Social Research Ethics: When the End Doesn't Justify the Means

This essay examines the critical ethical considerations in social research, focusing on the principle that the end never justifies the means when human subjects are involved. It highlights the potential risks and ethical dilemmas inherent in research with people, emphasizing the importance of adhering to ethical guidelines. The essay explores three key principles: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice, and their implications for research practices. Respect for persons necessitates informed consent, ensuring voluntary participation. Beneficence requires balancing potential benefits with minimal harm to participants. Justice demands fairness and impartiality in all aspects of the research. The essay argues that even if the anticipated outcomes are beneficial, unethical means, such as harming, disrespecting, or treating participants unjustly, are never justifiable. It stresses the importance of ethical conduct in social research to protect human dignity and ensure the integrity of research findings. The paper provides references to support the arguments and principles discussed.

Running head: SOCIAL RESEARCH
SOCIAL RESEARCH
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note:

1SOCIAL RESEARCH
Topic: End never justifies the means where research with humans is concerned.
Human research is comprised of significant risks which have the possibilities of things
going wrong. Despite the fact that researchers have the best intentions, the chances are always
there (Barber 2018). Human research is research that is conducted about and with people. These
researches are carried out using their data with the intention that focuses only on improvements,
innovation and development of common good. the paper discusses the way means cannot justify
the end in researches with humans.
According to Miracle (2016), there are three comprehensive principles that are relevant to
the ethical practices of human subject’s researches. The three principles are 1. Respect for
persons 2. Beneficences and 3. Justice. The first principle is specifically relevant to the question
of deception in research (Brakewood and Poldrack 2013). Therefore, when a research involves a
person it is necessary to seek their consent before they are used in this research. Depending on
their decision, the research is proceeding as the respect for person demands that the subjects
voluntarily participate in the research with adequate information about the research. Therefore,
the end will certainly depend on the human ought consent which is to be priority as per the
research ethics (Bryman 2016).
The principle of beneficence is the concept in social research where the researchers must
have the welfare of the research participant at as a goal of any research. The rational for
balancing minimal harm to the participants against the value of knowledge is the principle of
beneficence (Winter and Winter 2018). Therefore, in order to reach the end a researcher cannot
risk the welfare of the participants. This specific principle of beneficence will usually have two
general rules. The two rules involve 1. Do not harm and 2. Maximize the benefits as much as

2SOCIAL RESEARCH
possible while keeping the harm as minimum as possible. Considering both the rules, certainly a
research cannot be carried out when the participants are at a risk of being harmed (Bryman
2016).
Lastly, the principle of justice is based on obligations of fairness, impartiality, equality,
regarding treatment of individuals who participate in the research. The principle is mostly
associated with the fairness to all groups of people that resides within a community. It is
applicable of equity, access and participation. Therefore, one cannot carry out a research when it
does not abide by this principle. Any action that violates this principle in social research is
violation of the research ethics. Therefore, biased, partial or injustice research cannot be carried
out in social research. The researcher must eliminate and make the research as non-partial as
possible in order to get appropriate result and to ensure the process is ethical. In this case as well,
the end cannot justify the means, if the means are based on injustice, the end cannot be justified
which is very likely in human behavior (Anderson and Munoz Proto 2016.).
Since human behaviors are largely driven by emotions and their thoughts, it is evident
that the end cannot be justified by the means. Even though consequences may be estimated to be
beneficial for the society, it cannot be called ethical if it harms, disrespects or treat with injustice
to the participants.

3SOCIAL RESEARCH
References:
Anderson, S.M. and Munoz Proto, C., 2016. Ethical requirements and responsibilities in video
methodologies: Considering confidentiality and representation in social justice research. Social
and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(7), pp.377-389.
Barber, B., 2018. Research on human subjects: Problems of social control in medical
experimentation. Routledge.
Brakewood, B. and Poldrack, R.A., 2013. The ethics of secondary data analysis: Considering the
application of Belmont principles to the sharing of neuroimaging data. Neuroimage, 82, pp.671-
676.
Bryman, A., 2016. Social research methods. Oxford university press.
Miracle, V.A., 2016. The Belmont report: The triple crown of research ethics. Dimensions of
Critical Care Nursing, 35(4), pp.223-228.
Winter, S.F. and Winter, S.F., 2018. Human dignity as leading principle in public health ethics: a
multi-case analysis of 21st century German health policy decisions. International journal of
health policy and management, 7(3), p.210.