Critical Behavior in Research
University of Phoenix
Critical Behavior in Research
The intent of this paper is to provide a general overview of the issues surrounding ethical behavior throughout research process. The research process can have very different requirements based on the industry and profession. The authors profession does not deal with the direct involvement of human subjects as some medical research might. This brings a different point of view to the research process since direct impact of procedures, drugs or other human studies is not required for this type of research. This paper will evaluate various works by Christensen, (2010), Leedy & Ormord, (2010), and Neuman, (2005). There are special works that provide additional insight provided by Greaney, et al., (2012) and Frechtling, et al., (2012). These works, directed toward profession research provide specific focus on the authors field of study. The process of developing an ethically sound research project and properly evaluating the impacts are the genesis that drives this paper. This work, divided into several sections, each with a particular emphasis: Ethical issues, Importance of ethical consideration, Potential issues and impacts on Information Systems research. Ethical issues at the heart of the readings
The article that used for this evaluation is the planning and design work done by Leedy & Ormrod, (2010). This work provided detailed explanations of the high level issues that researcher face during the development of research projects. ‘Most ethical issues in research fall into one of four categories: protection from harm, informed consent, right to privacy, and honesty with professional colleagues.’ (Leedy & Ormrod, 2010). Protection from harm, defined as ‘exposure of research participants to unnecessary physical or psychological harm’, (Leedy & Ormrod, 2010). The more ethically obvious physical harm is easier to prepare for during the development of a research project. The psychological harm is more difficult anticipate as each individual can have varying impressions of a given situation. The next item pointed out in the Leedy & Ormord, (2010) work is informed consent where an interesting question was poised. ‘A dilemma sometimes arises as to how informed participants should be. If people are given too much information—for instance, if they are told the specific research hypothesis being tested—they may behave differently than they would under more normal circumstances.’ The researcher must weigh each of the components of research and identify potential situations where the amount of information could alter the results. Right to privacy is another area of consideration where Leedy and Ormrod, (2010) stated, ‘a researcher must keep the nature and quality of participants’ performance strictly Confidential.’ With amount of information available over the internet and through public records, the privacy lines become blurred. There is some information that is publicly available that should only be used for statistical information while personal information would best be removed. The implications and impacts of exposing personal information could cultivate the perception that the work face dismissal on the grounds of questionable tactics, (Greaney, et al., 2012). The final area presented in the Leedy & Ormrod, (2010) work is honesty with professional colleagues. They state, ‘Researchers must report their findings in a complete and honest fashion, without misrepresenting what they have done or intentionally misleading others about the nature of their findings.’ This includes omissions and misrepresentations of the data gathered. When the larger group of researchers must continuously validate and verify research studies, the body of knowledge suffers. When the research presented is in a credible and honest manner, future studies have the opportunity to avoid wasted time and repeating situations that do not...