Content uploaded by Funda Eryılmaz Ballı
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Funda Eryılmaz Ballı on Jul 22, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2020, 12 (2), 119-131
© 2020 International Online Journal of Educational Sciences (IOJES)
www.iojes.net
International Online Journal of Educational Sciences
ISSN: 1309-2707
Examination of Informed Consent Forms in Masters and Doctorate Theses
of Educational Sciences
Research Article
Ozgur ONEN
1
, Funda ERYILMAZ BALLI
2
1Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Science, Burdur, Turkey, ORCID: 0000-0002-3715-7488
2 University, Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Science, Burdur, Turkey, ORCID: 0000-0003-4703-3945
To cite this article: Onen, O., & Balli, F. E. (2020). Examination of Informed Consent Forms in Masters and
Doctorate Theses of Educational Science, International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 12 (2), 119-131.
ARTI CLE IN F O
ABS T RAC T
Article History:
Received: 06.11.2019
Available online:
09.03.2020
The purpose of this study is to examine the informed consent forms of the master’s theses and
doctorate dissertations in educational sciences departments in Turkey; and to reach a conclusion
about whether the informed consent forms have the related informed consent criteria (competence,
voluntariness, disclosure, recommendation, understanding, decision and authorization) as proposed
by previous studies. This study is designed as documentary analysis, and the data was obtained from
master and doctorate theses which have been approved by social sciences and educational sciences
institutions, and submitted to the National Theses Center founded by the Council of Higher
Education (CoHE). Results indicated some deficiencies on consent forms, and some studies even did
not report consent forms in master thesis and doctorate dissertations. The results of the study are
discussed in the light of the existing literature. Finally, for ensuring responsible research conduct,
some recommendations were provided.
© 2020 IOJES. All rights reserved
Keywords:
Scientific ethics, responsible conduct of research, informed consent, deficiencies in informed consent
forms
Introduction
Conforming to ethical principles is an essential requirement for conducting responsible research in
human science studies (Federman, Hanna, & Rodriguez, 2003). According to the existing world-wide codes of
ethics, researchers who are interested in collecting data from human subjects have to abide by the ethical
principles while conducting research. In educational sciences, as a field dealing with human matters, it is
highly important and a duty for researchers to follow the ethical rules in order to protect research participants
1
Corresponding author’s address: Mehmet Akif Ersoy Ünv.Eğitim Fakültesi Burdur
Telephone: +9005068636519
e-mail: onenonen@hotmail.com
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2020.02.008
International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2020, 12 (2), 119-131
120
(Fraenkel, Wallen & Hyun, 2009). The extant literature about research ethics in educational sciences requires
that researchers are responsible for getting informed consent from the people participating (e.g. Howe &
Moses, 1999; Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2000). Regarding the history of scientific ethics in research, it is seen
that ethical codes were initially formed for medical studies. The first internationally salient ethical guideline,
although not officially accepted by western world (Katz, 1996), for research was the “Nuremberg Code”. After
that, “Declaration of Helsinki” in 1964 was the next most significant development in setting ethical principles
for conducting responsible research (Annas, 1992). There are, also, some more attempts on the issue on
international level (Fischer, 2006).
Many professional bodies have created their own ethical regulations to protect the persons who get
service, professionals who serve and the profession itself too. American Medical Association code of medical
ethics for physicians (2016), American Psychological Association (APA) ethical principles of psychologists
(APA, 2017) and American Counseling Association (ACA) code of ethics (2014) for counselors are some ethical
guideline samples for different professional associations. Specific ethical principles have also been formed by
many universities such as Harvard, Stanford or University of Toronto. With the help of ethical guidelines,
ethics committees and centers for ethics, universities aim at not only responsible research but also fostering
studies on ethics for different disciplines.
Considering Turkey, many of the universities have founded an ethics committee and written a code of
ethics (e.g. Middle East Technical University, Bosphorus University etc.). However, complaints on ethical
problems in Turkish universities are increasing day by day, but ethic committees and ethics codes fall short of
stopping the problems regarding scientific ethics (Ertekin, et al., 2002). Although many reasons can be
speculated, one of the main reasons of the ethical problems may be that Turkish university ethics committees
have recently been established and ethical violation is a quite new concern. Possibly because of those
speculations, Higher Education Council (CoHE) revealed new regulations and sanctions in 2016. According
to new regulations, informed consent is a must for graduate students and academics conducting researches in
Turkey, however most of the universities had already issued their own regulations for getting informed
consents from participants in the studies conducted by their academics and students.
Although, master’s theses and doctorate dissertations are the scientific studies requiring informed
consent from the participants in most of the universities, it is the personal observation of the researchers of
this current study that there are neither standardized informed consent rules nor informed consent forms
presented by all universities. Hence, it is quite possible to expect that master’s and doctoral students violate
some basic principles of informed consent. In addition to this observation, it is reported that graduate
students’, intentionally or unintentionally, engage in some unethical, questionable behaviors in their academic
studies (Artino Jr & Brown, 2009). Considering these, it can be hypothesized that some problems in informed
consent forms may exist in master’s theses and doctorate dissertations. Thus, this study aimed to examine the
informed consent forms of the master’s theses and doctorate dissertations in educational sciences and to
conclude whether the informed consent forms have the related and required informed consent criteria.
Theoretical Framework
Different definitions of informed consent focus on three main components; having enough knowledge
about the study, a voluntary agreement to join, an uncompelling interaction between the researcher and the
participant (Eyler & Jeste, 2006; Neff, 2008; Ross, Sundberg, & Flint, 1999). If the persons are eligible in terms
of age and mental functioning, they can personally consent to take part in a research. However, if the person
is not eligible, either the parents (for their children) or the caretakers/guardians can decide for participation
on the condition that the relevant study will not damage the person under their protection.
Özgür Önen & Funda Eryılmaz Ballı
121
Informed consent is important and functional because it is the personal, ethical and legal shared
understanding between the participants and the investigators. The existing literature agrees on the necessary
elements which an informed consent should include (Beauchamp & Childress, 2001; Marczyk, DeMatteo, &
Festinger, 2005; Neff, 2008). The elements of informed consent can be listed as: a purpose statement,
explanation of the procedure, confidentiality, voluntariness, the right to withdraw from the study any time,
potential risks, benefits, other available alternative studies, any compensation in case of injury, informing
about the new findings, contact information for questions and concerns.
The accessible informed consent literature is primarily about medical studies. They point out that
existing forms of informed consent and implementation of informed consent should be improved in order to
protect patients from mistreatment (e.g. Davis, Berkel, Holcombe, Pramanik, & Divers, 1998; Lynöe, Sandlung,
& Jacobson, 1996). The first group of studies focused on the comprehension qualities of the informed consent.
They noted that people involving to a research study generally do not understand the information in the
informed consent procedure since informed consent requires heavy comprehending of complex information
(e.g. Barrett, 2005; Wirshing, Wirshing, Marder, Liberman, & Mintz, 1998). The second group thinks that
readability level of the informed consent is really high and inappropriate for persons to be involved in a
research study (Hammerschmidt & Keane, 1992; Raich, Plomer, & Coyne, 2001). Another group stated that
language and culture are big challenges for the western model of informed consent (Levine,1991; Saunders &
Davys, 2007); and therefore informed consent should be adapted in accordance to the culture it belongs. In
order to increase the success of the informed consent, explaining the informed consent verbally to the study
participants (Flory & Emanuel, 2004), the use of multimedia (Jimison, Sher, Appleyard, & Levernois, 1998),
using simplified forms instead of the standard ones (Davis, et al., 1998), were the suggestions of the
researchers.
Social research and educational research have pursued the medical research ethics. Due to the fact that
research in educational sciences, usually, involves human beings in their study scope, it is a requirement that
researchers comply with ethical principles. And from the recent ethical guidelines presented (e.g. American
Educational Research Association, 2011; Scottish Educational Research Association, 2005), it is clear that
obtaining informed consent has become an essential part of doing educational research. However there is no
study directly focusing on consent forms used in the studies, except the one conference paper presented by
first author of this study and his colleague (Önen & Tanrıkulu, 2010). Examining the consent forms may help
researchers in their future studies on fulfilling the ethical standards. Additionally, it may also be useful for
research institution as to understand the current deficiencies on responsible research conducts practices. They
can revise their regulations, or can have understanding on educational needs of their research staff.
By conducting this study, it was aimed to call attention of researchers on the problems existing informed
consent forms. Additionally, revealing the shortcoming of the consent forms, already used in the studies, may
enhance the researchers’ educational needs on scientific ethics education too. Moreover, it may help to
development of the scientific ethic culture in research institutions and educational organizations.
Method
This is a descriptive study to identify the features of the informed consent forms that were used in the
master’s theses and doctorate dissertations conducted in Turkey. In this study, document analysis method,
which is an organized procedure for examining and evaluating documents (Bowen, 2009), is used. By
document analysis method, it was aimed to present the already existing deficiencies of informed consent
forms.
International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2020, 12 (2), 119-131
122
Procedure
According to ongoing regulations, all thesis have to be submitted to the Higher Education Council
(CoHE). At the same time, CoHE have a right of presenting the theses for researchers and public. The only
exceptions are for the theses those the writers indicated that they do not want to share it with public, but this
is also for a limited time. Up to three years, researchers can postpone the publication of their theses on CoHE
web-site. In addition, researchers have to submit all the documents including data collection questionnaires
in their master and doctorate theses in Turkey. Therefore, other researchers have open access to most of the
master theses and doctorate dissertations. In this current study, informed consent forms gathered from the
CoHE web site, and their consent forms are examined. However, in most of the studies conducted in Turkey,
there is no separate informed consent form. But questionnaires usually start with an “informed consent-like”
section that works as an informed consent. These parts are accepted as informed consent forms in this study
as well, although they are not separately given to participants.
Data Selection Criteria
The population of this study is composed of all master’s theses and doctorate dissertations submitted
in educational sciences departments in Turkey. However, accessible population is the master and doctorate
theses that are available for all the researchers on the web side of CoHE. Prior to the analysis of informed
consent forms, there were a total of 1617 master and 300 doctorate theses submitted to educational sciences
departments and published on the CoHE web-site with full permission. In this study, 400 of them were
downloaded by stratified random sampling method from CoHE web site before October, 2018. By this method,
from each strata researchers aims to access same amount of data source to represent the population better
(Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006). However, seven of them were not included into the analysis as there were no
appendix sections acknowledging data collection although they should have according to ongoing regulation.
Other 42 of them were excluded since they were not related to human subjects. Finally, 304 master theses and
54 doctorate dissertations have included in this study, accordingly amounts of the total numbers of theses and
dissertations. Only the theses submitted between 2010 and 2015 were selected, as some studies which were
submitted in 2016 still do not publically available. Additionally, studies before 2010 has been examined in a
study presented in a conference (Önen & Tanrıkulu, 2010). In Table 1, thesis and dissertations included in the
study were given accordingly to programs in educational sciences.
Table 1. Thesis and Dissertations Included According to Programs
Program
Master
Doctorate
Total
Curriculum and Instruction
55
14
69
Educational Administration
170
13
183
Educational Assessment
10
6
16
Guidance and Psychological Counseling
25
6
31
Special Education
35
10
45
Educational Technology
5
1
6
Educational Culture
4
4
8
Total
304
54
358
Procedure
Initially, master theses and doctorate dissertations were randomly downloaded by the researchers from
the web site of the CoHE. Similar programs are clustered together in this study, for example educational
administration, educational management and economics, educational management and supervising
departments are clustered as educational administration.
Özgür Önen & Funda Eryılmaz Ballı
123
Later a check list prepared accordingly, one of the clearly presented informed consent form criteria that
can be found on Marczyk, DeMatteo and Festinger’s (2005) study. However, they presented informed consent
criteria primarily based on experimental design. But it was seen that the downloaded theses and dissertations
included diverse samples and diverse research designs. Therefore, in addition to the basic elements proposed
by Marcyzk, DeMatteo and Festinger (2005), the researchers made use of other resources (Beauchamp &
Childress, 2001) regarding the elements of informed consent forms for different research designs and samples.
Finally, a comprehensive check list was formed. The components were; purpose, possible risks and risk
mention, benefits, alternatives, confidentiality, voluntariness, authorization, contact information, contact
address, children and parent permission, language for children and sign. All the consent forms and method
sections were examined. Later on, peer reviews were conducted for increasing the validity of the study.
Results
There are 358 theses from 48 different universities in seven different programs, namely; curriculum,
administration, measurement, guidance, special education, technical education, and culture. In total 304 of the
studies (84.9 %) were master theses and 54 of the studies (15.1 %) were doctorate dissertations. In total, 67 of
the studies (18.7 %) were completed in 2010, 31 of the studies (8.7 %) were completed in 2011, 43 of the studies
(12 %) were completed in 2012, 53 of the studies (14.8 %) were completed in 2013, 68 of the studies (19 %) were
completed in 2014 and 96 of the studies (26.8 %) were completed in 2015. Language of the studies were mainly
Turkish (n=336, 93.9 %) and only 22 of them (6.1 %) were written in English.
Informed Consent
As can be seen in Table 2, 275 (76.8 %) of the theses has an informed consent, however 83 (23.2 %) of the
theses do not have any kind of consent form or statement. When the inclusion of informed consents are
examined accordingly to doctorate and master levels, it is noticed that 16 (29.6%) of the doctorate dissertations
do not have consent forms while 38 (70.4%) of them has got. On the other hand, 237 (78 %) of the master theses
have consent forms while 67 (22 %) of them do not have. These may be considered as very high amounts.
Table 2. Percentages of Theses Including Consent Form
When the desired properties of the consent form examined, on the other hand, some deficiencies are
detected as given below;
Purpose
From one of the basic features of informed consents, 234 of the theses (85.1%) included the purpose of
the study. However, 41 of them (14.9%) did not directly or correctly stated the purpose (example for incorrect
statement; “The data will be used in my master thesis”) in the informed consents. When it is examined
according to master or doctorate levels it can be seen that 198 (83.5%) of the master theses have consent forms
while 39 (16.5 %) of them do not have. Likewise 36 (94.7%) of the doctorate dissertations have consent forms
and only 2 (5.3%) of them do not have.
Included
Not included
Total
Ms/PhD
n
%
n
%
n
%
Master
237
78
67
22
304
100
Doctorate
38
70.4
16
29.6
54
100
Total
275
76.8
83
23.2
358
100
International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2020, 12 (2), 119-131
124
Table 3. Percentages of Theses Including Purposes
Possible risks and risk mention
Another important issue is risk in informed consents. In the analysis, it is seen that 147 (53.5%) of the
theses had possible risky situations at some degree, while there were no risks for participants in 128 (46.5%)
of them. When the master theses are examined it can be said that 131 (55.3%) of the studies had risks for
participants and 106 (44.7%) of them had no risks. Similarly, 16 (42.1%) of the doctorate dissertations consist
risky situations, while 22 (57.9%) of them do not. More importantly none of them included a risk mention.
Table 4. Percentages of Theses Including Possible Risks
Benefits
When the benefits of the research for participants are examined Table 5 shows that only 28 (10.2%) of
the 275 studies have benefits for participants and the rest that is 247 (89.8%) of them have not. For master
degree numbers of beneficial and non-beneficial studies are respectively 18 (7.6%) and 219 (92.4%). For
doctorate degree, there are 10 (26.3%) beneficial and 28 (73.7%) non-beneficial dissertations. However, no
possible benefit statement was detected.
Table 5. Percentages of Theses Including Benefits
Alternatives
As can be seen in Table 6, in total, only 4 (1.5%) of the theses include alternatives for participants, in
case they do not want to participate. However, 271 (98.5%) of them do not states any alternative way. Three
of the four consent forms that stated alternatives were master theses (1.3%) and one of them was doctorate
dissertation (2.6%).
Table 6. Percentages of Theses Including Alternatives
Included
Not included
Total
Ms/PhD
n
%
n
%
n
%
Master
198
83.5
39
16.5
237
100
Doctorate
36
94.7
2
5.3
38
100
Total
234
85.1
41
14.9
275
100
Included
Not included
Total
Ms/PhD
n
%
n
%
n
%
Master
131
55.3
106
44.7
237
100
Doctorate
16
42.1
22
57.9
38
100
Total
147
53.5
128
46.5
275
100
Beneficial
Non-beneficial
Total
Ms/PhD
n
%
n
%
n
%
Master
18
7.6
219
92.4
237
100
Doctorate
10
26.3
28
73.7
38
100
Total
28
10.2
247
89.8
275
100
Included
Not included
Total
Ms/PhD
n
%
n
%
n
%
Master
3
1.3
234
98.7
237
100
Doctorate
1
2.6
37
97.4
38
100
Total
4
1.5
271
98.5
275
100
Özgür Önen & Funda Eryılmaz Ballı
125
Confidentiality
Again one of the most important features of the informed consents is confidentiality. But only 129
(46.9%) of the consent forms include a statement that supply confidentiality. On the other hand, 146 (53.1%)
of the informed consents do not have a statement for confidentiality (Table 7). For the master theses the
number of theses which provide confidentiality is 106 (44.7%) while the opposite is 131 (55.3%). When the
number of doctorate dissertations have confidentiality is 23 (60.5%), 15 (39.5%) of the theses do not have
confidentiality.
Table 7. Percentages of Theses Including Participant’s Confidentiality
Voluntariness
Another basic feature of the informed consents is the statement of voluntariness. However, only 34 of
them (12.4 %) stepped on this issue, 241(87.6 %) of the studies did not indicate that if they did not want to
participate, they had a right not to participate (Table 8). For master theses number of studies that include
voluntariness is 26 (11.0%) and there are 211 (89.0%) studies which do not include any statement for
voluntariness. Likewise most of the doctorate dissertations, 30 (78.9%) of them, do not have statement for
voluntariness and only 8 (21.1%) of them have.
Table 8. Percentages of Theses Including Voluntariness
Authorization
When Table 9 is analyzed, it is seen that only 37 (13.5) of the theses have statements for authorization
and most of the theses, 238 (86.5%), do not have. When it is examined according to master or doctorate levels
it can be seen that 28 (11.8%) of the master theses have authorization while 209 (88.2 %) of them do not have.
Likewise 9 (23.7%) of the doctorate dissertations have authorization and 29 (76.3%) of them do not have.
Table 9. Percentages of Theses Including Authorization
Contact information
As shown in Table 10, 229 (83.3%) of the consent forms include information about researchers and 46
(16.7%) of them do not. With similar percentages 198 (83.5%) master theses have contact information and 39
(16.5%) of them do not. Likewise, 31 (81.6%) of the doctorate dissertations include contact information of
researchers but 7 (18.4%) of them do not.
Included
Not included
Total
MsPhD
n
%
n
%
n
%
Master
106
44.7
131
55.3
237
100
Doctorate
23
60.5
15
39.5
38
100
Total
129
46.9
146
53.1
275
100
Included
Not included
Total
Ms/PhD
n
%
n
%
n
%
Master
26
11
211
89
237
100
Doctorate
8
21.1
30
78.9
38
100
Total
39
34
12.4
241
87.6
275
Included
Not included
Total
Ms/PhD
n
%
n
%
n
%
Master
28
11.8
209
88.2
237
100
Doctorate
9
23.7
29
76.3
38
100
Total
39
37
13.5
238
86.5
275
International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2020, 12 (2), 119-131
126
Table 10. Percentages of Theses Including Contact Information
Contact address
In case of a need, when a participant wants to communicate with the researchers, it is an important issue
to provide a contact address. Yet, only 74 (26.9 %) of the informed consents include contact addresses. 201
(73.1 %) of them do not include contact address (Table 11). When the inclusion of contact address is examined
accordingly to doctorate and master levels, it is noticed that 58 (24.5 %) of the master theses have contact
address while 179 (75.5 %) of them have not. On the other hand, 16 (42.1 %) of the doctorate dissertations have
contact address while 22 (57.9 %) of them do not have.
Table 11. Percentages of Theses Including Contact Addresses
Children and parent permission
In total, 120 of them (33.5 %) included children. However only 19 (19%) of themincluded parent
permissions in master theses, while 81 (81%) of them do not included any parent permission (Table 12). On
doctorate dissertations 8 (40%) of them included parent permissions while 12 (60 %) of them do not include
parent permission.
Table 12. Percentages of Theses Including Parent Permissions Where Children are Samples
Language for children
When the uses of languages are examined, only 4 of them were not written in a language that may not
be understandable by children (3.3 %) (Table 13). Those theses were all master theses. All the doctorate
dissertations were written accordingly children’s understanding levels.
Table 13. Percentages of Theses Including Appropriate Language for Children
Sign
Sign is, also, considered as another basic feature of the informed consents. However, when the Table 13
is examined it is seen that only 39 (14.2%) of them have a part for sign but 236 (85.8%) of them do not have
(Table 14). Again with similar percentages, 29 (12.2%) of the master theses have a part for sign but 208 (87.8%)
Included
Not included
Total
Ms/PhD
n
%
n
%
n
%
Master
198
83.5
39
16.5
237
100
Doctorate
31
81.6
7
18.4
38
100
Total
39
229
83.3
46
16.7
275
Included
Not included
Total
Ms/PhD
n
%
n
%
n
%
Master
58
24.5
179
75.5
237
100
Doctorate
16
42.1
22
57.9
38
100
Total
39
74
26.9
201
73.1
275
Included
Not included
Total
Ms/PhD
n
%
n
%
n
%
Master
19
19
81
81
100
100
Doctorate
8
40
12
60
20
100
Total
39
27
22.5
93
77.5
120
Appropriate
Inappropriate
Total
Ms/PhD
n
%
n
%
n
%
Master
96
96
4
4
100
100
Doctorate
20
100
0
0
20
100
Total
39
116
96.7
4
3.3
120
Özgür Önen & Funda Eryılmaz Ballı
127
of them do not. And for doctorate dissertations number of studies which have sign part is 10 (26.3%) and
number of studies which have not is 28 (73.7%).
Table 14. Percentages of Theses Asking for Sign
Discussion
There is an important amount of theses not including any kinds of consent forms. This occurs especially
in the theses where the variables are measured by achievement tests. It may be considered as an important
ethical problem. Some participants may even not know that they are a part of a study. However, it must be
noted that some thesis do not have an appendix part, but this does not truly mean that consent forms are not
gathered. But, not reporting the necessary parts may also be considered as kind of scientific ethics problem,
since reporting the all results, documents and tools used in a scientific study is primarily researchers’
responsibility. When the consent forms were examined, it was seen that many of them lack some critical
aspects of a qualified consent form as proposed by previous researchers (Beauchamp & Childress, 2001;
Marcyzk, et al., 2005) and declarations. For example, almost 15 % of them did not have the aim of the study.
And even in some possible risky and beneficial situations, none of the theses had a risk or benefit statement.
It is also seen that the percent of stating confidentiality (46.9 %) seems unsatisfactory. Moreover, mentioning
voluntariness is quite low. Only thirty four of the theses put a statement of volunteer participation, which may
be considered as a core concept in a scientific study and one of the early components as arose from the
Nurnberg trials. In addition, the participants’ right of terminating a study was only given in thirty seven of all
theses. Even though most of the researchers (83.3%) indicated some information about themselves such as
names and institutions, only seventy four of them provided contact address.
Although, 120 of the theses involved children as a sample, only twenty seven of them asked for parent
permission. This not only just an ethical concern, but also against the current legal regulations in Turkey.
Ongoing regulations do not permit researchers to conduct studies without getting written permission from
parents, at the same time, principals and teacher are also responsible for checking the legal permissions
gathered from parents (MoNE, 2007). However, it is detected that most of the consent forms presented to
children were written in appropriate language, only four of them were not suitable for the children in master
theses.
Although, alternative treatment offering is more crucial for experimental and quasi experimental
studies. Only in four of the theses alternative options were presented. Indication of voluntarily participation
and acceptance the terms by sign is, just, found in 39 consent form.
Considering the findings, it can be concluded that there are important deficiencies in consent forms.
This problem has three main dimensions; the researcher, the supervisor and the university. These three agents
have primary roles (Fisher, Fried, Goodman, & Germano, 2009). Lack of knowledge or not giving enough
attention to responsible research conduct practices by these agents may be the main source. However, it should
be noted that, in studies conduct in educational organizations, researchers should get permissions. On
application processes, authorities in educational organizations have a right to check the data collection tools
and other documents. This means that there must be a problem on permission processes, either occurring from
the regulations or coming from the qualifications of the staff responsible on checking the documents while
getting permissions for conducting research in educational organizations. However, Higher Education
Council (CoHE) as mentioned before, revealed new regulations and sanctions for improving responsible
Included
Not included
Total
Ms/PhD
n
%
n
%
n
%
Master
29
12.2
208
87.8
237
100
Doctorate
10
26.3
28
73.7
38
100
Total
39
14.2
236
85.8
275
100
International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2020, 12 (2), 119-131
128
research conducts in 2016. According to new regulations, informed consent is a must for graduate students
and academics conducting researches in Turkey. Additionally, TUBİTAK, a higher education institution for
supporting and conducting researches in Turkey, has started to support a project which aims to increase
awareness of responsible research conduct and give online education about scientific ethics. In future, by
conducting similar studies, the effect of the regulations and the education programs should be evaluated.
Limitations
The scope of this study only covers the available master theses and doctorate dissertations in Turkey.
Additionally, results based on the declared documents in the theses and dissertations. Although, researchers
are expected to present all documents they have used in their graduate studies, still, there is the possibility
that some researchers have not presented all the documents. So the results of this study can be generalized to
some extent. Although peer reviews were conducted for the analyses, the results are based on the subjective
judgments of the researchers.
Özgür Önen & Funda Eryılmaz Ballı
129
Appendix
Sample Consent Form Derived from the First Author’s Dissertation
Dear Participant,
This study is a part of doctorate dissertation with the title “Teachers’ Openness to Violation of Ethical
Decisions”, which is conducted by METU Educational Sciences Department Student Özgür ÖNEN with
supervision of Assoc. Prof. Dr. Yaşar KONDAKÇI.
The aim of this study is to reveal to what extent teachers can violate their ethical decisions for the well-
being and / or interests of managers, teachers (colleagues), students and their parents, who are the main
stakeholders of educational institutions, when they encounter a situation or issue that they do not find morally
(ethically) correct; and to examine the relationship between these attitudes and some variables at the
individual and organizational level.
It will take you approximately twenty minutes to fill out the form. Participation is entirely voluntary, and
you can stop participating at any stage when filling out the form. If you don’t want to participate in the study,
you may choose any other activity to spend your time, you may stay or leave the room.
The information to be obtained will be used in the doctoral dissertation study carried out for scientific
purposes. Your participation in the study does not pose any risk except being read by the others. However,
this risk is eliminated since individual data will be stored by the researcher and will not be shared with third
parties or institutions. The scale form will not be associated with this signed form to keep your identity
confidential. If you have any questions, you can reach the researcher through the contact addresses listed
below and ask your questions about the research. If you want to participate in the research, please read and
sign the statement below.
Research Assistant Özgür ÖNEN
Adress: Middle East Technical University,
Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Sciences,
Üniversiteler Mahallesi, Dumlupınar Bulvarı,
06800 Çankaya Ankara/TURKEY
Phone number : +90 (3XX) YYY YY YY
: +90 (5XX) YYY YY YY
E-mail : XXXX@metu.edu.tr
I have read the above statement and I voluntarily participate in this study.
………………….
Sign
Authorization
Voluntariness
Confidentiality
Contact info
Purpose Mention
Contact adress
Sign
Risk mention
Alternative
International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2020, 12 (2), 119-131
130
REFERENCES
American Counseling Association. (2014). Code of ethics. Retrieved from https://
www.counseling.org/resources/aca-code-of-ethics.pdf
American Educational Research Association. (2011). Code of Ethics. Approved by the AERA Council February
2011. Retrieved from https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.weraonline.org/resource/resmgr/ a_general/
aera.pdf
American Medical Association. (2016). AMA Code of medical ethics. Retrieved from https://www.ama-
assn.org/sites/ama-assn.org/files/corp/media-browser/principles-of-medical-ethics.pdf
American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Retrieved
from https://www.apa.org/ethics/code/
Annas, G. J. (1992). “The changing landscape of human experimentation: Nuremberg, Helsinki, and
beyond”. Health Matrix, 2, 119 - 140.
Artino Jr, A. R., & Brown, S. W. (2009). “Ethics in educational research: A comparative analysis of graduate
student and faculty beliefs”. College Student Journal, 43(2), 599-616.
Barrett, R. (2005). “Quality of informed consent: measuring understanding among participants in oncology
clinical trials”. In Oncology nursing forum. 32(4), 751-755.
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2001). Principles of biomedical ethics. USA: Oxford University Press.
Bowen, Glenn A., 2009, Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method, Qualitative Research Journal,
9(2), 27-40.
Council of Higher Education. (2018). Thesis center. Retrieved from https://tez.yok.gov.tr /UlusalTezMerkezi/
Council of Higher Education. (2016). Yükseköğretim kurumlari bilimsel araştirma ve yayin etiği yönergesi
(Regulation on scientific research and publication ethics for higher education institutions). Retrieved from
https://www.yok.gov.tr/Sayfalar/ Kurumsal/mevzuat/bilimsel-arastirma-ve-etik-yonetmeligi.aspx
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education 5th edition. London: Routledge
Falmer.
Davis, T. C., Berkel, H. J., Holcombe, R. F., Pramanik, S., & Divers, S. G. (1998). “Informed consent for clinical
trials: a comparative study of standard versus simplified forms”. JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer
Institute, 90(9), 668-674.
Ertekin, C., Berker, N., Tolun, A., Ülkü, D., Aksan, D., Erzan, A., ... & Öztürk, O. (2002). Bilimsel araştırmada
etik ve sorunları. Ankara: Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Yayınları.
Eyler, L. T., & Jeste, D. V. (2006). “Enhancing the informed consent process: A conceptual overview”. Behavioral
sciences & the law, 24(4), 553-568.
Federman, D., Hanna, K., & Rodriguez, L. (2003). Responsible research. A Systems Approach to protecting research
participants executive summary, committee on assessing the system for protecting human research participants.
Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US).
Fisher, C. B., Fried, A. L., Goodman, S. J., & Germano, K. K. (2009). “Measures of mentoring, department
climate, and graduate student preparedness in the responsible conduct of psychological
research”. Ethics & Behavior, 19(3), 227-252.
Fischer IV, B. A. (2006). “A summary of important documents in the field of research ethics”. Schizophrenia
Bulletin, 32(1), 69–80.
Flory, J., & Emanuel, E. (2004). Interventions to improve research participants' understanding in informed
consent for research: A systematic review. Jama, 292(13), 1593-1601.
Fraenkel, J.R., & Wallen, N.E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education (6th ed.). Boston, MA: The
McGraw-Hill Companies.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York
NY: McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages.
Özgür Önen & Funda Eryılmaz Ballı
131
Hammerschmidt, D. E., & Keane, M. A. (1992). “Institutional Review Board (IRB) review lacks impact on the
readability of consent forms for research”. The American Journal of the Medical Sciences, 304(6), 348-351.
Howe, K. R., & Moses, M. S. (1999). Ethics in educational research. Review of research in education, 24(1), 21-59.
Jimison, H. B., Sher, P. P., Appleyard, R., & LeVernois, Y. (1998). “The use of multimedia in the informed
consent process”. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 5(3), 245-256.
Katz, J. (1996). “The Nuremberg code and the Nuremberg trial: A reappraisal”. Jama, 276(20), 1662-1666.
Levine, R. J. (1991). “Informed consent: some challenges to the universal validity of the Western model”. Law,
Medicine and Health Care, 19(3-4), 207-213.
Lynöe, N., Sandlund, M., & Jacobsson, L. (1996). “Some aspects on doctors' attitudes to informing
participants”. Acta Oncologica, 35(6), 749-754.
Marczyk, G., DeMatteo, D., & Festinger, D. (2005). Essentials of research design and methodology. New York, NY:
John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Ministry of National Education. (2007). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığına bağlı okul ve kurumlarda yapılacak araştırma ve
araştırma desteğine yönelik izin ve uygulama yönergesi (Regulations on research and grants, for the studies will
be conducted in schools and institutions under authorization of Ministry of National Education). Retrieved from
http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/dosyalar/538.pdf
Neff, M. J. (2008). “Informed consent: what is it? Who can give it? How do we improve it?”. Respiratory care,
53(10), 1337-1341.
Önen, Ö. & Tanrıkulu, İ. (2010). Examination of informed consent in Masters and doctorate theses of Educational
Sciences. Paper presented at XIV. World Congress of Comparative Education Societies, Istanbul-Turkey
Raich, P. C., Plomer, K. D., & Coyne, C. A. (2001). “Literacy, comprehension, and informed consent in clinical
research”. Cancer investigation, 19(4), 437-445.
Ross, J. G., Sundberg, E. C., & Flint, K. H. (1999). “Informed consent in school health research: why, how, and
making it easy. Journal of School Health, 69(5), 171-176.
Saunders, S., & Davys, A. (2007). “Informing for consent: The challenges across language, culture and
gender”. Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work Review, 19(2), 12-21.
Scottish Educational Research Association. (2005). Ethical guidelines for educational research. Scottish
Educational Research Association, 1-15.
Wirshing, D. A., Wirshing, W. C., Marder, S. R., Liberman, R. P., & Mintz, J. (1998). “Informed consent:
assessment of comprehension”. American Journal of Psychiatry, 155(11), 1508-1511.
