The Harmful Effects of Social Research and the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights
Results of a National Survey of Social Scientists in Mexico
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1344/rbd2021.53.33758Keywords:
Social Research, Bioethics, Harmful Effects, Social Sciences, RiskAbstract
Risks and harms comprise a controversial topic in health sciences social research: they are minimised, denied, or not communicated to study participants. Article 4 of the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights stipulates the need to minimise harm, but this provision does not appear to refer directly to social sciences. Objectives: 1) to understand the harmful effects in social research; and 2) to describe the application of Article 4 to harm reduction in this field of research. Methods: We conducted an internet-based survey with social research investigators, asking about their experience and opinions regarding ethical practices in social research studies. Results: Respondents indicated that harmful effects were considered in terms of the repercussions of certain actions and decisions of the investigator, confirms risks such as the misuse and/or manipulation of information, the generation of false expectations of participants, the invasion of their space and privacy. The harms were disclosure of identity, violation of rights and the generation of stigma and prejudice; it brings in other types of harmful effects such as the self-interest of the researcher or his/her institution. Discussion: Social researchers observe Article 4, but this study questions aspects of the social and cultural context and their ethical repercussions.
References
American Anthropological Association. (2012). Statement on ethics. Principles of Professional Responsibility. American Anthropological Association. Retrieved from: http://ethics.americananthro.org/category/statement/
American Sociological Association. (2018). Code of Ethics. Proposed Revision Approved by Council in August 2017 for consideration by the full ASA membership in the 2018 election. Retrieved form: http://www.asanet.org/membership/code-ethics
Aarons, D. (2017). Explorando el balance riesgos/beneficios en la investigación biomédica: algunas consideraciones. Revista Bioética, 25 (2), 320-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1983-80422017252192
Bosi, M. (2015). Questioning the concept of risk in ethical guidelines for research in the humanities and social sciences in Public Health. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 20 (9), 2675-2682. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232015209.11392015
British Sociological Association. (2017). Declaración BSA de la práctica ética. Retrieved form: https://www.britsoc.co.uk/media/24310/bsa_statement_of_ethical_practice.pdf
Echemendía, B. (2011). Definiciones acerca del riesgo y sus. Revista Cubana de Higiene y Epidemiología, 49 (3), 470-481.
Howitt, D. (2010). Introduction to qualitative methods in psychology. Harlow: Prentice Hall.
Israel, M. (2015). Research ethics and integrity for social scientists. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Pidgeon, N., Simmons, P., Sarre K., Henwood, K., & Smith, N. (2008). The ethics of socio-cultural risk research. Health, Risk & Society, 10 (4), 321-329. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698570802334526
Santi, M. (2015). El debate sobre los daños en investigación en ciencias. Revista de Bioética y Derecho, 34, 11-25. https://doi.org/10.1344/rbd2015.34.12063
Secretaría de Salubridad y Asistencia. (1984). Reglamento de la Ley General de Salud en materia de Investigación para la Salud. Secretaría de Salud. Retrieved from: http://www.salud.gob.mx/unidades/cdi/nom/compi/rlgsmis.html
Social Research Association. (2013). The New Brunswick Declaration. Retrieved from: https://the-sra.org.uk/SRA/Ethics/New-Brunswick-Declaration/SRA/Ethics/The-New-Brunswick-Declaration.aspx?hkey=2ea5b0a6-c499-45e4-9595-626bea495ff1
Sorokin, P., Sotomayor Saavedra, M., de Bennato, M., Cardozo de Martínez, C., González, M., Vergès, C., López Dávila, L,. & Rueda Castro, L. (2017). Ciencias sociales, humanas y del comportamiento: dificultades regulatorias en países latinoamericanos y su impacto en la investigación en salud. Revista Grafía- Cuaderno de trabajo de los profesores de la Facultad de Ciencias Humanas. Universidad Autónoma de Colombia, 14(1), 147-164. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.26564/16926250.765
Tealdi, J. (2008). Comunidad y Contexto. En J.C. Tealdi (Ed.), Diccionario Latinoamericano de Bioética (pp. 17-33). UNESCO-Red Latinoamericana y del Caribe de Bioética; Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2005). Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. Retrieved form: http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=31058&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
Virraroel, R. (2020). Caracterización diferencial de la investigación social. ETHIKA+,1 30-44. DOI: 10.5354/2452-6037.2020.57085
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Liliana Mondragón Barrios, Tonatiuh Guarneros García, Alberto Jiménez Tapia
![Creative Commons License](http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by-nc-nd/4.0/88x31.png)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The author retains the copyright and grants Revista de Bioética y Derecho the right of first publication of the article. All articles published in Revista de Bioética y Derecho are under Creative Commons licensing Recognition – Non Commercial – NoDerivedArtwork (by-nc-nd 4.0), which allows sharing the content with third parties, provided that they acknowledge its authorship, initial publication in this journal and the terms of the license. No commercial use of the original work or generation of derivative works is permitted.