Ethical Implications for Ethical Values Assessment Study

This article discusses the ethical implications of conducting an Ethical Values Assessment study on Chinese students. It includes a participant information sheet, consent form, and a summary of the interview sessions.

Running head: ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS
Ethical Implications
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS
Participant Information Sheet Your letterhead
Study title: Ethical Values Assessment
Locality: Ethics committee ref.:
Lead investigator: Contact phone number:
You are invited to take part in a study on Ethical Values Assessment. Whether or not you
take part is your choice. If you do not want to take part, you do not have to give a reason. If
you do want to take part now, but change your mind later, you can pull out of the study at any
time.
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to sign the Consent Form on the last
page of this document. You will be given a copy of both the Participant Information Sheet
and the Consent Form to keep.
Purpose of the Study:
An investigation on the interpretation of the trust among the Chinese students.
Need of Participant’s Involvement:
You are required as a representative of the Chinese student group for responding to
the questions asked in the interview.
Funding for the Study:

2ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS
The participant’s will not be subjected to any sort of payment for the interview as the
total funding will be done by the researcher.
Risk Issues:
The participants will not be liable for any sort of risk or if anything goes wrong in the
study as the researcher takes all the responsibility under such situations.
Change of Mind:
The participants will be asked any sort of questions or payment if they changed their
mind in responding to the study.
Further Information:
If you have any questions, concerns or complaints about the study at any stage, you
can contact:
Name, position
Telephone number
Email

3ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS
Consent Form Your letterhead
Please tick to indicate you consent to the following:
I have read, or have had read to me in my first language, and I
understand the Participant Information Sheet.
Yes  No 
I have been given sufficient time to consider whether or not to
participate in this study.
Yes  No 
I have had the opportunity to use a legal representative or a friend to
help me ask questions and understand the study.
Yes  No 
I am satisfied with the answers I have been given regarding the
study and I have a copy of this consent form and information sheet.
Yes  No 
I understand that taking part in this study is voluntary (my choice)
and that I may withdraw from the study at any time.
Yes  No 
I consent to the research staff collecting and processing my
information.
Yes  No 
If I decide to withdraw from the study, I agree that the information
collected about me up to the point when I withdraw may continue to
be processed.
Yes  No 

4ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS
I understand that my participation in this study is confidential and
that no material, which could identify me personally, will be used in
any reports on this study.
Yes  No 
I understand the compensation provisions in case of injury during
the study.
Yes  No 
I know who to contact if I have any questions about the study in
general.
Yes  No 
I understand my responsibilities as a study participant. Yes  No 
I wish to receive a summary of the results from the study. Yes  No 
Declaration by participant:
I hereby consent to take part in this study.
Participant’s name:
Signature: Date:
Declaration by member of research team:

5ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS
I have given a verbal explanation of the research project to the participant, and have answered
the participant’s questions about it.
I believe that the participant understands the study and has given informed consent to
participate.
Researcher’s name:
Signature: Date:

6ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS
The interview sessions are broadly conducted to get the important insights from the
individuals who are being interviewed (Spradley, 2016). The main motive of these kind of
interacting sessions is to obtain what the person, who is to be interviewed, feels on a
particular situation (Doody & Noonan, 2013). The interview session that Samah conducted
for her investigation of the interpretation of the trust among the Chinese students was having
the objective to get the inputs from the students regarding what they prioritize most among
the presented different values related to trust. Along with that the students were responsible
for the explanation regarding the meaning of the values that they ranked. The answers from
the different personalities were meant to be different as the personal preferences for the
different personalities will not be same as the others. The Chinese society and the people of
China are significantly influenced with their concept of honesty where the fundamental
approach towards the communication or statement will only be inspired by getting convinced
regarding the issue. Even the people of china are considerably open to the exchange of the
ideas and they welcome the opposing ideas as well. Hence Samah should have answered the
question of Lian but it was not ethically justified to express any sort inputs to him regarding
the answers of the previous participants of the interview. It was not right from the part of
Samah to influence the answer of Lian by expressing the choice of the majority in placing
Honesty as the highest important value. Rather she could have encouraged Lian to express his
own point of view and explanation for his choices and that would have been the perfect
display of the role of a controller of the interview.
The major learning from the interview of Lian for Samah will be the assessment of
the fact that the people of different personalities and backgrounds may have the differences in
their opinion. Not a single interview session will produce all the data in the same manner as
there will be significant scope of exceptions and being the researcher, Samah would not have
closed her mind in order to get the response of a single genre. The interview of Lian

7ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS
obviously gave Samah the realization of the fact that there are considerable amount of people
who considers “Honesty” as the value having least priority among the Chinese students and
they have their own explanation in support of their choice. Along with these the interview of
Lian also gave an assessment of the fact that the inputs from the research controller may
influence the data of the participants as well.
Samah must treat the two deviant responses with equal amount of concentration as
that will enable her to get a perfect assessment of how the Chinese society or specifically the
students prioritize their values. The ignorance towards the deviant responses may convert the
task of evaluation of the interview responses into a considerably easy one but the
investigation of Samah will not be absolute in that case. The deviant responses signifies that
the Chinese society even in limited amount, considers that honesty is not the value with
utmost priority. Hence in the evaluation of the interview data, the deviant responses should be
taken care by Samah with significant amount of importance.

8ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS
References:
Doody, O., & Noonan, M. (2013). Preparing and conducting interviews to collect data.
Spradley, J. P. (2016). The ethnographic interview. Waveland Press.

9ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS
Bibliography:
Muethel, M., & Hoegl, M. (2012). The influence of social institutions on managers’ concept
of trust: Implications for trust-building in Sino-German relationships. Journal of
World Business, 47(3), 420-434.