UPI Study › Courses › Educational Psychology › Free lessons › Lesson 10.4 Free with a free account
Research with Integrity: Ethical Guidelines in Educational Research
Educational Psychology · Chapter 10: Research Methods and Evidence in EducationSection 10.4 · lesson 95 of 1009 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Educational Psychology.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Educational Psychology
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: Can We Apply This Everywhere? Generalizing Research Findings in Education →← What Do the Numbers Tell Us? Inferential Statistics in EducationNext lesson: Can We Apply This Everywhere? Generalizing Research Findings in Education →
In this lesson
Review boards, consent, confidentiality, and the duty owed to minors.
- Describe the purpose and function of an IRB
- Explain the components of informed consent
- Distinguish confidentiality from anonymity
- Identify protections owed to vulnerable populations
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,159 words). Read along, or search it.
Research Methods and Evidence in Education
Research with Integrity
Research ethics is usually taught as a list of forms to fill in. That framing gets it exactly backwards. Every rule in this section exists because someone was harmed first. We will start with that history, and the report it produced. Then the three principles that still govern everything. Then why doing research in schools is a harder case than most. Then institutional review boards, and the three levels of review. Then informed consent, and when a signature can be waived. Then confidentiality, anonymity, and the difference between them. And finally what the researcher owes, under the professional codes. None of this is paperwork. It is the price of doing the work at all.
Why It Matters
The Rules Were Written After the Harm
Educational research inherently involves human participants. Students, teachers, parents, and school administrators. Many of them may be vulnerable to harm if research is done irresponsibly. The history of research ethics reflects a series of serious abuses. Abuses in medical and social science research. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study is the most notorious of them. The Stanford Prison Experiment is the other most often cited. Those cases led to formal ethical frameworks. Frameworks governing how research participants must be treated. The central one is the Belmont Report, published in nineteen seventy-nine. It established three core principles that still guide ethical review.
Belmont
Three Principles, Still Load-Bearing
The three Belmont principles are short, and they are load-bearing. The first is respect for persons. That means acknowledging autonomy, and protecting those with diminished autonomy. A person who cannot fully decide for themselves is owed more, not less. The second is beneficence. Maximize benefits, and minimize harms to participants. The third is justice. Distribute research burdens and benefits fairly across social groups. Justice is the one people forget, and it does real work. It asks who bears the risk of a study, and who gets the benefit. These three principles underpin all modern research ethics codes. Everything that follows is an application of them.
Minors
Why School Research Is a Harder Case
Ethical concerns are especially acute in educational research. The reason is simple. The primary participants are often minors. Children and adolescents cannot give fully informed legal consent. So the requirement doubles. They need parental permission, alongside their own assent. Assent is the child's affirmative agreement to participate. Expressed in language appropriate to their age. There is a second complication, and it is structural. Schools are institutional settings with existing power dynamics. A student asked by a teacher is not being asked as a free agent. So participation must be genuinely voluntary. Refusal or withdrawal must carry no academic consequences at all. The harms to weigh include distress, loss of privacy, and stigmatization.
The IRB
The Gate Before Any Data Is Collected
An institutional review board is the gate before any data is collected. It is a committee established by a university, hospital, or research institution. Its job is to review and approve research involving human participants. And that review happens before the study begins, not after. The board weighs three things in particular. Whether the potential benefits of the research justify any risks. Whether participants will be adequately informed. And whether vulnerable populations are appropriately protected. That last category has a specific meaning in this context. Vulnerable populations include children, prisoners, and pregnant women. These are groups that require special protections. In education, the first of those three is almost always in play.
Three Levels
How Much Review a Study Draws
Not every study needs the same level of scrutiny. So review boards operate three levels. The first is exempt review, for minimal-risk studies. An anonymous survey is the standard example. The second is expedited review. That is for studies with more than minimal risk. But no major ethical concerns attached to them. The third is full board review. That is required for significant risk, deception, or vulnerable populations. Notice the logic underneath the ladder. Scrutiny is matched to the risk and ethical complexity of the research. Not to the prestige of the researcher, or the size of the study.
Not A One-Time Stamp
Approval Is a Relationship, Not an Event
Researchers submit detailed protocol applications before collecting data. The application describes the research purpose and participant populations. It describes data collection procedures and risk minimization strategies. And it describes exactly how consent will be obtained. But approval is not a one-time event. That is the part that surprises people new to research. Researchers must report adverse events as they occur. They must request approval for any protocol amendments. And they must submit annual renewals for ongoing studies. Skipping this is not a technicality. Conducting research without approval violates federal regulations. It can mean lost institutional funding, retracted publications, and worse.
Informed Consent
What a Valid Process Actually Requires
Informed consent is a process, not a form. It is how potential participants receive enough information to decide. And the decision must be voluntary and uncoerced. A valid process gives participants five things. The study's purpose and procedures. The potential risks and benefits. Any alternatives to participating. The voluntary nature of participation. And the right to withdraw at any time, without penalty. Two further requirements are easy to miss. Consent documents must be written in plain language. Language the participant or their guardian can actually read. And sufficient time must be given for questions before signing.
Waivers
When a Signature Would Do Harm
Sometimes requiring a signature would itself do harm. In those circumstances the board may waive written informed consent. The classic case is a study involving only anonymous surveys. Think about what a signed consent form does there. Obtaining it would reveal the participants' identities. The signature would destroy the very protection it documents. So in these cases participants receive an information sheet instead. It explains the study without requiring a signature. Assent works on the same underlying logic. It exists to acknowledge the child's developing autonomy and dignity. Not to generate a record that a minor was processed. The paperwork serves the principle. It is never the other way around.
Two Protections
Confidentiality Is Not Anonymity
Two protections get used interchangeably, and they are not the same. Confidentiality means data linking individuals to responses is kept private. It is shared only with authorized researchers. Anonymity is stronger than that. Under anonymity, no one can link responses to individuals. Not even the researcher who collected the data. Several strategies protect participants in practice. Use participant identification codes rather than names. Store identifying information separately from the data itself. Limit who can access the data, and use secure storage systems. And destroy the identifying links once analyses are complete. One more obligation runs alongside all of this. Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism all count as research misconduct.
APA Principles
What the Researcher Owes
The professional codes turn these principles into stated obligations. Beneficence and nonmaleficence. Maximize benefits and minimize harm, to participants and to society. Fidelity and responsibility. Uphold professional standards, and accept accountability for your conduct. Integrity means being accurate, honest, and transparent. In planning, in reporting, and in publication. Justice means the equitable distribution of burdens and benefits. Respect for rights and dignity covers autonomy, privacy, and confidentiality. Data integrity means accurate collection, storage and reporting. And it means avoiding fabrication or falsification outright. Two more sit on the list. Informed consent before any data collection. And avoiding deception, except where it is scientifically necessary.
About Educational Psychology at UPI Study
Educational Psychology (Psychology 120) is a self-paced online course of 100 video lessons in 11 chapters, from memory, conditioning and child development to motivation, individual differences, assessment, instruction and educational technology. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Psychology and social science courses Every course with PRO →
Why take it here
Why students take Educational Psychology with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Educational Psychology carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About Research with Integrity: Ethical Guidelines in Educational Research
What are the three principles of the Belmont Report?
What does an institutional review board (IRB) do?
What is the difference between confidentiality and anonymity in research?
What is the difference between consent and assent for children in research?
About the Educational Psychology course
How many college credits is Educational Psychology?
How much does Educational Psychology cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Educational Psychology take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Educational Psychology.
100 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →