Loughborough University London (adapted from Derek Thomson, Architecture, Civil & Buildings) School-level Ethical Risk Assessment
Complete the risk assessment below so that you can answer ‘yes’ to the question concerning risk assessment on the University’s Ethical Clearance Checklist.
Print out this form and submit it with your Ethical Clearance Checklist to your tutor for approval. Remember that both this form and the Checklist need to be signed.
Step 1: Complete the following risk assessment, adding any further types of ethical risk (i.e. reputational, psychological, social and/or emotional harm)
that may not be present in the suggested Column 1 content. Enter each further type of risk in a new row and add more rows as necessary.
Note that both participants and researchers can be exposed to these risks.
Column 1: Risks present
Column 2
Column 3: Mitigation measures in study design
Column 4
Ethical risks (i.e. a risk of reputational, psychological, social and/or emotional harm) present in the planned research:
Is the risk in Column 1 present in your study design?
If ‘Yes’ to Column 2, describe the provisions made in your study design to minimise the risk:
Is the residual risk remaining after
the mitigation measures of Column 3 appropriate to the research need?
Principle 1: Sound application and conduct of social research methods, and interpretation of the findings
The research methods may place an undue burden on respondents or the researcher may use them incorrectly due to lack of experience or training.
Yes / No
–
Yes / No
Principle 2: Participation based on informed consent
Potential participants may feel obliged to take part (e.g. due to a pre-existing relationship with the researcher), they may lack full information about the nature of the study, the risks to which they will be exposed, and/or the way in which the results will be disseminated. Potential participants may be provided with an inappropriate amount of information when deciding to participate: either too much or too little.
Yes / No
Yes / No
Principle 3: Enabling participation
The recruitment and/or sampling strategy may make it impossible for certain categories of potential participant to contribute to the study when they would otherwise be suitable. The data gathering methods may disadvantage some or all of the participants by limiting their contributions.
Yes / No
Yes / No
Principle 4: Avoidance of personal and social harm
The research may cause participants to feel they have been wronged. They may feel taken advantage of by inappropriate questions, excessive time obligations, raising false hope, creating anxiety, or by damaging their reputation.
Yes / No
Yes / No
Principle 5: Non-disclosure of identity
The identity of participants, and all the data they generate or contribute, may not be sufficiently anonymised and protected. Data may be used for purposes other than those to which participants consented.
Yes / No
Yes / No
Column 1: Risks present
Column 2
Column 3: Mitigation measures in study design
Column 4
Ethical risks (i.e. a risk of reputational, psychological, social and/or emotional harm) present in the planned research:
Is the risk in Column 1 present in your study design?
If ‘Yes’ to Column 2, describe the provisions made in your study design to minimise the risk:
Is the residual risk remaining after
the mitigation measures of Column 3 appropriate to the research need?
Study-specific risk (please describe):
Yes / No
Yes / No
Study-specific risk (please describe):
Yes / No
Yes / No
Study-specific risk (please describe):
Yes / No
Yes / No
Study-specific risk (please describe):
Yes / No
Yes / No
Examples of study-specific risks might include: questionnaire questions that may be culturally or commercially sensitive; the possibility that the results could reveal an anonymous participant’s identity; placing undue time obligations on participants; the existence of prior relationships that may induce individuals to participate or bias or filter their views; and so forth.
Step 2: Review your answers to Column 4, considering each risk in turn. If any ‘no’ answers are present in Column 4, reconsider how you are going to reduce the possible effect of each risk by revising the design of your study (which includes the training of your researchers) and update Column 3. Keep improving your mitigation measures (Column 3) until you can truthfully answer ‘yes’ to every entry in Column 4. If you cannot or are unsure how to do this, contact your tutor.
Step 3: Sign and date the following declaration, print out this risk assessment and return to your tutor with your completed University Ethical Clearance Checklist.
I confirm that the above assessment accurately evaluates the residual risk of reputational, psychological, social and/or emotional harm to
participants or researchers in my/our study and that the design of that study appropriately balances those risks with the research need.
Responsible Investigator: Print name: _____________________________ Sign: ____________________________ Date: ______________
Student: Print name: _____________________________ Sign: ____________________________ Date: ______________
Reference: Government Social Research Unit (2009). GSR Professional Guidance: Ethical Assurance for Social Research in Government. London: Government Social Research Unit, HM Treasury. v. 5, March 2016