Rpe - As Per Vtu - Module 1 Definition of Philosophy

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 25

RPE - AS PER VTU - MODULE 1

Definition of Philosophy:
Quite literally, the term "philosophy" means, "love of wisdom." In a broad sense, philosophy is an
activity people undertake when they seek to understand fundamental truths about themselves, the
world in which they live, and their relationships to the world and to each other, (Florida State
University). Philosophical questions can't be straightforwardly investigated through purely
empirical means.

Branches:
1. Metaphysics
Metaphysics is the study of the nature of reality, of what exists in the world.
Is there a God?
What is truth?
What is a person? What makes a person the same through time?
Is the world strictly composed of matter?
Do people have minds? If so, how is the mind related to the body?
Do people have free wills?
What is it for one event to cause another?

2. Epistemology
Epistemology is the study of knowledge.
What is knowledge?
Do we know anything at all?
How do we know what we know?
Can we be justified in claiming to know certain things?

3. Ethics
The study of ethics often concerns what we ought to do and what it would be best to do. Questions
about what is good and right arise.
What is good? What makes actions or people good?
What is right? What makes actions right?
Is morality objective or subjective?
How should I treat others?

4. Logic
The arguments or reasons given for people's answers to questions. Philosophers employ logic to
study the nature and structure of arguments. Logicians ask such questions as:
What constitutes "good" or "bad" reasoning?
How do we determine whether a given piece of reasoning is good or bad?

5. Aesthetics
The word is Greek in origin, which refers to the perception and experience of the senses. The study
of aesthetics is the study of something sensed, in a broad understanding of that word, rather than
something imagined or reasoned.
The philosophical study of beauty and taste. It is closely related to the philosophy of art, which is
concerned with the nature of art and the concepts in terms of which individual works of art are
interpreted and evaluated.

Page 1 of 25
Aesthetics is a sub-branch of philosophy that examines questions of the pleasantness of our
experiences concerning things in the world (where pleasantness is taken in a broad sense to include,
for example, the intellectual pleasure of being example,
challenged or confronted). It deals with development and cultivation of appreciation and
appropriate response.

6. Axiology
The term axiology is derived from Greek and means 'value' or 'worth'. Axiology is engaged with
assessment of the role of researcher's own value on all stages of the research process. In simple
terms, axiology focuses on what do you value in your research. This is important because your
values affect how you conduct your research and what do you value in your research findings.

Schools of Philosophy
Approaches to Research
There are three standard approaches
• Qualitative
• Quantitative
• Mixed

Qualitative research : Qualitative research is an approach for exploring and understanding the
meaning ascribed to a social or human problem. Data is typically collected in the participant's
setting, data analysis inductively building from particulars to general themes, and the researcher
making interpretations of the meaning of the data. Those who engage in this form of inquiry use an
inductive style building from data to themes and a focus on individual meaning, and emphasize the
importance of reporting the complexity of a situation.
Examples:
Does social media affect the way teenagers feel about their body?
What factors lead to high attrition rate in companies?
Are single children selfish compared to children who have siblings?
Does competition in children cause them to be insensitive?

Quantitative research : Quantitative research is an approach for testing objective theories by


examining the relations between variables that can be measured, typically using instruments and
using numbered data can be analyzed using statistical procedures. Quantitative researchers test
theories deductively, build into the process to prevent bias, and seek to generalize and replicate the
findings.
Examples:
1. How efficient are a hospitals operations?
2. Experimental study on effect of quantity drinking water on sleep patterns?
3. Improving forecast of solar power generation.
4. Study of effect of pollution on lungs.
5. Improvement of efficiency of vehicles with generative braking.

Mixed methods
Mixed methods research is an approach to inquiry involving collecting both quantitative and
qualitative data, using a specific procedure or design, combining (or integrating) the two forms of
data within the design, and drawing conclusions and inferences) about the insight to emerge from
the combined databases.
Page 2 of 25
Examples:
1. How does the students perception of the school (qualitative relate to test scores(Quantitative?
2. How does employee satisfaction (qualitative) affect the sales of the company (Quantitative)?
3. Will belief in democracy (qualitative) improve voter turn out in elections(Quantitative)

Points of Philosophy:
Academic philosophy doesn't present a body of consensus knowledge the way chemistry and
physics do. Do philosophical questions have correct answers? Does philosophical progress exist?
Does philosophy get closer to the truth over time?

So what's the point of philosophy?


To discover truth, wherever and whatever it is.
To learn how to better live our lives.
To understand our own views, including their strengths and weaknesses.
To examine our own lives and be more conscious of our choices and their implications.
To learn how to better think and reason

What are different schools of philosophy?


There are four broad schools of thought that reflect the key philosophies of education as we know
today.
These schools of thought are:
• Idealism
• Realism
• Pragmatism
• Existentialism

I - Idealism:
Idealism is a school of philosophy that emphasizes that "ideas or concepts are the essence of all that
is worth knowing". It believes that true reality exists only in idea.
• Plato is a leading personality of this school of thought.
• This school encourages conscious reasoning in the mind of different ideas. Idealists look for
absolute or universal truths.
• Socrates : The other great philosopher of this school is Socrates. His style involves deep
questioning to arrive at the knowledge. When followed in research this can lead to higher-order
thinking.
• Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) German Philosopher, who said that it was only reasoning that helped
us gain knowledge of the world and understand it.
• Swami Vivekananda, Rabindranath Tagore

This school of thought can be useful in research as reasoning definitely helps us to arrive at a
solution to a problem. Some questions of this school that can help in research are,
1. What’s the relevance of my question?
2. How does this idea relate to my problem?
3. What assumptions can be made?
4. What are the implications of these assumptions?
5. What are similar examples?
6. Is there an alternative way to look at it?
Page 3 of 25
II - Realism:
This school of philosophy emphasizes that "reality, knowledge, and value exist independent of the
human mind" Realists use the senses and scientific investigation in order to discover truth. The
application of the scientific method also allows individuals to classify things into different groups
based on their essential differences. Key philosophers of this school of thought are
• Aristotle : (384-322 BC)
Called father of realism. Believed that everything has a function and purpose. He was first to teach
logic as a discipline in order to be able to reason about physical events and aspects"
• John Locke (1632-1704)
Believed that when born a child's mind is like a blank white paper. The paper is then filled with
impressios created by experience.

In this school everything is based on scientific enquires and nothing on speculations.


Researchers following this school use:
• Determinism
• Experimentation
• Critical thinking
• Observation

III - Pragmatism:
Philosophers of this school of thought believe that reality is constantly changing and our experience
helps us to evolve. The learner constantly changes by interacting with the environment. They
believe there is no absolute truth but truth is what works. Key philosophers are:
• Charles Sanders Pierce(1839-1914)
He introduced a method where learners are provided with a procedure to construct and clarify
meanings.
• John Dewey (1859-1952) : He believed humans have to evolve constantly in their environments.
He introduced a systematic procedure to arrive at solutions.
1. Recognize that the problem exists.
2. Clearly define the problem.
3. Suggest possible solutions.
4. Consider the potential consequences of the possible solutions.
5. Carry out further observation and experiment leading to the solution's acceptance or rejection.

This school teaches the researcher to think critically rather than what to think. Its more exploratory
than explanatory.
The researcher is actively involved in learning process and challenged to take on problems. It
involves
• Hands on problem solving
• Cooperative learning
• Projects
• Experimenting

IV - Existentialism:
It focuses on importance of individual rather than the external standards.
Existentialists believe reality is just our experiences.

Page 4 of 25
As such, the physical world has no real meaning outside our human experience and there is no
objective, authoritative truth about metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics.
Key philosophers are
• Kierkegaard (1813-1855): Founder
• Nietzsche (1844-1900): He evolved a strategy to liberate people from the oppression of feeling
inferior within themselves, and a teaching of how not to judge what one is in relation to what one
should be". The subiect matter takes second place to understanding and appreciating themselves
for who they are as individuals. The learners accept individual responsibility for their personal
thoughts, feelings, and actions.
Existentialists strongly oppose standardized assessments which measure or track learning. Instead,
they want the educational experience of the learner to focus on creating opportunities for self-
direction and self-actualization of the whole person, not just the mind.

Need for philosophical approach to research


Most people plan their research in relation to a question that needs to be answered or a problem that
needs to be solved. Then we think about what data is needed and the techniques we need to collect
them. Ultimately, we need to explain the choices made, so that others take our research seriously.
We can say, research philosophy is belief about the ways in which data about a phenomenon should
be collected, analyzed and used.

Research Onion

Research Philosophy : Research philosophy is the set of beliefs, assumptions and principles that
underlie the way you approach to solve your problem. What are some standard philosophies in
research?

Page 5 of 25
I - Positivism (Scientific) : Positivism is rooted in the belief that knowledge can be obtained
through objective observations and measurements. In other words, the positivist philosophy
assumes that answers can be found by carefully measuring and analyzing data, particularly
numerical data.
Very useful for science and engineering. As a research paradigm, positivism results in
methodologies that make use of quantitative data, and often adopt experimental or quasi-
experimental research designs.
The research looks for causal relationships - in other words, understanding which variables affect
other variables, in what way and to what extent. As a result, studies with a positivist research
philosophy typically aim for objectivity, generalizability and replicability of findings. Lets look at
an example.
Example of Positivism:
Suppose we want to study the effect of a herbal supplement on weight loss. A positivist would
divide the group into a control group (who do not get the supplement) and a test group (who receive
the supplement.) The participants weight can then be measured over a period, detailed statistical
analysis done to see if the supplement has any effect on weight loss.
The underlying assumptions and beliefs revolve around the viewpoint that knowledge and insight
can be obtained through carefully controlling the environment, manipulating variables and
analyzing the resulting numerical data. Very useful for hard sciences and often adopted in
technological research also.

II - Interpretivism(Constructivism): Essentially, interpretivism takes the position that reality is


socially constructed. In other words, that reality is subjective, and is constructed by the observer
through their experience of it, rather than being independent of the observer.
Essentially, interpretivism takes the position that reality is socially constructed so that reality is
subjective, and is constructed by the observer through their experience of it. rather than being
independent of the observer.
An interpretivist philosophy manifests in the adoption of a qualitative methodology, relying on data
collection methods such as interviews, observations, and textual analysis. These types of studies
commonly explore complex social phenomena and individual perspectives, which are naturally
more subjective and nuanced.

Example of Interpretivism:
Consider studying the effect of care-giving of a terminally ill person . To study this we would
conduct interviews with care-givers, analyze their responses, study the effect on their health, mind,
social activities etc and draw inferences from this data. The research involves subjective exploration
of individual experiences.

Scienti c/Positivist Interpretivist/Anti-positivist


1. Laboratory Experiments 1. Subjective/Argumentative
2. Field Experiments 2. Reviews
3. Surveys 3. Action Research
4. Case Studies 4. Case Studies
5. Theorem Proof 5. Descriptive/Interpretive
6. Simulation 6. Role/Game Playing

Page 6 of 25
fi
III - Pragmatism:
With a pragmatic research paradigm, both quantitative and qualitative methods can play a part,
depending on the research questions and the context of the study. This often manifests in studies
that adopt a mixed-method approach, utilizing a combination of different data types and analysis
methods. Ultimately. the pragmatist adopts a problem-solving mindset, seeking practical ways to
achieve diverse research aims.

What are strategies of inquiry for research?


Once we choose the approach, we choose the design or strategy for inquiry.
Quantitative design:
1. Experimental and quasi-experimental
2. Single subject - where experiment is administered to a single individual or small group of
individuals.
3. Correlation design - Researcher uses correlated statistics to investigate the relationship
between two Or more variables.
4. Survey - provides a quantitative or numeric description of a population's trends, attitudes, or
opinions by studying a sample of that population. It includes studies using questionnaires or
structured interviews for data collection generalize from a sample to a population
5. Experimental research - seeks to determine if a specific treatment influences an outcome. The
researcher assesses this by providing a specific treatment to one group. withholding it from
another, and then determining how both groups scored on an outcome

Qualitative design:
Descriptive method - an approach to analysis where the researcher stays close to the data, uses
limited frameworks and interpretation for explaining the data, and catalogues the information into
themes.
Narrative research - inquiry from the humanities in which the researcher studies the lives of
individuals and asks one or more participants to provide stories about their lives. , in the end, the
narrative combines views from the participant's life with those of the researcher's life in a
collaborative narrative.
Phenomenological research - is a design of inquiry coming from philosophy and psychology in
which the researcher describes the lived experiences of individuals about a phenomenon as
described by participants. It culminates in the essence of several individuals who have all
experienced the phenomenon.
Grounded theory - It is from sociology in which the researcher derives a general, abstract theory
of a process, action, or interaction grounded in the views of participants. It involves using multiple
stages of data collection and the refinement and interrelationship of categories of information to
form a theory
Case studies - They are a design of inquiry found in many fields, in which the researcher develops
an in-depth analysis of a case, which could be a program, event, activity, process, or one or more
individuals.

Mixed design:
1. Convergent mixed methods design - Here the researcher converges or merges quantitative and
qualitative data to provide a comprehensive analysis of the research problem. The investigator
typically collects both forms of data at roughly the same time and then integrates the information in
the interpretation of the overall results. Contradictions or incongruent findings are explained or
further probed in this design.
Page 7 of 25
2. Explanatory sequential mixed methods - A design in which the researcher first conducts
quantitative research, analyzes the results, and then builds on the results to explain them in more
detail with qualitative research It has a sequential structure because the initial quantitative phase is
followed by the qualitative phase.
3. Exploratory sequential mixed methods - It is the reverse sequence from the explanatory
sequential design. In the exploratory sequential design the researcher first begins with a qualitative
research phase and explores the views of participants. The data are then analyzed and the
information used to build into a second, quantitative phase.

The next point is the specific research method to be used.


It involves how data is collected, interpreted and organized. Data could be collected using
instruments, measurements, observing people, gather information on behavior, interviews, surveys
etc.
Quantitative approach - Predetermined, experiment and instrument based, attitude data,
observational data, census data, statistical analysis and interpretation.
Qualitative approach - Open ended questions, observation, interview data, document data, audio
visual data, text and image analysis, themes and interpretations.
Mixed method - Open ended and closed ended questions. multiple forms of data collection,
statistical and text analysis.

Issues with Higher education and research:


• Declining interest in admission into science courses, science careers, and pursuit of science, as
indicated by flight of bright students to other branches of human knowledge and careers.
• Research in science is viewed as a long drawn process, expensive and strenuous.
• Research in science is often experiment intensive and is very expensive.
• Declining standards of teaching Natural Science, Social Science and Humanities, particularly of
Biology at school, undergraduate and postgraduate levels.
• Advanced maths involving calculus, geometry and trigonometry is no longer deemed necessary.
• The taking over of educational training, from main stream schools and colleges, by coaching
centers for getting admission into professional courses.
• Conflict of interest between personal and professional lives of students, practitioners and
preachers of science.(India is 3rd largest exporter of beef)
• Increasing perception of science as an esoteric activity unrelated to daily life experience as well as
social. economic and cultural problems.
• Unmanageable learning burden for students and surprisingly for teachers
• The dichotomy in the level of joy between doing science and probing science
• Pursuing science without scientific method,
• Confused thinking and wrong perception of science especially biology as an unethical activity,
etc.
• Poor Infrastructure in terms of accessible and affordable facilities including library, laboratory,
supportive administration etc.on one hand and uninspiring and incompetent Faculty on the other
hand are two major reasons for the sorry state of affairs in HEIs of our country.

Unbearable pressure??
• Jason Altom (6 October 1971 - 15 August 1998) was an American PhD student working in the
research group of Nobel laureate Elias James Corey at Harvard University. He killed himself by
taking potassium cyanide in 1998, citing in his suicide note "abusive research supervisors" as one

Page 8 of 25
reason for taking his life. Altom was studying a complex natural product and felt enormous
pressure to finish the molecule before starting his academic career.
• Anik Paul was a PhD student at Purdue University, and he committed suicide by jumping into a
river.
• The annual incidence of suicide among Chinese doctoral students high. The statistics for doctoral
student suicides over the past 12 years was reviewed and administered a questionnaire survey and
interviews to relatives and friends of doctoral students who committed suicide. The results
indicated that suicide among doctoral students is closely related to academic pressure, the teacher-
student relationship, and the academic environment, reflecting the current condition of China's
doctoral tutorial system.
• Four in 10 UK PhD students at high risk of suicide. Loneliness and intellectual insecurity
highlighted as prime reasons for elevated suicide risk among doctoral researchers.
• A 28-year-old PhD (Doctor of Philosophy) student on Wednesday died by suicide inside her
hostel room at Rajasthan Central University, Ajmer, police said.

So, what are other issues with PhD?


• It is a long journey. You need passion, patience and commitment.
• In practice, it is not anywhere resembling an ideal activity. There is no joy in its pursuit, in over
90% of the cases. People find it too strenuous and arduous.
• In most cases the system is moth eaten and is a crumbling structure.
• There are very few real mentors who nurture students, departments etc. Incompetence, lack of
scholarship and talent among faculty is appalling.
• Most of people in academics are there for getting career benefits and not to achieve anything
worthwhile. Most of them do not inspire anybody.
• Academia has become a Ponzi scheme and doing a good PhD is not worth the torture and agony.
• There is highest unemployment/underemployment among PhDs.
• Funding is very restrictive and pattern less.
• Leaders have no vision. Mafias hijack funding, awards etc. 1% of people get all the funds, awards
and patronage.

So is doing PhD a dark world or is there something more?


• A contribution to the field
• A sense of achievement
• Experience in perseverance, commitment and hard work.
• Development of creativity and innovation
Progress in career, fame and name

" Research is a structured systematic study carried out through acceptable Scientific Methodology
to solve problems that results in verifiable, valuable and valid proposals"
Research may lead to new Theory, Proposal, Correlation, Design or Method or even a new
Product.
Making a rigorous and relevant contribution to knowledge in an area.
Organized inquiry to provide solutions to a problem
Understanding cause and effect of a phenomenon or uncovering a new phenomenon
A careful and systematic investigation in some field to establish facts or principles Scientific and
scholarly communication of the results.
Make things happen.

Page 9 of 25
We need reasoning to come to a conclusion about the research work undertaken. To provide
hypothesis, facts predictions etc. from the data collected and analyzed.

Reasoning: Reasoning is the process of using existing knowledge to draw conclusions, make
predictions, or construct explanations. Three approaches are possible:
1 Deductive Reasoning:
Deductive reasoning starts with the assertion of a general rule and proceeds from there to a
guaranteed specific conclusion. Deductive reasoning moves from the general rule to the specific
application: In deductive reasoning, if the original assertions are true, then the conclusion must also
be true
Consider If x=5 and y = -3
Then 2x+y = 7
By logic, 2x+y must equal 7. It cannot be anything else
We can write this generally as
IfA (is true) and B (is true)
Then
C (is true)

Consider this
IF medical research helps treat people it must be funded.
IF treatment helps treatment of infertility
So IVF research must be funded.
All birds have feathers
Crow is a bird
Crow has feathers.
Be careful!! Reverse need not be true. For example. if 2x+y=7, you cant say anything about x or y.

If propositions are sound, the conclusion can be certain.


Deductive reasoning cannot really increase human knowledge because the conclusions yielded by
deductive reasoning are tautologies-statements that are contained within the premises and virtually
self-evident. Therefore, while with deductive reasoning we can make observations and expand
implications. we cannot make predictions about future or otherwise non-observed phenomena.

Try this
All birds can fly
Penguin is a bird
So penguin can fly!!
What's wrong here? (incorrect premise)
Or Birds can fly
Moths can fly
So moths are birds!!
(unrelated premises)
Deductive reasoning is used in every day life. If it rains carry an umbrella. It is cloudy and rain any
time. So carry umbrella.

2 Inductive Reasoning:
Inductive reasoning starts with observations that are limited in scope, and proceeds to a more
generalized conclusion that may be true. Confidence in the validity of a conclusion can vary
Page 10 of 25
widely, depending on the quality and number of observations that support it. In inductive approach
the premises are there to support the result or conclusion but they do no ensure it. Therefore the
conclusion is known as hypothesis. Example
• Consider the growth rate of population of a country in the last 20 years.
• With inductive reasoning you can predict the population increase the next 5 years.
Note that this prediction may not come true. There may be many factors. A war, a drought, a
pandemic, etc.
• The revenue goal of the company ABC in Q3, has exceeded in the last 5 years. So this year the
revenue goal is likely to be exceeded in Q3. (general inductive reasoning)
• 90% of the students of college XYZ have a salary package offer of 10L per annum in the last
three years. Shyam is a student of XYZ. So he is likely to get an offer of 10L. (Statistical
Inductive reasoning)
• Every time I visit Delhi I get an attack of asthma. This does not happen when I visit other cities.
Therefore there is something in Delhi, that triggers my asthma. (Casual inductive reasoning)
• Anybody who breaks into a building must have opportunity, motive and means.
Sunil, was near building “Brindavan Gardens “ when the owners were away(Opportunity), he
hated the owners( motive) and had lock picks with him (means). So likely he broke open their
house. (induction by confirmation)

Deductive reasoning: Deductive reasoning uses theories and beliefs to rationalize and prove a
specific conclusion. The goal is to prove a fact.
Inductive reasoning: Inductive thinking uses experience and proven observations to guess the
outcome. The goal is to predict a likely outcome.

3 Abductive Reasoning:
Abductive research starts with incomplete observations and continues to the closest possible
explanation for it. While abductive reasoning allows for more freedom than inductive or deductive
reasoning, it can also result in several incorrect conclusions before you uncover the true answer.
Abduction is believed to be a method of research in which the logic of discovery is highlighted over
the logic of justification. Very commonly used in medical diagnosis.

Consider
The lawn is wet
If it rains the lawn gets wet
Therefore it rained.
The conclusion can be true. However, though both premises are true, still the conclusion that it
rained, may or may not be true. The lawn could have been wet, because a water pipe broke.

Patient has low grade fever , cough and breathlessness.


Covid is widespread in the area.
So the patient is likely to have covid. (However, the premise and information is incomplete. So this
conclusion needs further investigation and tests to prove it correct. The patient may have a viral
infection that is not covid.)

My car doesn’t start in the morning. So my battery must be dead (this may not be true. There could
be other reasons why the car is not starting) .

Page 11 of 25
Ethics:
• The discipline dealing with what is good or bad and with moral duty and obligation
• A set of moral principles or values put in place for the betterment of all
• Conforming to professional standards of conduct
• “Ethics is the disciplined study or morality, and morality asks the question, what should one’s
behavior be”.
• “Greek ethos ‘character’ is the systematic study of value concepts—good, bad, right, wrong and
the general principles that justify applying these concepts”.

Is ethics same as LAW?


Ethics is the responsibility of the INDIVIDUAL . It is more than adherence to LAW. A person may
indulge in an unethical practice, but unless caught, law cannot come into force !

So what does ethics have to do with research?


Research ethics:
• Ethics are the set of rules that govern our expectations of our own and others’ behavior.
• Research ethics are the set of ethical guidelines that guides us on how scientific research should
be conducted and disseminated.
• Research ethics govern the standards of conduct for scientific researchers as a guideline for
responsibly conducting the research.
• Research that involves human subjects or contributors rears distinctive and multifaceted ethical
concerns.
• Research ethics is unambiguously concerned in the examination of ethical issues that are upraised
when individuals are involved as participants in the study.
• Ethics is about creating a mutually respectful relationship with the research population
• Subjects are pleased to participate
• Community regards the conclusions as constructive

Why is research ethics important?


• It is a reflection of respect for those who ‘take part’ in research
• It ensures that no unreasonable, unsafe or thoughtless demands are made by researchers
• It ensures sufficient knowledge is shared by all concerned
Page 12 of 25
• It imposes a common standard in all the above respect
• It has become the norm as an expectation for research activity
• A professional requirement for practitioners in some disciplines e.g. psychology
• A requirement to comply with external agencies to obtain funding
• Ensure that researchers can be held accountable to the public

An ethically insensitive researcher:


Can leave the research setting in pandemonium including the researcher , the institution , the cause
that he/she seeks to promote .

Three important objectives of research ethics:


• To guard/protect human participants, their dignity, rights and welfare
• To make sure that research is directed in a manner that assists welfares of persons, groups and/or
civilization as a whole.
• To inspect particular research events and schemes for their ethical reliability, considering issues
such as the controlling risk, protection of privacy and the progression of informed consent.

What Compromises Ethics or makes people ignore it?


• Power
• Greed
• Fear
• Not-in-my-back-yard (NIMBY)
• Everybody is doing it
• It does not hurt anybody

Ethical principles of research:

• Honesty : Being honest with the beneficiaries and respondents, about the findings and
methodology of the research, honest with other direct and indirect stakeholders, honest with data.

Page 13 of 25
Case study 1 : Two researchers have made some measurements on a new material. The data points
are as shown. To prove their hypothesis the results should lie on the curve shown. The two students
considered omitting the two data points which were off the theoretical curve.

• It is not ethical as honest data has not been presented.


• Should declare the outliers
• Explain reason for outliers.

2. Integrity
• Keep your promises and agreements
• Act with sincerity
• Strive for consistency of thought and action
• Transparency in conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest
• Protection of human subjects in the conduct of research
• Humane care of animals in the conduct of research
• Adherence to the mutual responsibilities between investigators and their research teams.

A conflict of interest in research exists when the individual has interests in the outcome of the
research that may lead to a personal advantage and that might therefore, in actuality or appearance,
compromise the integrity of the research. The most compelling example is competition between
financial reward and the integrity of the research process. Religious, political, or social beliefs can
also be undisclosed sources of research bias.

Case study 2 : A group of researchers gathered data from teenagers to study impact of pregnancy
age to fetal abnormalities, with the agreement that it would be used for pure research. They sold the
data to a pharmaceutical company that developed tests to detect fetal abnormalities, as the company
promised to fund their lab. Discuss.

3. Objectivity
Avoid bias in experimental design, data analysis, data interpretation, peer review, personnel
decisions, grant writing, expert testimony, and other aspects of research. Objectivity means being
objective or impartial and not being influenced by personal experiences, value judgments, or
preconceived notions. It is the opposite of subjectivity, which is an outlook governed by one’s
personally held beliefs, opinions, or tastes. Objectivity is free from all bias. A bias is an unfair
tendency to prefer one outcome, thing, person, or group of people over another.

What are the types of research bias one can have?


• Confirmation bias is the result of people seeking information that supports their preconceptions.
Deductive logic is used to support a preconception as people look for and believe that which is in
Page 14 of 25
agreement with their already existing beliefs and values. Evidence that challenges or refutes one's
preconceptions is dismissed or ignored altogether.
• Observer bias is when systematic disparities result from the data collected by humans. This bias
can occur because there is variability between observations made by different people.
• Selection bias is when a group in a research study somehow differs from the larger population
they represent.

Case study 3 : A researcher is conducting a research on the impact of physical disability on the
social a person. The researcher herself is a physically disable person, who has undergone
experiences that made her believe, that disabled people are at a disadvantage and are treated
unfairly, resulting in them having a low economic status. So , the sample of participants of her study
all included disabled participants who were mostly involved in jobs requiring manual labor, where
they were at a disadvantage even without any discrimination, because of the very nature of the job.
At the end of the study, she concluded that the economic status of disabled people was always less
than those not disabled.

4. Informed Consent
• Informed consent means that a person knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently gives consent to
participate in a research.
• Informed consent is related to the autonomous right of the individual to participate in the
research.
• Informing the participant about the research objective, their role, benefits/harms (if any) etc.

It is unethical to obtain responses/feedback/answers etc. without telling the respondent the use of
the information collected. Very important in
• Obtaining response through Questionnaires, Schedules and interviews and Feedbacks, Practical
experiments (such as effect of a drug, psychological response in a game etc.)
• When an environment is created for a particular study and participants would be observed in that
environment.
• Consent should be without undue threat or inducement and with enough information. Preferably
written consent to be obtained.
• In social research where people, their opinion, behavior, life is involved, the researcher has to be
extra careful. Belmont Report (1979)

Case study 4 : A group of students planned a research project on the detection of fetal
abnormalities in the second trimester, by ultrasound scanning. They collected data from the scan
room without informing the mothers.
• Unethical as informed consent was not taken
• Should have informed mothers of their intent even though there is no particular advantage/
disadvantage to the mother in doing so.

5. Respect for respondent/participant


• Includes autonomy, which requires that those who are capable of deliberation about their personal
goals should be treated with respect for their capacity for self-determination
• Protection of persons with impaired or diminished autonomy, which requires that those who are
dependent or vulnerable be afforded security against harm or abuse.
• The participant must be fully informed of the research objectives, procedures, risks, and potential
benefits.

Page 15 of 25
• The participation should be fully voluntary without fear of repercussions.

Case study 5 : A researcher undertakes research to study effect of oil- pulling on Alzheimer
patients. Since these patients are compromised , consent has to be obtained from their care-givers.
Utmost respect for the participants and care givers is necessary to see that their vulnerability is not
taken advantage of.

Case study 6 : A researcher wanted to study the problem solving skills of senior citizens that would
enable them to get an A grade in a college course and compare their performance with regular
younger college students. He goes to many senior homes, and tells the elderly people that he would
teach them to play video games, when in actuality he would study their problem solving skills while
playing the game.

6. Beneficence and minimizing harm


Maximize the benefits of the participants. Ethical obligation to maximize possible benefits and to
minimize possible harms to the respondents.

What are the different types of harm that can affect a respondent?
• Psychological harm: Sensitive questions or tasks may trigger negative emotions such as shame
or anxiety.
• Social harm: Participation can involve social risks, public embarrassment, or stigma.
• Physical harm: Pain or injury can result from the study procedures.
• Legal harm: Reporting sensitive data could lead to legal risks or a breach of privacy.

Case study 7 : A researcher wishes to study the effect of prolonged vaping on the mental health of
adolescents.
The questioning can bring shame, guilt and loss of dignity to the respondents. So the researcher
should assure the participants that their response is confidential and also help them to seek
counselling.

Case study 8 : A child is suffering from a rare cancer. A team of doctors who know that the child
will not survive for more than a week, want to study if antibodies can be produced by a healthy
body if the cancer cells are injected into the healthy person. They tell the mother, that if she
consents to have the cancer cells injected, the probability of antibodies to be produced is very high
and this can be used to save her child. The mother consents. The child dies after 5 days and the
mother dies after 462 days because of the cancer she got infected with.

7. Confidentiality
Following information has to be given:
• Introduction and objective of the research
• Purpose and procedure of the research
• Anticipated advantages, benefits/harm from the research (if any)
• Use of research
• Their role in research
• Right to refuse or withdraw
• Methods which will be used to protect anonymity and confidentiality of the participant
• Freedom to not answer any question/withdraw from the research
• Who to contact if the participant needs additional information about the research.
Page 16 of 25
8. Protecting anonymity
The identity of the participants must be kept anonymous. This means not revealing name, address,
case, religion etc. of the respondent.

Case study 9 : A researcher plans to compare alcohol abuse among college freshman and seniors.
Because she may want to reinterview some subjects later, she plans to write their names and phone
numbers on their data sheets. She plans to promise confidentiality, so that subjects will trust her, and
to keep the data in her dorm room in a locked file.

Case study 10 : A group of undergraduate students collected data from a group of bank officers,
with their consent, regarding their working hours and salary with regards major health issues of
prevalence of diabetes and high blood pressure. Subsequently the researchers gave the same data to
another group who were in need of same data variables to study the impact of working hours and
salary on productivity.

• Unethical as violating principles of consent and confidentiality


• Data can be used for a secondary purpose which was not first considered as long as
- informed consent for sharing has been given
- identities anonymized
- due consideration to access restrictions

9. Compensation for injury


Responsibility for what happens to the subject (federal law requires that subjects be informed about
compensation). When an injury occurs as a result of participation in a research study it is called a
“research related injury” and these are sometimes inevitable. Such injuries may range from
relatively minor harms (such as bruises due to a study procedure or vomiting due to a new drug) to
major injuries (such as organ damage or temporary physical disability) to catastrophic injuries (such
as permanent disability or death).
Injuries can be physical, psychological/emotional, social or economic and may require only acute or
emergency care, or long term medical care. Compensation is defined as ‘the act or process of
making amends for something’ or ‘something, typically money, awarded to someone in recognition
of loss, suffering or injury’. ICMR guidelines specify that this be an essential element of the
Informed consent document (ICD). Research participants who suffer physical injury as a result of
their participation are entitled to financial or other assistance to compensate them equitably for any
temporary or permanent impairment or disability, according to the guidelines. In case of death, their
dependents are entitled to material compensation.

Case study 11: In March 2006, eight healthy volunteers in a phase I trial received a T cell aganist at
Parexel's clinical pharmacology research unit at Northwick Park Hospital, London. This was the
first human trial of TeGenero's TGN1412, a new humanised monoclonal superagonist of the CD28
T cell surface receptor, designed to mitigate autoimmune and immunodeficiency disease. The six
men who received the active component rapidly developed catastrophic multisystem failure; the
remaining two, who received a placebo, were unharmed. ( So the failure was clearly due to the
active component)
The participants who had developed serious complications received very little compensation for
their injuries because Parexel, who conducted the trial for TeGenero, maintained that it had carried
out all procedures correctly and hence was not responsible for the unforeseen reactions caused by
Page 17 of 25
the drug and the insurance cover (£ 2 million) that TeGenero (the sponsor) had, was not enough to
cover the long-term health consequences of this disaster, as the volunteers are at risk of developing
life-threatening conditions such as autoimmune diseases or cancer later in life.

10. Authorship
Authors of any research report/paper/publication should be only the people who are involved in the
research. Data collectors, technicians need not be authors.

Case study 12: Four friends decide to work together on a research project during the vacation. One
of them went abroad during the vacation and did not contribute to the research. The friends include
all 4 names in a presentation made at a scientific congress
• Unethical as only those who contributed intellectually should be cited as authors
• Those who contribute in other ways may be acknowledged

11. Respect IPRs


Honor patents, copyrights, and other forms of intellectual property. Do not use unpublished data,
methods, or results without permission. Give proper acknowledgement or credit for all contributions
to research. Use of copyrighted images without acknowledgement , in publication is unethical.

Case study 13 : This case has arisen over a dispute where Cipla has filed a patent application for a
generic drug ‘Erlopic’ which was manufactured using a polymorphic compound of Erlotinib
Hydrochloride. While patent for Erlotinib Hydrochloride was already been given to another
company Roche. Therefore, Roche has filed an infringement application against Cipla. But Cipla
claimed that it had not used Erlotinib Hydrochloride in its medicine ‘Erlopic’ but had only used a
polymorphic compound of Erlotinib Hydrochloride. It was finally held that Cipla has infringed the
patent of Erlotinib Hydrochloride granted to Roche as any preparation of a polymorphic compound
of Erlonitibactually first does involve the manufacturing of Erlotinib Hydrochloride. The patent
application of Erlotinib Hydrochloride also has stated that its compound form can exist in different
polymorphic forms and any such forms will be covered by its patent.

Case study 14 : In this case, the defendant who is a YouTuber and a social media influencer has
made objectionable and disparaging comments on ‘Parachute hair oil’ in one of his videos and has
used the parachute hair oil bottle in his video. The plaintiff Marico Ltd. who is the owner of
Parachute Oil Brand has applied for the removal of the video on the grounds that the YouTuber
through his video has harmed the goodwill of the company and has also violated its trademark
‘Parachute’. The court while interpreting Section 29 of The Trademarks Act, 1999 held that
defendant has violated the exclusive trademark rights of the plaintiff by not seeking prior
permission or consent of the plaintiff, and thus, the court ordered the removal of video.

12. Responsible Publication


Publish in order to advance research and scholarship, not to advance just your own career. Avoid
wasteful and duplicative publication. Plagiarism means using someone else’s work without giving
them proper credit. In academic writing, plagiarizing involves using words, ideas, or information
from a source without citing it correctly. In practice, this can mean a few different things.

Different ways plagiarism is done


• Copying parts of a text word for word, without quotation marks -It makes it seem like these are
your own words.
Page 18 of 25
• Paraphrasing a text by changing a few words or altering the sentence structure, without citing the
source - It makes it seem like you came up with the idea, when in fact you just rephrased someone
else’s idea.
• Paper contains significant portion from another, word for word.
• Mix content from different sources – Mashup
• Include citations of non-existent sources or misquoted sources.
• Self plagiarism – take content from your own published work, without citation.

Case study 15: Chemistry Professor Accused of Plagiarizing More Than 70 Articles University
Executive Council of the Sri Venkateswara University banned their chemistry professor accused of
plagiarizing not just one or two research papers, but almost seventy of them. Almost all these
research papers were published between the years 2004 to 2007. The institution banned the
professor from taking any research guidance along with the upcoming examination works.

Case study 16: In the year 2002, in October, Late President APJ Abdul Kalam received a letter
from Stanford University. The letter claimed that physicist; Prof. B S Rajput has blatantly copied
from other sources. One of the signatories of this letter was Renata Kallosh. She claimed that an
entire research paper of hers has been used without her acknowledgment. Stanford was shocked by
the fact the person who committed the heinous act was not punished. During this time, Prof. Rajput
was the Vice-Chancellor of Kumaon University. However, after the investigation and after the
completion of the investigation, Prof. Rajput has to resign from his post.

13. Justice
The researcher has an obligation to distribute benefits and burdens fairly, to treat equals equally, and
to give reasons for differential treatment based on widely accepted criteria for just ways to
distribute benefits and burdens. This conception of justice embodied in the Belmont Report is
essentially that of distributive justice, a notion pertinent to situations that call for the fair allocation
of society's benefits and burdens.
In the context of clinical studies, fair allocation is best characterized as equity. That is, because
research carries both benefits and burdens, fairness requires that no one group—gender, racial,
ethnic, or socioeconomic group—receive disproportionate benefits or bear disproportionate burdens
of research. It is not readily apparent, however, what is to count as "proportionate" or
"disproportionate" benefits and burdens.
One aspect of justice in research is thus the requirement of a "fitting" match: the population from
which research subjects are drawn should reflect the population to be served by the actual or
projected results of the research. The selection of research subjects needs to be scrutinized
in order to determine whether some classes (e.g., welfare patients, particular racial and ethnic
minorities, or persons confined to institutions) are being systematically selected simply because of
their easy availability, their compromised position, or their manipulability, rather than for reasons
directly related to the problem being studied.

Case study 17 : The Tuskegee Experiment, also known as the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, was a
deeply racist and unethical clinical research study that took place between 1932 and 1972 in
Tuskegee, Alabama, under the auspices of the United States Public Health Service (USPHS). The
so-called Tuskegee Experiment involved a group of 399 African American men diagnosed with
syphilis as well as 201 uninfected men, who served as the control group. The study participants
were told that they were being treated for “bad blood,” a term that was commonly used in the South
to describe a variety of illnesses, including syphilis, anemia, and general fatigue.
Page 19 of 25
However, the men were never informed either that they had syphilis or that they were part of a
clinical study. The study was designed to be observational in nature. This meant that the researchers
would not provide any treatment to the participants despite the fact that penicillin, the first effective
treatment for syphilis, was already being widely used in the 1940s. The study participants were
periodically examined, had blood samples taken, and were given sham or placebo “treatments,” but
were never actually treated for syphilis. In fact, involved physicians actually contacted other doctors
in the area to prevent them from treating the study’s participants.
The study was initially intended to last for only six months, but it was extended several times,
eventually lasting for 40 years. During this period, the study participants suffered grievously from
the debilitating effects of untreated syphilis. These included blindness, deafness, neurological
damage, other severe health problems, and death.

14. Animal Care


Show proper respect and care for animals when using them in research. Do not conduct unnecessary
or poorly designed animal experiments. Although animal research remains a necessary part of
modern research, current methods are far from perfect. At the moment, researchers often need to
cull and perform autopsies on animals to see how diseases develop on a molecular level. This
means that an animal needs to be killed for every data point recorded, so some studies might use
dozens of mice to get reliable data on disease progression.
Each year around four million animals are experimented on inside British laboratories. Dogs, cats,
horses, monkeys, rats, rabbits and other animals are used, as well as hundreds of thousands of
genetically modified mice. The most common types of experiment either attempt to test how safe a
substance is (toxicity testing) or attempt to investigate human diseases and how they could be
treated (disease research).

Case study 18:


• Monkeys being brain-damaged with a toxic chemical and given the street drug ecstasy.
• Pregnant sheep and their unborn lambs being surgically mutilated, partially suffocated and then
killed.
• Rats and mice being poisoned with an industrial chemical for around six months to induce cancer.
3 Genetically modified mice being bred to suffer limb paralysis, anxiety and motor dysfunction,
then suspended by their tails to assess abnormal behavior.

15. Competence of researcher


The researcher should be capable to carry out the procedures. A researcher who lacks competence
should not undertake the research, since it would imply that the work will be done by someone else.
This should not be confused with hiring associates, assistants, students, public to help in the
research.
Consider the case of a researcher who is in Electronics engineering,
being the co-author of a paper on marketing strategy for adult diapers!!

Research Misconduct - The Big three


Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or
reviewing research, or in reporting research results.
(1) Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.
(2) Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or
changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the
research record.

Page 20 of 25
(3) Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without
giving appropriate credit.
Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.

Other types of misconduct


• Piracy : infringement of a copyright
• Submitting/Publishing the same paper to different journals
• Not informing a collaborator of your intent to file a patent in order to make sure that you are the
sole inventor
• Including a colleague as an author on a paper in return for a favor even though the colleague did
not make a serious contribution to the paper
• Trimming outliers from a data set without discussing your reasons in paper
• Using an inappropriate statistical technique in order to enhance the significance of your research
• Bypassing the peer review process and announcing your results through a press conference
without giving peers adequate information to review your work
• Conducting a review of the literature that fails to acknowledge contributions of others
• Stretching the truth on a grant application in order to convince reviewers that your project will
make a significant contribution to the field
• Giving the same research project to two graduate students in order to see who can do it the fastest
• Overworking, neglecting, or exploiting research students
• Making derogatory comments and personal attacks in your review of author's submission
• Making significant deviations from the research protocol approved by the Review Board without
informing the committee
• Not reporting an adverse event in a human research experiment
• Wasting animals in research
• Exposing students and staff to biological risks
• Rejecting a manuscript for publication without even reading it.
• Sabotaging someone's work
• Rigging an experiment so you know how it will turn out
• Deliberately overestimating the clinical significance of a new drug in order to obtain economic
benefits

Advantages of research ethics:


• Research ethics promote the aims of research.
• It increases trust among the researcher and the respondent.
• It is important to adhere to ethical principles in order to protect the dignity, rights and welfare of
research participants.
• Researchers can be held accountable and answerable for their actions.
• Ethics promote social and moral values.
• Promotes the ambitions of research and motivates people to strive for benefit of mankind
• Ethical standards uphold the values that are vital to cooperative work, such as belief,
answerability, mutual respect, and impartiality.
• Ethical norms in research also aid to construct public upkeep for research. People are more likely
to trust a research project if they can trust the worth and reliability of research.

Discussions
Case 1 : The research protocol for a study of a drug on hypertension requires the administration of
the drug at different doses to 50 laboratory mice, with chemical and behavioral tests to determine
Page 21 of 25
toxic effects. Tom has almost finished the experiment for Dr. Q. He has only 5 mice left to test.
However, he really wants to finish his work in time to go to Florida on spring break with his
friends, who are leaving tonight. He has injected the drug in all 50 mice but has not completed all of
the tests. He therefore decides to extrapolate from the 45 completed results to produce the 5
additional results. His actions would constitute a form of research misconduct. But note that
misconduct is only when researcher intends to manipulate. In this case that intention was not there.
So is this misconduct?
Case 2 : Dr. T has just discovered a mathematical error in his paper that has been accepted for
publication in a journal. The error does not affect the overall results of his research, but it is
potentially misleading. The journal has just gone to press, so it is too late to catch the error
before it appears in print. In order to avoid embarrassment, Dr. T decides to ignore the error.
This may not be considered as misconduct. However, Dr. T should inform the editors and publish an
errata.
Case 3 : A group of medical students conducted a research on the
awareness of diabetic diet in medical clinic participants. Their research was recognized as the best
undergraduate research and later they submitted the same research paper to two different journals to
see which journal publishes it first. Unethical as it would result in "inadvertent double-counting or
inappropriate weighting of the results of a single study, which distorts the available evidence. It
would give a false idea of the number of publications in a given area -wasting of resources on the
review and publication process .
Case 4: Students are required to prepare a research proposal during their undergraduate program.
Prem developed the idea for his project and discussed with a friend. Several months later, he found
that his idea had been submitted as a research proposal by his friend without his knowledge.
Unethical – Plagiarism, Should be made co-author

Clinical Research vs Social Science Research


The broad field of clinical research includes research in field of medicine, related sciences, bio
medical engineering, etc. It is a research study intended to test safety, quality, effectiveness of new
and/or existing or old medicines, medical devices and/or treatment options, using human
participants .
The research activities involve invasive and non- invasive procedures that may include surgical
intervention, removal of body tissues/ fluids, administration of chemical substances, observation,
administration of questions etc. It normally has 4 phases in research.
PHASE I: A new drug, vaccine or medical device is tested in a small group of healthy persons for
the very first time. The aim is to determine the general safety, the correct dosage and negative
effects.
PHASE II: Clinical trials of the new drug, vaccine or medical device is carried out in a larger
group (several hundred people)
PHASE III : Testing is taken to several thousand people.
PHASE IV: Clinical trials done to several thousand people after the new drug, vaccine or medical
drug has been registered and licensed for sale by the Medical Control Council of the respective
country.

Social Science research is a systematic recording and analysis of data that may lead to
generalization of principles and theories resulting in prediction and possibly management of
behavior and events in individuals and society. The research activities review of literature, review of
data, interviews, focus groups, observations, administration of survey instruments, or tests etc. It
normally has 8 phases of research.
Page 22 of 25
Phase1: Problem Identi cation
Phase2: Problem De nition
Phase3: Development of a theoretical framework
Phase4: Hypothesis formulation or literature overview
Phase5: Research Design
Phase6: Data Collection
Phase7: Data Analysis
Phase8: Report writing and publicising results

Evolution Of Research Ethics, Codes And Regulations: International Landscape

Nuremberg Trials : From 1945 to 1946, Nazi Germany leaders stood trial for crimes against peace,
war crimes, crimes against humanity, and conspiracy to commit any of the foregoing crimes. 23
people were tried (20 doctors and 3 administrators). Seven were sentenced to death by hanging;
nine were given prison terms and seven were found not guilty.
Key principles in the Nuremberg Code:
• Voluntary consent of the human subject – capacity to consent, freedom from coercion and an
understanding of risks and benefits involved; and freedom to bring the experiment to an end.
• Minimization of risk and harm.
• The science and design of the study must yield fruitful outcomes.

1964 - Adopted by the World Medical Association


Ten out of the 12 ethics research markers from the Nuremberg Codes were adopted.
The central point in DoH is the principle that the well-being of the participant should take
precedence over the interests of science

Belmont report : This is a major outcome of the Tuskegee case. As a result of the Tuskedee case
the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioural
Research was established The report sets forth the principles underlying ethically acceptable
conduct of research involving human participants. Report is also the basis for the US Federal

Page 23 of 25
fi
fi
Regulations governing research The Belmont report emphasizes on the principles of respect, justice,
and beneficence.

Council for International Organizations of Medical science (CIOMS) Guidelines (1982):


The Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) is an international non-
governmental organization of 40 international, national, and associate member groups representing
the biomedical science community. It was jointly established by the World Health Organization
(WHO) and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 1949.

The topics in CIOMS Guidelines include:


• Ethical justification and scientific validity of biomedical research including human subjects
• Informed consent
• Standards for external review
• Research in communities with limited resources

Ethics Committee:
This institution is responsible for establishing an EC to ensure an appropriate and sustainable
system for quality ethical review and monitoring. The EC is responsible for scientific and ethical
review of research proposals. ECs are entrusted with the initial review of research proposals prior to
their initiation, and also have a continuing responsibility to regularly monitor the approved research
to ensure ethical compliance during the conduct of research. The EC should be competent and
independent in its functioning.
• ECs should be multi-disciplinary and multi-sectoral.
• There should be adequate representation of age and gender.
• Preferably 50% of the members should be non-affiliated or from outside the institution.
• The number of members in an EC should preferably be between seven and 15 and a minimum of
five members should be present to meet the quorum requirements.
• The EC should have a balance between medical and non-medical members/technical and non-
technical members, depending upon the needs of the institution.

Functions of EC:
• EC has to ensure protection of the dignity, rights, safety and well-being of the research
participants
Page 24 of 25
• EC must ensure ethical conduct of research by the investigator team
• EC is responsible for declaration of conflicts of interest to the Chairperson
• EC should perform its function through competent initial and continuing review of all scientific,
ethical, medical and social aspects of research proposals received by it in an objective, timely and
independent manner
• EC should assist in the development and education of the research community in the given
institute
• EC should ensure that privacy of the individual and confidentiality of data including the
documents of EC meetings is protected
• EC reviews progress reports, final reports and AE/SAE and gives needful suggestions
• Regarding care of the participants and risk minimization procedures, if applicable
• EC should recommend appropriate compensation for research related injury, wherever required
• EC should carry out monitoring visits at study sites as and when needed

Page 25 of 25

You might also like