Technology Faculty General Guidance on Ethics
This document is intended to give an overview of Ethical Issues that are particularly relevant
to the Faculty Technology and has been requested by members of the FEC. The University
Ethics Policy, Faculty Flowcharts and Online Checklist are available on the University
Website
1. GENERAL
The vast majority of research in Technology does not have serious ethical implications and
is involved with examining inanimate objects and technologies (rather than people or
animals). However all research in the University requires positive vetting and all research
(Staff, PGR and PGT) needs to be reviewed, this may only require the online checklist to be
completed and stored as appropriate, depending on the flow chart guidance. There are also
always general issues to be considered such as:
1.1.
Funding
Funding sources need to be identified to all participants in research to ensure no deception
or conflict of interest occurs. There has been some confusion as to the position of accepting
funding for research. The University will not receive funding or other support from
organisations involved in the tobacco industry and recognises that Staff may have individual
beliefs that restrict the organisations that they wish to work with, and that this can be
accommodated where possible.
1.2. Research Integrity
The University requires integrity in research activities covering areas such as:
• Pursuing research that is designed to contribute to knowledge; the pursuit and protection of truth;
• Honesty in communication and publication.
• Managing risks and ensuring the safety of those involved ensuring the probity of the financial management of
the project.
• Misappropriation of another’s intellectual property by plagiarism.
• Unfairly influencing witnesses or interviewees.
• Breach of confidentiality required by external contracts.
• The deliberate commercial exploitation of ideas of others without acknowledgement.
• Failing to comply with statutory or institutional regulations.
These need to considered, especially when dealing with very close to market activities and
when collaborators/funders have a financial interest in the outcomes of a project. Many of
the Departments in the Faculty are also accredited by Professional Bodies which require a
code of conduct and ethics from members.
“Every member should understand, foster and promote the concepts of sustainable development and the need
to deliver projects with an appropriate balance between environmental, social and economic factors;”
ICE
1.3. Environmental/Heritage Impacts
Some activities can have an impact on the environment and cultural artefacts – which should
be considered.
2. HUMAN PARTICIPANTS
The majority of the research falling under this heading in Technology involves professional
people or companies, which are able to give informed consent. In this case a Participant
Information Sheet or similar statement explaining the project methodology and use of the
data is sufficient.
Where there are possible issues of embarrassment or legal issues, maintaining the
anonymity of the participant may be appropriate and at a higher level confidentiality may be
required. There are some issues associated with whether individuals are giving their own
consent or their companies, and the Participant Information Sheet should be clear on this
point. There are some guidelines on preparing these sheets on the web site. Data storage
and protection should also be considered in the design of the questionnaire.
Where there are projects dealing with vulnerable groups (e.g. children, people with certain
disabilities etc) that cannot give informed consent it is recommended that the researcher
contacts the FEC or the University Research Ethics Adviser (david.carpenter@port.ac.uk)
before undertaking the review. This also applies to studies involving deception, anxiety or
stress being imposed on participants.
Any research involving NHS patients, staff or resources, requires the submission of the
project to the appropriate NHS Research Ethics Committee (REC). Local University Ethics
Committees should be aware of references to external committees, but need not make
separate evaluations of the ethical issues involved
3. PHD STUDENTS
As PhD students are training to be independent researchers and Supervisors are
responsible for approving methodology and submissions. All printouts from the online
system therefore need to be countersigned by Supervisors confirming the responses.
Supervisors are also responsible for ensuring PhD students follow the University Ethics
Policy, develop appropriate documentation and receive training in Ethical issues.