IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/pscirm/v10y2022i4p840-847_11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From principles to practice: methods to increase the transparency of research ethics in violent contexts

Author

Listed:
  • Baron, Hannah
  • Young, Lauren E.

Abstract

There has been a proliferation of research with human participants in violent contexts over the past ten years. Adhering to commonly held ethical principles such as beneficence, justice, and respect for persons is particularly important and challenging in research on violence. This letter argues that practices around research ethics in violent contexts should be reported more transparently in research outputs, and should be seen as a subset of research methods. We offer practical suggestions and empirical evidence from both within and outside of political science around risk assessments, mitigating the risk of distress and negative psychological outcomes, informed consent, and monitoring the incidence of potential harms. An analysis of published research on violence involving human participants from 2008 to 2019 shows that only a small proportion of current publications include any mention of these important dimensions of research ethics.

Suggested Citation

  • Baron, Hannah & Young, Lauren E., 2022. "From principles to practice: methods to increase the transparency of research ethics in violent contexts," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(4), pages 840-847, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:10:y:2022:i:4:p:840-847_11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2049847021000480/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:10:y:2022:i:4:p:840-847_11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ram .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.