Ethical issue: the term and the five issues
Ethical issue — a point where the researcher's need for useful, valid data conflicts with the rights, dignity or wellbeing of participants; not simply a study being unpleasant. Bullet a is a term: learn the five issues from 11.1.8 — informed consent, deception, confidentiality, right to withdraw and protection of participants — each in two elements, as a one-word label rarely scores. Bullet b then asks you to find these issues inside real Topic 1-5 studies.
Studies from Topics 1-5 as the AO2 vehicle
Bullet b earns the marks: take research from the compulsory topics and use it to explain ethical issues. Learn a few as worked examples — Haney, Banks and Zimbardo (1973) raises protection of participants and the right to withdraw (prisoners distressed; some could not leave); Piliavin et al (1969) raises deception (a staged collapse). The habit: name the study, the specific feature that creates the problem, the issue, then the safeguard.
Pair each issue with its safeguard
Every ethical issue has a recognised safeguard, and a full answer names both. Informed consent: explain the study and its risks, get written agreement first (children: via parents or guardians). Deception: keep it minimal and fully debrief. Confidentiality: store data securely and report it anonymously, e.g. under a pseudonym. Right to withdraw: tell participants at the start they may leave and remove their data. Protection: monitor for distress and stop if harm occurs.
Drawn from real examiner reports.
Informed consent vs right to withdraw
These two blur because both involve agreement, but at different moments. Informed consent comes before the study: the participant agrees to take part after being told what it involves and its risks. The right to withdraw runs during and after: they may stop at any time and remove their data. Consent at the start never cancels the ongoing right to leave.
Not every criticism is an ethical issue
The most-recorded error: asked for an ethical issue, candidates give a method point instead. A biased sample, an invalid measure or an extraneous variable all concern the quality of the evidence, not the treatment of participants. An ethical issue is about how people were treated — consent, deception, privacy, freedom to leave, safety — not how good the evidence is.
Asked to state an ethical issue, candidates instead answered about variables, validity, reliability, sampling or personality (June 2022 P2 Q4b).
Restating the label is not a definition
A definition that just repeats the label scores nothing, and it bites hardest on the right to withdraw. "The right to withdraw is the right to withdraw" earns no mark; "the participant may stop at any time and have their data removed" does. For each issue learn the two elements the scheme wants; if your wording adds no new word, it is circular.
A right-to-withdraw definition must say what withdrawing actually means, not restate the term (June 2019 P2 Q1b).
Ethics must fit the setting and people
Ethics is real evaluation, but only when the situation raises it. In a public place, observing behaviour without asking first is not automatically a fault: a lack of informed consent there would not be creditworthy. With children, consent and debriefing count only through parents or guardians. Protection is judged against everyday life, so mild discomfort is not a breach.
In a public place, a lack of informed consent would not be creditworthy as a weakness (June 2024 P1 Q23b). With children, informed consent and debriefing count only when routed through parents or guardians (June 2023 P2 Q1b).
Confidentiality vs protection
Both protect the participant, from different things. Confidentiality protects information: personal data and identity kept private, reported anonymously (a pseudonym). Protection protects the person: safe from harm beyond everyday life. A study can breach one alone — a published name breaks confidentiality with no harm; distress breaks protection though data stays private.
Naming a study is not application
Bullet b wants you to use research from Topics 1-5, but naming the study is not application. "Zimbardo's study was unethical" earns little; point to the specific feature — prisoners became distressed, the study stopped early — then name the issue it raises and its safeguard. A bare title, or a vague "it raises ethical issues", is not credited.
"Ethical" does not mean "nice"
Students read "ethical" as meaning kind, and call a study unethical whenever anyone was uncomfortable. That is wrong. An ethical issue is a conflict between research and participants' rights, judged by the study's aim and how the issue was handled. Protection concerns harm beyond everyday life — whether it was justified and managed, not whether anyone was upset.
The 9-mark Assess: AO1 3 / AO2 3 / AO3 3
This is examined by the 9-mark Assess: AO1 3 / AO2 3 / AO3 3. Define the issue (AO1), tie it to a feature of the study (AO2), then weigh the ethical cost against the findings (AO3) and conclude. The recurring weakness is AO3 and balance — reach a judgement, not a list.
Write AO2 before AO3
AO3 cannot be awarded without AO2 present: a faultless, study-based evaluation with no scenario link scores zero. Starting with evaluation leaves the application too thin, so write AO2 first — tie each point to a specific feature of the study before judging it.
Name the issue and its safeguard
Naming an issue is only half a point. "It breaks confidentiality" is a bare identification; "so report the data under a pseudonym and store it securely" adds the method that earns the mark. For every issue you raise, give the point plus its concrete safeguard.
Prose, and read the command word
Write continuous prose — bullet-pointed answers are not accepted. Match the answer to the command word: "state one ethical issue" wants a named issue, not a method point; "explain a strength" wants justification, not description, or it stays in the lower band.
Ethical issue — a point at which the researcher's need for useful, valid data comes into conflict with the rights, dignity or wellbeing of the participants. It is not the same as a study being unpleasant.
The five issues to name and define (from statement 11.1.8), each in two elements:
Full notes, flashcards, Q&A and the topic quiz for every premium subject.
Premium plans are US$8.99/month or US$49.99/year — first month free.
Studying with a parent's blessing? Show them this.
