Unpacking Ethics in Social Research: Navigating Reasonable Disagreement and Pre-emptive Governance

Nico Varela in Culture & Society December 2025 • 4 min read.

"Delving into the complexities of ethical governance in social research, this article explores the necessity of balancing diverse values and perspectives."

In the ever-evolving landscape of social research, ethical considerations are not just a matter of compliance; they are the bedrock upon which the integrity and validity of research are built. The debate around the most effective ways to govern these ethical considerations is ongoing, with various stakeholders holding diverse perspectives.

This article delves into the core disagreements surrounding ethical governance in social research, specifically addressing the balance of values and the role of researchers in ethical decision-making. Our aim is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the intricacies involved, highlighting the importance of open dialogue and a balanced approach.

We will explore the essential arguments underpinning the need for ethical governance, particularly in the context of pre-emptive ethics review. By analyzing different viewpoints, we hope to provide a clearer roadmap for navigating the complex terrain of social research ethics.

Understanding the Core Disagreements: Governance, Values, and Perspectives

Illustration of a diverse group engaged in a discussion about social research ethics.

At the heart of this discussion lies a fundamental disagreement: the justification for a model of social research ethics governance. One perspective emphasizes the importance of recognizing a range of ethical considerations, each reflecting different values and perspectives.

This means that decisions about the ethical acceptability of research should be free from any exaggerated emphasis on specific values. It requires a system that acknowledges reasonable disagreement, ensuring that decisions are made in a way that is acceptable to those who may hold differing views.

Balancing Values: The need to recognize that various ethical considerations, which reflect different values and perspectives, are relevant to considering the acceptability of research.
Avoiding Exaggeration: Decisions on ethical acceptability should not be skewed by exaggerated values or concerns.
Reasonable Disagreement: The importance of acknowledging that people can reasonably disagree about how to balance different ethical values.
Public Accountability: The necessity of case-by-case decision-making that is transparent and open to public scrutiny.

In contrast, alternative viewpoints propose that researchers should have more autonomy in judging the ethical acceptability of their research. However, this approach risks giving undue weight to certain ethical considerations and potentially marginalizing other important perspectives. The challenge is to create a system that fosters both ethical integrity and rigorous research.

Conclusion: A Path Forward in Social Research Ethics

In conclusion, navigating the complexities of social research ethics requires a balanced approach. By acknowledging diverse perspectives, fostering open dialogue, and ensuring transparent decision-making processes, we can create a robust ethical framework that supports both the integrity of research and the well-being of society. This ongoing conversation is essential for ensuring that social research remains a valuable tool for understanding and improving the world.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.1136/medethics-2018-104975, Alternate LINK

Title: Reasonable Disagreement And The Justification Of Pre-Emptive Ethics Governance In Social Research: A Response To Hammersley

Subject: Health Policy

Journal: Journal of Medical Ethics

Publisher: BMJ

Authors: Mark Sheehan, Michael Dunn, Kate Sahan

Published: 2018-06-26

Everything You Need To Know

Why is ethical governance important in social research?

Ethical governance is paramount in social research because it ensures the integrity and validity of the research itself. It acts as the bedrock upon which trustworthy research is built. Without careful ethical considerations, research can be compromised, leading to unreliable or even harmful outcomes. Balancing values and ensuring open dialogue are key components of this governance.

What are some core disagreements in how social research ethics should be governed?

One core disagreement revolves around how to justify a model of social research ethics governance. Some believe in recognizing a range of ethical considerations, reflecting diverse values and perspectives, while others suggest researchers should have more autonomy. The former emphasizes "Balancing Values," "Avoiding Exaggeration" of specific concerns, acknowledging "Reasonable Disagreement," and ensuring "Public Accountability." The latter risks undue weight to certain considerations and marginalizing others.

What does it mean to 'balance values' in the context of social research ethics?

Balancing values in social research ethics means recognizing that various ethical considerations are relevant when determining the acceptability of research. These considerations reflect different values and perspectives held by stakeholders. It implies that decisions should not be skewed by an overemphasis on any single value but should instead consider a spectrum of ethical viewpoints to arrive at a well-rounded assessment.

How does 'reasonable disagreement' play a role in ethical decision-making for social research?

'Reasonable disagreement' acknowledges that individuals can legitimately hold differing views on how to balance ethical values in social research. Recognizing this possibility is crucial because it necessitates creating decision-making processes that can accommodate and address these disagreements constructively. This might involve open discussions, diverse review boards, and transparent justifications for the ultimate ethical judgments to ensure fairness and inclusivity.

What's the significance of 'public accountability' in the ethical governance of social research, and how can it be achieved?

'Public accountability' signifies that ethical decision-making in social research should be transparent and open to public scrutiny. This is vital for maintaining trust in the research process and ensuring that ethical standards are upheld. It can be achieved through case-by-case decision-making processes that are well-documented and accessible, involving diverse stakeholders in ethical review boards, and openly communicating the rationale behind ethical approvals and any associated conditions or limitations imposed on research projects. Without public accountability, the research community risks losing the public's trust and support.