What's trust got to do with research: why not accountability?

Morẹ́nikẹ́ Oluwátóyìn Foláyan, Bridget Haire
{"title":"What's trust got to do with research: why not accountability?","authors":"Morẹ́nikẹ́ Oluwátóyìn Foláyan, Bridget Haire","doi":"10.3389/frma.2023.1237742","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the intricate dynamics of trust, power, and vulnerability in the relationship between researchers and study participants/communities in the field of bioethics. The power and knowledge imbalances between researchers and participants create a structural vulnerability for the latter. While trust-building is important between researchers and study participants/communities, the consenting process can be challenging, often burdening participants with power abrogation. Trust can be breached. The paper highlights the contractual nature of the research relationship and argues that trust alone cannot prevent exploitation as power imbalances and vulnerabilities persist. To protect participants, bioethics guidance documents promote accountability and ethical compliance. These documents uphold fairness in the researcher-participant relationship and safeguard the interests of socially vulnerable participants. The paper also highlights the role of shared decision-making and inclusive deliberation with diverse stakeholders and recommends that efforts should be made by researchers to clarify roles and responsibilities, while research regulatory agents should transform the research-participant relationship into a legal-based contract governed by accountability principles. While trust remains important, alternative mechanisms may be needed to ensure ethical research practices and protect the interests of participants and communities. Striking a balance between trust and accountability is crucial in this regard.","PeriodicalId":73104,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in research metrics and analytics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2023.1237742","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper explores the intricate dynamics of trust, power, and vulnerability in the relationship between researchers and study participants/communities in the field of bioethics. The power and knowledge imbalances between researchers and participants create a structural vulnerability for the latter. While trust-building is important between researchers and study participants/communities, the consenting process can be challenging, often burdening participants with power abrogation. Trust can be breached. The paper highlights the contractual nature of the research relationship and argues that trust alone cannot prevent exploitation as power imbalances and vulnerabilities persist. To protect participants, bioethics guidance documents promote accountability and ethical compliance. These documents uphold fairness in the researcher-participant relationship and safeguard the interests of socially vulnerable participants. The paper also highlights the role of shared decision-making and inclusive deliberation with diverse stakeholders and recommends that efforts should be made by researchers to clarify roles and responsibilities, while research regulatory agents should transform the research-participant relationship into a legal-based contract governed by accountability principles. While trust remains important, alternative mechanisms may be needed to ensure ethical research practices and protect the interests of participants and communities. Striking a balance between trust and accountability is crucial in this regard.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
信任与研究有什么关系:为什么不追究责任?
本文探讨了生物伦理学领域研究人员与研究参与者/社区之间关系中信任、权力和脆弱性的复杂动态。研究人员和参与者之间的权力和知识失衡给后者造成了结构性的脆弱性。虽然在研究人员和研究参与者/社区之间建立信任很重要,但同意过程可能具有挑战性,通常会给参与者带来权力废除的负担。信任可能会被破坏。本文强调了研究关系的契约性质,并认为由于权力不平衡和脆弱性持续存在,仅靠信任无法防止剥削。为了保护参与者,生物伦理指导文件促进问责制和伦理合规。这些文献维护了研究者与参与者关系的公平性,维护了社会弱势参与者的利益。该论文还强调了与不同利益相关者共同决策和包容性审议的作用,并建议研究人员应努力澄清角色和责任,而研究监管机构应将研究-参与者关系转变为一种受问责原则支配的基于法律的合同。虽然信任仍然很重要,但可能需要其他机制来确保合乎伦理的研究实践并保护参与者和社区的利益。在这方面,在信任和问责制之间取得平衡至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Navigating algorithm bias in AI: ensuring fairness and trust in Africa. The ethics of knowledge sharing: a feminist examination of intellectual property rights and open-source materials in gender transformative methodologies. Complexity and phase transitions in citation networks: insights from artificial intelligence research. Designing measures of complex collaborations with participatory, evidence-centered design. Patent data-driven analysis of literature associations with changing innovation trends.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1