Ethics of the sociologist and sociological research. Ethical Issues of Research in Social Work

The development of social science, the wide dissemination of its methods makes both scientists and society think again and again about the ethics of research. The problem of research ethics has received particular relevance in connection with the growing popularity of qualitative research methods. It is these methods that are most effective for studying topics such as sexual behavior, religion, health, and others, and therefore make it more sensitive to research intervention. When studying such areas, the ethical controversy of many methodological decisions is most clearly manifested. In order to assess the moral side of the decisions made, their morality, to prevent the collapse of established values ​​and norms, it is important to have the necessary knowledge about the actual functioning of morality in society.

Any study of society, when collecting information, uses its carriers for its own purposes - respondents, informants, experts, observed, thereby violating one of the main ethical requirements - to see a person as an end, not a means. Therefore, in fact, every study of society initially contains an element of unethics. The risk of moral damage exists not only for the subjects, but also for the researcher.

The foundations of research ethics were laid back in the 19th century by E. Durkheim. He proposed the term "sociology of morality", stated the need for a sociological substantiation of morality, the use of methods for the sociological study of morality, and tried to create a new image of ethics as an empirical science. The source and object of morality is a society that surpasses the individual in its strength and authority. It is this that requires moral qualities from an individual, among which readiness for self-sacrifice and personal disinterestedness were considered especially important, and, therefore, obligatory components of morality. E. Durkheim evaluated morality as a real, effective, practical force. Society must constantly make efforts to restrain the biological nature of man, to introduce it into certain limits with the help of morality and religion. Otherwise, the disintegration of society and the individual occurs, i.e. what E. Durkheim defined by the term "anomie" is, first of all, the moral crisis of society, when, as a result of social upheavals, the system of social regulation of human needs ceases to function normally. As a result of such a process, the person loses his balance and prerequisites for deviant behavior are created.

In domestic sociology, the concept of the unity of moral action and the moral reaction to it from the side of society received its justification in the works of P. A. Sorokin, who proposed to study the correlation of various ethical values ​​depending on cultural and sociological factors.

Qualitative research methodology raises critical questions about the need to expand the concept of research quality itself. In particular, ethical dilemmas in qualitative research are getting a new sound, making it necessary to evaluate not only the actual scientific, but also the ethical component of qualitative research. Today we can talk about several approaches to assessing the quality of qualitative research. The first of them is based on the assumption that for qualitative research such criteria of scientificity and methods for its achievement should be developed, which, for all their specificity, could be correlated with traditional ones (validity, reliability, etc.). Some authors who share this approach suggest using traditional criteria, somewhat rethinking them in relation to the reality of qualitative research and suggesting special ways and techniques to achieve high validity and reliability of the study. Other authors offer alternative criteria for assessing the scientific nature of a qualitative study (criteria of reliability, confirmability, tolerability, authenticity, etc.), which, nevertheless, can be correlated with traditional criteria, although, of course, there is no complete correspondence between them.

There are also very radical approaches to assessing the quality of qualitative research. The point is that qualitative research, as an interpretive enterprise, should be correlated not so much with the proper scientific, but with a broader general humanitarian tradition. Supporters of such views criticize the "technocentrism" of science and call for evaluating research not so much from the point of view of its compliance with the methodological norms of scientific character, but from the point of view of what exactly this research gives to culture as a whole, how much it meets the interests of human practice, how ethical it is, what values ​​it serves, and so on. . In other words, instead of assessing the "correctness" of the study, the assessment of its ethical component comes to the fore. The emphasis on ethical forms of validation and the transformational potential of research really brings to the discussion the most important components of the socio-humanitarian science.

Many ethical issues are related to the balance between two values: the acquisition of scientific knowledge and the rights of research subjects. To conduct high-quality research that meets ethical standards and principles, it is necessary to balance between obtaining the necessary material and non-interference in people's private lives. Granting absolute non-intervention rights to research subjects may make empirical research impossible, but at the same time, granting these absolute rights to the researcher may violate basic human rights. Sociological researchers often put people in situations that are stressful, embarrassing, unsettling, or unpleasant. At the same time, the researcher should not forget that there is a possible danger of negative physical impact on the research group, primarily in the person of the interviewers. Full information about the researcher helps protect people from fraudulent projects, as well as protect researchers working in accordance with the law. Informed consent reduces the likelihood that someone posing as a researcher will deceive or harm the subjects of study, as well as that someone will use the information received for their own selfish purposes. Researchers ensure privacy by not disclosing the names of project participants after information has been collected. This takes 2 forms, each of which involves separating the individual's identity from his or her responses: anonymity and confidentiality. Anonymity means that the names of the subjects are not disclosed; the object cannot be identified and remains unrecognized or anonymous. Researchers get rid of the names and addresses of participants, assigning each a specific code to ensure anonymity. Even in cases where anonymity cannot be maintained, researchers must maintain confidentiality. Anonymity implies that the identity of the respondent will be unknown to other people. Confidentiality means that the information can be matched to the names, but the researcher is kept confidential, i.e. kept secret from the general public. The information is only presented in an aggregated form, which does not allow the association of specific individuals with specific responses. Confidentiality can protect participants from not only moral but also physical harm, especially when studying the problems of political life in a non-democratic society.

Social research provides a unique perspective on society as a whole. The perspectives and technologies of social research can be powerful tools in understanding and interpreting the world. But it is worth noting that with strength comes responsibility: responsibility to oneself, to the professional community and responsibility to society as a whole. Ultimately, one must decide for oneself whether to conduct research ethically and whether to require ethical behavior from others. The truth of the knowledge obtained in the framework of social research, and its use or non-use depends on the individual researcher.

Bibliography

1. Hoffman A.B. Emile Durkheim in Russia. Reception of Durkheimian sociology in Russian social thought // Moscow: SU-HSE. 1999. 136 p.

2. Sokolov V.M. Sociology of morality - real or hypothetical? // Sociological research. 2004. No. 8. S. 78-88.

3. Busygina N.P. The problem of the quality of qualitative research: the principles of scientific and ethical validation // Methodology and history of psychology. 2009. Volume 4. Issue 3. P. 106-130.

4. Voiskunsky A.E., Skripkin S.V. Qualitative data analysis // Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 14. Psychology. 2001. No. 2. S. 93-109.

5. Malikova N.N. Ethical problems of applied sociological research // Sotsis. 2007. No. 5. S. 46-51.

6. Ipatova A.A., How reasonable is our belief in the results of surveys, or violation of research ethics in sociological research // Monitoring of public opinion: economic and social changes. 2014. No. 3. S. 26-39.

7. Toshchenko Zh.T. On protest and the ethics of scientific sociological research // Monitoring of public opinion: economic and social changes. 2011. No. 3. S. 142-143.

ART 183013 UDC 172

Nekrasov Nikita Andreevich,

student of the Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education "Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov", Arkhangelsk [email protected]

Ethical problems of applied sociological research

Annotation. The article raises the problem of ethical regulation of sociological research. The ethical aspects of sociological research are considered. A review of the current norms for conducting applied sociological research is made.

Key words: sociology, sociological research, ethical aspect,

sociologist ethics, interviewer, respondent, research ethics.

Section: (03) philosophy; sociology; political science; jurisprudence; science of science.

Studying the whole variety of social phenomena - social interactions, social conflicts, social control and social organizations, at each stage of this study, a sociologist can give his vision and interpretation of social processes, which other researchers and scientists will then rely on. The success of social transformations, the possibility of resolving social conflicts, and maintaining social stability largely depend on the accuracy and objectivity of the information provided by a sociologist. The moral position of a professional sociologist largely depends on the degree to which he has assimilated the foundations of professional ethics and provides clear moral orientations for professional activity.

The relevance and necessity of studying the foundations of professional ethics of a sociologist is also due to the ever-increasing role of professional morality in the life of modern society. The need for increased moral requirements, and hence the creation of professional moral codes, is manifested primarily in those areas of human activity that are directly related to the upbringing and satisfaction of his needs. It is precisely such activity that includes the professional activity of a sociologist, who is called upon to contribute not only to the development of social processes, but also to the self-improvement of the individual.

In the sociological literature, there is sometimes a list of requirements for an interviewer that require him to have a combination of qualities that are inherent only in a superman. Among them: attractive appearance, decency, sociability, psychological stability, conscientiousness, susceptibility, sociability, quick wit, intellectual development, impartiality, objectivity, possession of speech manners, the ability to behave at ease, relaxed, neatness, etc. Recognized specialist in the field of mass polls, Elisabeth Noel-Neumann deduced her famous "formula of the ideal interviewer", according to which this is a "comradely pedant" - a person who attaches great importance to the formal side of the matter, neatness and at the same time has high communication skills.

There are also socio-demographic requirements that can be used during the formation of a field team. The American social psychologist Herbert Hyman (who introduced the concept of "reference group" into the social sciences) believed that the best interviewers are women aged 3545, with higher education, with certain life experience and companions.

scientific and methodical electronic journal

skies by nature. Indeed, in Western sociological companies that specialize in mass surveys, it is these women who mostly work as interviewers. So, at the Gallup Institute, approximately 60% of interviewers are women, at the Roper Center they are 97%. Practical experience suggests that it is middle-aged women who cause less fear and suspicion. However, this does not mean that if you are not a middle-aged woman, or if you do not meet all of the above quality requirements, then you will not succeed in becoming a qualified and skillful interviewer. In each country, in each situation, in various projects, “specific” personnel may be needed. But what all sociologists agree on in their attitude to the work of the interviewer are the ethical principles that he must adhere to. Without them, all ultra-fine sociological ideas, verified samples, modern methods, carefully selected wording of questions are worthless, since all intellectual, sometimes long-term, work can be destroyed “in the field” by the hands of the interviewer.

No less significant is the fact that in his practical activities the interviewer must be guided by a sense of social responsibility, remember that his work can significantly affect the lives of individual citizens, social strata and society as a whole. Mass polls are often aimed at solving specific social problems, and interviewing is only one of the stages of this process, and the chosen way of solving the problem may depend on its results.

Most sociological and marketing companies strictly adhere to international and national quality standards for social research, according to which the researcher must use all means of caution to ensure that there are no adverse effects on respondents as a result of their participation in the study.

The ethical norms of sociological work are fixed in a number of normative documents. For example, in the International Procedural Code of Marketing and Sociological Research ICC / ESOMAR, the Code of Ethics of the International Sociological Association (ISA), the Code of Professional Ethics of a Sociologist of the Russian Sociological Association, the Code of Ethics of the World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR), the Code of Ethics of the Russian Marketing Association.

Their main provisions are based on the principles of decency, honesty, social and professional responsibility of the interviewer. Respect for human rights, dignity and individuality of the respondent, the medical principle "Do no harm" in relation to him, concerning issues of confidentiality, privacy of personal life, are the main aspects of the ethics of the interviewer's work.

During the study, it is the interviewer who is the main performer of the work and ensures the quality of the research results. The completeness and accuracy of taking into account the opinions of different segments of the population depend on the responsibility and decency of the interviewer. When conducting a survey, the interviewer should:

Perform all the features of the methodology of this study;

Responsible for the accuracy of the data;

Be impartial;

Strictly adhere to the timing of the survey;

Responsible for the confidentiality of the information received.

Ethical issues concern not only the status of the respondent, but also the observance of the principles of professional ethics of the sociologist during the entire research process. When legislation is vague or inconsistent, one must be guided by the above basic ethical principles and remember that maintaining the safety and protection of the respondent is of paramount importance.

scientific and methodical electronic journal

For each study, it is advisable to organize an advisory study advisory group (an advisory board to oversee the study process) or use existing structures. Such a group/council should include the researchers who will carry out the work, representatives of civil society organizations and service providers, and - preferably a few - representatives of the study's target group. Community advisory councils (also known as local stakeholder groups, community ethics councils, or advisory committees) provide researchers with an opportunity to consult with communities. These groups allow understanding the public perception of the proposed activities, assessing the risks and benefits, as well as ensuring the protection of respondents during research activities.

The study must be carefully designed, based on detailed consultations and properly conducted. Researchers need to have the right skills and knowledge. Methods should be appropriate to the purpose of the study and the group studied. It should also be noted that representatives of the target groups may decide to participate, for example, to see the implementation of the results of studies organized for them. Therefore, it is important to disseminate the results of the study and carry out further activities.

It is important to ensure that the main principles of applied social science research ethics are observed by all members of the assessment team (informed consent, voluntary participation, confidentiality, anonymity and no harm). There may be a need for special training and ongoing field supervision to ensure that good research practice is followed.

Researchers should be trained in gender and power imbalances so that they have a better sense of different situations. Researchers also need to be trained on issues of discrimination for disadvantaged environments or ethnically distinct groups.

Ethical issues play an important role in conducting research with children and adolescents. Investigators should describe the procedure by which they determine that potential participants are capable of consenting to participate in the study. If it is established that it is impossible for certain reasons to provide the consent of the respondent, there is a need to obtain such consent from his parents or guardians.

There is an ancient moral and legal tradition that supports parents as the primary decision makers for their minor children, including the right to make authoritative decisions about their children's participation in research. In most countries, parental permission is the most important factor, even if it is recognized that parents, as well as researchers, may have interests that are at odds with the child's vital interests.

Some countries (such as Canada) require researchers to prove to the local ethics committee why parental consent is not required, such as:

Such consent is not required to conduct research;

The study poses no risk to participants;

Adequate steps have been taken to inform parents about the study and provide them with the opportunity to terminate their child's participation if they so choose;

Each study participant is capable of giving consent (consciously and mature enough to understand the consent process, and emotionally mature enough to understand the consequences of giving consent).

scientific and methodical electronic journal

Researchers also need to know what steps to take to protect themselves from harm.

The danger is represented by respondents under the influence of alcohol, drugs or in a state of drowsiness. If they have recently used alcohol or drugs, they may not be able to provide coherent answers to questions, they may fall asleep or become very sleepy during the interview.

If the researcher has started the interview and the participant is no longer providing coherent responses, the interview should be terminated, the respondent thanked, and what happened described in the interviewer's notes (interviewer reporting form, diary, etc.).

Sexual assault - if the respondent seeks sexual intimacy or harasses the interviewer, he has the right to terminate the interview. If the researcher feels that the respondent is behaving inappropriately, the researcher should first be reminded that the researcher is only there to interview him and that he is not interested in any sexual offerings. If the respondent continues to do this, it should be said that the interview should be terminated if he cannot concentrate on the questions. If this does not work, the interview should be terminated.

It is the responsibility of researchers to ensure that national and international legal provisions and accepted ethical standards are observed for conducting activities within research projects and performing the following activities:

1. Obtaining the consent of the Commission on Professional Ethics to conduct the study.

2. Obtain support from government agencies and/or community organizations or individuals who play an important role in the life of a particular group in planning research, as well as assistance in capacity development, where possible.

3. Training researchers to work with respondents, especially those who are illiterate or have limited education; familiarization of researchers with the issues of respondent protection and the ability to respond if the respondent is in a difficult life situation, under the influence of drugs or other similar situation.

4. Providing researchers with identification documents (interviewer's certificate) that show that they are really researchers.

5. Ensuring that research methods maximize the opportunity for respondents to participate fully in the research process.

6. Considering ways to involve marginalized and less visible groups in research along with more accessible and active representatives.

7. Dealing with issues of incentives and necessary compensation (for example, transportation costs) of respondents for participating in the study. Providing research information in this way is understandable and attractive to people and includes information about their rights as respondents, the benefits of the research (future interventions) and what will happen to the data they provide.

8. Practical measures to protect the confidentiality of respondents.

9. Appropriate notification of representatives of the study's target groups and relevant communities about the results of the study.

The Fundamental Principles of Social Research draw on the fundamental principles of medical research and refer to the three fundamental responsibilities of a researcher: respect for the individual, benevolence, and fairness. The precise fulfillment of these duties overcomes the “powerful” difference between the participant and the researcher.

scientific and methodical electronic journal

donor. The information provided to respondents should be well-designed, culturally and gender-sensitive. The concepts used in the study should be clear for a particular social group. Particular attention should be paid to respondents with low levels of education and literacy.

Thus, the moral and legal regulation of applied sociological research is one of the urgent problems of modern science. The main "ethical" documents in sociology are codes of professional ethics, which systematize the basic ethical requirements for the activities of a sociologist. The codes are based on international and national norms, current legislation, and internal regulatory documentation specific to individual industries and organizations. The unprofessional, unethical attitude of a sociologist can humiliate the dignity of a research participant.

1. Zaslavskaya T. I. The role of sociology in transformation // Sociological research. - 2014. - No. 3.

2. Panina N. Technology of sociological research: a course of lectures. - M.: Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences, 2015. - 320 p.

3. Lapin N. I. Subject and methodology of sociology // Sotsis. - 2016. - No. 3. - S. 106-119.

4. Bauman Z. Think sociologically: textbook. allowance. - M., 2010. - 560 p.

5. Sociology: terms, concepts, personalities: textbook. reference dictionary / ed. V. N. Pichi. - M.: "Karavel"; L .: "New World-2000", 2012. - 480 p.

6. Golovakha E. Conceptual and organizational and methodological foundations for the creation of the "Sociological Archive and Data Bank of Social Research" // Sociology: Theory, Methods, Marketing. - 2016. - No. 1. - S. 140-151.

Nikita Nekrasov,

Student, Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M. V. Lomonosov, Arkhangelsk [email protected]

Ethical problems of applied sociological research

abstract. The article poses the problem of sociological research ethical regulation. Ethical aspects of sociological research are considered. The author does a review of applied sociological research conducting current norms. Key words: sociology, sociological research, ethical aspect, ethics of a sociologist, interviewer, respondent, ethics of research. References

1. Zaslavskaja, T. I. (2014). "Rol" sociology v preobrazovanie", Sociologicheskie studies, No. 3 (in Russian).

2. Panina, N. (2015). Tehnologija sociologicheskogo issledovanija: kurs lekcij, In-t sociology NAN, Moscow, 320 p. (in Russian).

3. Lapin, N. I. (2016). "Predmet i metodologija sociologii", Socis, no. 3, pp. 106-119 (in Russian).

4. Bauman, Z. (2010). Myslit" sociologicheski: ucheb. posobie, Moscow, 560 p. (in Russian).

5. Pichi, V. N. (ed.) (2012). Sociologija: terminy, ponjatija, personalii: ucheb. slovar"-spravochnik, "Karavel-la", Moscow: "Novyj Mir-2000", Leningrad, 480 p. (in Russian).

6. Golovaha, E. (2016). "Konceptual" nye i organizacionno-metodicheskie osnovy sozdanija "Sociologicheskogo arhi-va i banka dannyh social" nyh issledovanij", Sociologija: teorija, metody, marketing, No. 1, pp. 140-151 (in Russian).

Utemov V.V., Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences; Gorev P. M., candidate of pedagogical sciences, editor-in-chief of the magazine "Concept"

Received a positive review 01/25/18 Received a positive review 03/12/18

Accepted for publication Accepted for publication 03/12/18 Published 03/29/18

www.e-koncept.ru

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) © Concept, scientific and methodological electronic journal, 2018 © Nekrasov N. A., 2018

It is impossible to consider the methods of science only in their technical aspect. It is necessary to take into account ethical issues, especially if people are its object. We find ourselves in the realm of ethics when we evaluate the results of activities in terms of their benefit or harm to society as a whole and to specific people.

Responsibility of a scientist to society and the scientific community

Science is inherently imbued with noble aspirations and humanistic ideals. The desire for truth, like the desire for beauty or the desire to do good, characterize the best side of human nature. In its applied role, science uses the obtained information to improve people's lives. Knowledge becomes a force capable of transforming reality. But Every power is fraught with destructive potential. Therefore, handling it requires a certain amount of caution. The extraordinary growth of the possibilities of science in our day has clearly marked this side of scientific and technological progress. Therefore, today, more than ever, the question of the moral responsibility of scientists for the results of their activities has become acute. The activities of scientists must comply with the following ethical standards:

The interests of science become higher than personal interests;

The scientist must be objective and impartial, he is responsible for the information provided;

A scientist is responsible to society for his inventions.

The specificity of research in the social sciences adds some moral and ethical problems that researchers in the exact sciences do not face. This is due to the fact that the subject of study here is a person. Therefore, almost any research situation turns into a special type of interpersonal communication and must obey its norms. A physicist, for example, who studies the behavior of elementary particles, does not need to ask their permission for this. People are supposed to be treated like human beings.

Animal studies already pose special challenges. Among them is the problem of vivisection, which attracted public attention and provoked heated debate as early as the 19th century. Term vivisection(live cutting) is used to refer to such experiments on animals, during which harm or suffering is inflicted on them.

This is a complex problem, connected both with the need to clarify the content of the concepts of "harm" and "suffering", and with the drawing of a demarcation line between animate and inanimate nature, between lower and higher animals. We will not consider these aspects. We only note that science has developed quite clear (as far as it is possible here) principles of action in such situations.

Experiments of this kind are allowed only in cases where it is absolutely necessary for science. In particular, cruel experiments on animals can be justified by the reasoned argument that their results are very important for developing ways to help suffering people.

The problem of vivisection well illustrates the complexity of those ethical dilemmas with which scientists sometimes have to deal. A dilemma is a problem that does not have an optimal solution, a situation where something must be sacrificed.

In all cases, the motto "Do no harm!" should be adhered to.

The sociological community, like many other professional groups of specialists, has developed some general principles of what is considered ethical in their activities and what needs to be done to comply with these ethical principles. This concerns the principles of conducting surveys of the population, using the results in social practice and decision-making in the public and private sectors. The Principles also aim to improve the public's understanding of research methods and the acceptable use of the results of such research. In some extreme cases, such as in China, the law even requires the permission of certain government agencies to even conduct a survey. In Belarus, polls on political topics also require permission from a certain commission at the Academy of Sciences.

In all developed countries, there is legislation that regulates the rules for the collection, use and dissemination of information relating to a person. In 2007, a law also came into force in Russia that imposes restrictions on the collection and use of personal data 1 .

Within the research community, the main “legislators” of norms are such respected international organizations as VAPOR (World Association of Public Opinion Researchers), ESOMAYA (European Society for Public Opinion Research and Marketing Research), AARPW (American Association of Public Opinion Researchers) . The norms developed by these organizations, as a rule, take into account the legislation of specific countries, but the latter may contain provisions that impose additional restrictions on the activities of sociologists or the choice of forms of this activity.

Next, we will dwell on the basic concepts and criteria for ensuring compliance with these norms, as they are formulated in the documents of the above-mentioned organizations. The main object of attention is, of course, the respondent. The norms developed by the professional community stipulate its main right - voluntarily agree or disagree to participate in research - whether it be a request to answer interviewer's questions, take part in focus groups or become the object of observation.

In some cases, this requirement is easy to comply with and is taken for granted, and sometimes it is almost impossible. Thus, the use of the observation method is often associated with such difficulties.

In quantitative research, the principle of voluntariness leads to a number of methodological problems. A large number of refusals in surveys of the population calls into question the representativeness of the data and the legitimacy of generalizing the findings to the studied target population. This necessitates additional analysis of a specific, from the point of view of the researcher, group of “refuseniks”.

The respondent should be explained what kind of action he is involved in and what it all means. For example, having come to the focus group, the participant has already agreed to this kind of research, but he is faced with what he was not warned about in advance: that the researcher is going to record everything on videotape, the group will be observed by researchers through a translucent mirror, etc. Therefore, the moderator at the very beginning of the focus group should explain his actions and, if someone does not agree with such conditions of his participation, offer to leave the group or refuse to record the video.

In most cases, the respondent, voluntarily agreeing to take part in the study, cannot imagine what will be its result and what kind of consequences may affect him. Therefore, the second fundamental moral principle of the work of a sociologist sounds almost like a doctor: do no harm people who took part in the study.

The object of the study can be people with deviant behavior, holding an opinion that is contrary to social norms and morality. Or people give information about the structure of their income and expenses. By studying them, the researcher undertakes to voluntarily or unwittingly not harm them, and this principle must be understood by all members of the research team, starting with the interviewer. Of course, not all aspects of this criterion are so simple and indisputable. A journalist has the right before the law not to disclose his sources of information. And the sociologist? In some countries, such as the United States, academic researchers also have this option.

By what means are the above principles ensured?

Respondent anonymity. A respondent is anonymous if the researcher cannot identify responses with that particular person. However, not all sociological methods provide this opportunity. Interviews at home, by phone cannot be anonymous, participation in a focus group is also not anonymous. At the same time, the mail survey provides this opportunity, unless, of course, the researcher has previously numbered his questionnaires to identify the address. A group survey of schoolchildren by the method of self-completion of questionnaires under certain conditions can also be anonymous.

Confidentiality. In some cases, the researcher may identify the respondent, but undertakes not to do so publicly (i.e., not to share information with others outside the research team). This means that the researcher is obliged to provide measures to guarantee anonymity. In practice, this is often a time-consuming task that requires great care and attention. Let us consider a rather standard situation of a sociological survey with a respondent at home. The interviewer, after interviewing the respondent, has quite extensive information about this person - gender, age, social status, where he works, income and many other personal information. In addition, he knows where this person lives, and this address is recorded in one of the field documents (for example, in the respondent's search form). All this is transferred to the field department of the research center. The address is used mainly to control the work of the interviewer and then destroyed. In panel studies, the addresses of respondents have to be stored throughout the entire research cycle, which can reach many years. The computer file with the primary data necessarily contains the number of the respondent, which makes it possible to identify the data with a specific person until his address is destroyed.

Thus, during a rather lengthy procedure for collecting and processing primary documents that allow you to fully identify a person with his answers to the questionnaire, many employees of the organization work with them. Confidentiality of information for each specific respondent in this case can only mean that the organization as a whole guarantees the non-dissemination of information about him outside of it.

In one of the focus group studies on insurance, which was conducted by the author of these lines, the panelists spoke frankly about their own financial situation, their accounts and savings abroad (which is illegal under the current legislation), etc. Of course, dissemination of this information could cause significant harm to the members of the group. Therefore, the reports for the customer never indicate the names and, moreover, the addresses of the participants, the specific place of work and other parameters by which it is possible to identify him and harm a person. Particular attention in this regard must be paid to audio and video recordings if they are transferred to the customer. If, at the request of the customer, the video recording is supposed to be transferred to him, the international system of rules adopted by ESOMAYA requires obtaining the consent of each of the participants in the focus group for such transfer . The customer, in turn, must guarantee the confidentiality of the information transmitted to him.

The primary data collected by the research center can be transferred in the form of an electronic file to a variety of other organizations - the customer, another research center, sociological research data archives for public use (professional community, students, journalists, etc.). In this regard, it is very important to guarantee the confidentiality of personal information about the respondent. After all, even excluding from the primary data file of the population survey the name of the respondent and his address according to a set of characteristics - gender, age, profession, in which locality the survey took place, etc. etc., there is a possibility that it is possible to "calculate" the respondent. Eliminating this possibility is the task of the researcher. In this regard, serious survey data archives develop their own special requirements for the primary data transmitted to them in order to exclude the very possibility of confidentiality violation.

Some research projects involve the publication of personal information about the respondent. However, the only possible basis for such a publication is the permission of the person himself.

The problem of confidentiality finds a different refraction when studying certain social groups in society and applying different methods. We have already mentioned focus groups and related privacy issues. The emergence of new tools and objects of study, such as the Internet, necessitates rethinking the existing rules and concretizing them to new research methods.

Research objectives and researcher identification. Telling the truth is one of the important ethical principles of a researcher. This also applies to identifying oneself to the respondent as a representative of a particular organization, and communicating to him the goals of the study. In addition to the ethical side, there is also a professional aspect associated with the fight against all kinds of “mimicry” of trade, advertising, political support groups for a candidate in elections, which act at the right moments, taking the form of a respectable sociological research organization. One of his acquaintances complained about the cunning of the "sociologists" who, during an international flight, asked him to fill out a questionnaire about the quality of service and at the same time write his phone number and address. What was the amazement of my colleague when the next day after arriving home they called him and offered to buy some thing. Thus, against his will, he ended up in a database of wealthy people used by a trade organization to sell high-value goods.

To name the organization on behalf of which the study is being conducted, in most cases does not cause any problems. However, imagine that the research division of the tax inspectorate conducts a survey under its own name on the attitude of the population to this body, taxes and tax reforms, sociologists from the Russian Academy of Sciences conduct a survey of the population in Ukraine, etc. Possible biases in the answers of people who can occur in both cases. What usually has to be done? In the first case, researchers can say that they are from an independent research center or, doubly preferable, commission a study from a truly independent organization. In the latter case, the confidence of the professional community in the results of the study would also be higher. In the case of a survey of the population in Ukraine, bearing in mind the quality of the data, it is better to shift this task to local colleagues.

In almost all surveys, the respondent has to explain the objectives of the survey in which he or she is to take part. Here, too, general ethical norms come into conflict with the data quality criteria that the researcher must ensure. As a rule, specific goals and a specific subject of research have to be hidden behind general phrases such as “we study the way of life of people, what they think about events that take place in our country, etc.”, “the study will help develop scientifically based recommendations ... ". The formulation of the purpose of the study in general, neutral tones should help to avoid possible biases in the answers of the respondent.

Another aspect in the same chain of ethical issues is explaining to the respondent for whom the research is being done. Concern about the quality of the data, fears of all kinds of biases again lead to the need to adhere to general explanations. Of course, applied research commissioned by various departments and companies causes special problems. It would hardly be justified in terms of data quality in Ukraine to say that the study is being carried out, for example, for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of another country. And at the same time, it is completely unacceptable to deceive the respondent and say that this study is being commissioned by the UN or the World Health Organization, unless, of course, they are the real customers. In marketing research, they never name the specific manufacturer of the product who commissioned the study, but say: “a group of companies producing electronics would like to know the attitude of the population towards individual means of communication”, etc.

Thus, some fairly obvious techniques that sociologists use in their daily professional activities, primarily concerned with the quality of the information they collect, by and large raise a number of ethical questions that need to be answered.

Researcher and professional community. The previous pages of this chapter were devoted to the ethical aspects that arise in the interaction between the researcher and the respondent. Relations with the professional community are also governed by a set of obvious general principles.

These principles imply that when designing a study, developing an instrument, collecting information, processing and analyzing the data obtained, the researcher does everything possible to ensure that the results of his work are reliable and justified. More specifically, this means that only those methods should be used that, from a professional point of view, are most suitable for the problem under study; these research methods, by virtue of their capabilities, should not lead to erroneous conclusions; we must not consciously interpret research results or implicitly allow for an interpretation that is inconsistent with the available data; the interpretation of our results should not give the impression of greater credibility than the study data actually imply.

In order to avoid the aforementioned errors and ambiguities in interpretation, all reports should describe in sufficient detail and accuracy the methods used and the conclusions reached.

The general principles of ethical standards developed by the research community also state that in the event that a completed study becomes the subject of proceedings for violation of these standards, researchers should provide additional information that is necessary for the professional evaluation of this study.

Publication of the results of sociological research. The norms of professional ethics require that the publication of the results of sociological research be accompanied by a detailed description of the entire research methodology. This applies to publications both in professional literature and in the media. For the latter, this description can be very brief and simple.

For mass surveys, publication of data should be accompanied by clear references to:

the name of the research organization that conducted the study;

target population of respondents;

the size of the sample achieved and geographical representativeness (i.e. it should indicate which parts of the target population were excluded for various reasons, for example, areas where hostilities are taking place or natural disasters have occurred at the moment, etc.);

dates of field work;

sampling method, and if random sampling was used, the proportion of interviews successfully reached;

method of collecting information (personal interview at home, telephone, mail, etc.);

the exact wording of the question (indicating if it is an open question);

description of the main parameters of the sample:

the method of selection in general and, in particular, how the selection of the respondent was carried out,

sample size and percentage of successful interviews;

discussion on the accuracy of inferences, including if

it is applicable to this survey, sampling errors and data weighting procedures;

conclusions drawn on a part of the sample and conclusions drawn on the entire sample.

Unfortunately, these requirements are often not met in Russian media publications, which are full of references to sociological survey data. Before the presidential elections in 1999, the Central Electoral Commission had to specifically address the media with a request to accompany all publications with a description of the method of obtaining data. Now, if the situation has become better, it is not much at all. As a result, in public discussions, sociologists are often accused of some kind of charlatanism. That is, in this regard, undemanding to oneself (when research data is published in the scientific literature) and to journalists (who publish these data in the media) causes significant damage to science itself and discredits sociological science in the eyes of society.

Codes of norms and rules governing research activities.

• 1. The ICC/ESOMAR International Code of Marketing and Social Research Practice. E SO MAR, 1994.
• 2. Notes on How the ICC/ESOMAR International Code of Marketing and Social Research Practice Should be Applied. ESOMAR
• 3. Code of Professional Ethics and Practices. AAPOR, 1986.
• 4. American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR). Best Practices for Survey and Public Opinion Research (see www. aapor. org/ethics/best. html).
• 5. Guide to Opinion Polls. ESOMAR/WAPOR, 1998.
• 6. Tape and Video-Recording and Client Observation of the Interviews and Groups Discussions. ESOMAR, 1996.
• 7. Conducting Marketing and Opinion Research Using the Internet. ESOMAR, 1998.
• 8. Guideline on Interviewing Children and Young People. ESOMAR, 1999.

The latest editions of the codes of ethics can be found on the WAPOR WEB sites - www.wapor.org; ESOMAR - www.esom-ar.org; AAPOR - www.aapor.org.

Appendix

• Federal Law of July 27, 2006 No. 152-FZ "On Personal Data".
• The first such set of rules was first published in the European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research (ESOMAR) in 1948.
• Tare and Video-Recording and Client Observation of the Interviews andGroups Discussions. ESOMAR, 1996.

In doing research, sociologists encounter with dilemma. On the one hand, they do not have the right to distort or manipulate the results obtained so that they serve unrighteous, personal or state goals, on the other hand, they are obliged to consider people as an end, not a means of their research. In view of possible conflicts between various obligations, the American Sociological Association (1980) has developed a set of ethical standards that scientists are required to follow in their work. Among the main ethical principles, the following should be mentioned.

Sociologists should not consciously use their role as a researcher as a mask to obtain information for purposes other than research.

Research subjects must be treated with confidentiality and respect.

Researchers must not place subjects at significant risk or cause personal harm during experiments. Where risk or harm may be implied, the unconditional consent of fully informed research participants is required.

Confidential information provided by research participants should be treated as such by sociologists even in cases where such information is not protected by any legal protections or privileges.

In general, since sociological knowledge can take the form of economic and political power, sociologists have an obligation to take all measures to protect their discipline, the people they study and teach, and society from the damage that may result from their professional activities.

Sociological perspective

The sociological perspective offers a fresh and creative approach to the study of so often ignored or taken for granted aspects of the social environment. It turns out that human experience has many levels of meaning and things are not always what they seem. Man's behavior is governed by a complex web of invisible laws and institutional systems, and man continually creates, negotiates, and renegotiates implied agreements with family members, friends, and work colleagues throughout his life in society. Many of the principles that drive us lie beyond our threshold of awareness. This is how, by comprehending the hidden structure of the outer world, we encounter new levels of reality. The rules, norms and relations that organize society into a well-functioning living system, in which everything is distributed in its place and each element performs certain functions, are difficult to grasp even for a professional researcher. In order to try to reconstruct its social appearance, one must learn to assemble the “skeleton” (structure) of society “by bones” (individual elements: groups, relationships) and, conversely, “scan” (reveal hard-to-reach) internal content, i.e. patterns of organization of society as a social system. This approach to reality - a specific form of consciousness - is the essence of the sociological perspective. The sociological perspective allows society to realize the aspects of human life hidden from it, teaches to see and correctly interpret the social “landscape”.