. Reflections on the ethics involved in international research. Nurs Hlth Sci 2006; 8: 131–132.

13.

Cote

Salmela

Baria

Russell

. Organizing and interpreting unstructured qualitative data. Sport Psychol 1993; 7: 127–137.

14.

QSR International Pty Ltd. Getting Started — Get up and running with your NVivo Project. QSR International Pty Ltd, 2006.

15.

Constas

. Qualitative analysis as a public event: the documentation of category development procedures. Am Ed Res J 1992; 29: 253–266.

16.

Strauss

Corbin

. Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage 1990.

17.

Lincoln

Guba

. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications 1985.