Hi Anthony and Debbie, can you tell us about your role at LBU and how your research experience has shaped your understanding about research ethics

Anthony: I am Professor of Special Educational Needs, Disability and Inclusion, and Director of Research and Knowledge Exchange for Education. My own research relates to centring the experiences and amplifying the voices of disabled young people across education landscapes.

This type of work involves navigating extremely complex ethical issues while in the field, moving beyond technical ethical requirements to ensure that my approach is ethically situated, relational and responsive.

My knowledge and experiences in these research spaces shape my leadership of the University’s Research Ethics Sub-Committee (URESC) of which I am Chair. URESC’s main responsibility is to oversee and monitor the implementation of, and compliance with, policy and procedures for research ethics.

Debbie: I’m the Digital Library Service Manager, looking after some of the key library and research systems our users access for their studies. I’ve been through the research ethics approval process twice myself now at LBU – both for my Master’s and my PhD, so I’m in the handy position of having a ‘foot in both camps’ – being able to feedback on my own experiences and use this knowledge to influence the design of our new ethics system.

Why does research ethics matter in practice? Can you share an example where ethical considerations influenced your decision-making?

Anthony: Ethics matter in practice to ensure that we do no harm to, and do not exploit, the stakeholders that we work with. In my own research space, disability studies, there is a history and legacy of researchers parachuting into and helicoptering out of the lives of vulnerable and at-risk groups once they have ‘extracted’ the ‘data’ that they want. This is a chronic abuse of power and, as such, extremely problematic. One of my main considerations is how to diffuse the power imbalance between researchers and participants, and how to ensure that research is mutually beneficial.

Debbie: My own research has included 15 in-depth interviews with LBU students.  They’ve often disclosed personal feelings and information to me which has been incredibly insightful to my work, but requires maintaining their anonymity within the data, especially once my thesis is published online, in the university’s open-access repository.

What have been some of the most common or unexpected ethical challenges in your research?

Anthony: My research is littered with ethical challenges. One of the areas that I want to draw attention to, mainly because it is often neglected, is the ethics of exiting the research field once the research project is complete. In my research, as well as many other types of research, there is often a need to spend significant time and energy developing trust and rapport with participants. As such, exiting that relationship can be emotionally difficult for both participant and researcher. The exist strategy, therefore, needs to be considered from the very outset of the research project. Collaborative and mutually agreed approaches (between researcher, participants and gatekeeper) often work best for all involved.

Debbie: A number of students disclosed to me that they were disabled. When these students are also known to the people I work with it adds a further layer of confidentiality to our conversations, and to the security of the data I’m collecting.

Debbie, as a PhD researcher, what kinds of ethical questions have you discussed with your supervisor, and how did those conversations influence your thinking?

Debbie: We’ve discussed the careful use of voice recordings, transcripts and photography during supervisor meetings.  Also, how some conversations might take unexpected, surprising turns – where subjects are discussed that you might not have expected (such as feedback on individuals or personal experiences) – this requires additional sensitivity and confidentiality in the recording and storage of the data.

And Anthony, what kinds of ethics-related questions do researchers bring to you, and what do you wish more colleagues understood about the process?

Anthony: I get asked lots of different questions because of the diversity of research projects happening across the university. In my own School, the School of Education, I often get asked about the ethics of informed consent when working with children and young people, especially those considered ‘doubly vulnerable’. More generally, ‘hot topics’ across the University relate to the ethics of using Artificial Intelligence in research, data handling and protection when gathering data in multiple countries, and minimising reputational damage when working with funding partners.

I wish that colleagues understood, and most do, that ethics is not simply about an ethics application as a box that needs to be ticked before research commences. Ethics is, as the question suggests, a process. There will always be ethical challenges – some that can be foreseen, others that cannot – once the research begins. Ethics applications, for me, should give the reviewer confidence that the researcher will operate in an ethically sensitive, responsive and appropriate manner once their research commences.

Beyond formal processes, what kinds of support help you navigate ethical research in practice — whether that's advice from colleagues, data management tools, or training?

Anthony: There is a wealth of experience within each School that can be drawn upon to support researchers to navigate ethical issues in practice. While all Schools are configured slightly differently, there are dedicated Senior and Local Research Ethics Coordinators always on hand to give advice. Moreover, central and local ethics training, together with data management plans and ethics procedures and guidance documents, provide useful reference points to support researchers. Doctoral students also have experienced supervisors to support them to navigate both the ethics application and ethical dilemmas once their research begins.

Debbie: I’ve been incredibly lucky to be involved in conversations at a professional level, regarding issues like data storage, where ethical considerations are discussed at length.  Additionally, I work with the Library Research Team who advise on best practice - so I always have the very best experts on hand if I do need to talk anything through!

With the new Worktribe Ethics System launching soon, what improvements do you think it will bring, and what will make it genuinely useful for researchers at different stages?

Anthony: I have had the pleasure of being part of the working groups tasked with developing the Worktribe Ethics System and therefore have some insight into what it will be able to do. I am very excited about its capabilities. From a user perspective, I think that it will be easy to navigate and provide the questions and guidance that will enable users to properly reflect on the ethical implications of their research. From a reviewer perspective, I am quite excited by the ability to share ethics applications to draw ethical expertise from different people so that the review process is rigorous and a collaborative endeavour.

Debbie: It’s always best practice, in my experience, to invest in systems which are scalable and regularly developed and improved. In-house systems, developed by one or two individuals, can’t provide this long-term. Additionally, we’ve had a wide range of stakeholders (including students like me!) involved in procuring, configuring, testing and evaluating the Worktribe system, ensuring that its implementation is as inclusive as possible, in order to provide the best possible user experience to our students.