CREATE & MANAGE DATA
CONSENT & ETHICS
CONSENT / WRITTEN OR ORAL?
Whether informed consent is obtained in writing through a detailed consent form, by means of an informative statement, or verbally, depends on the nature of the research, the kind of data gathered, the data format and how the data will be used.
As with many other issues in research ethics, there is debate about the best format for gaining informed consent - written or oral. We recommend a pragmatic approach.
- For detailed interviews or research where personal, sensitive
or confidential data are gathered, the use of written consent forms
is recommended to assure compliance with the Data Protection Act
and with ethical requirements. Written consent documentation
typically includes an information sheet and consent form signed by
the participant.
- For surveys or informal interviews, where no personal data are
gathered or personal identifiers are removed from the data,
obtaining written consent may not be required. At a minimum an
information sheet should be provided to participants detailing the
nature and scope of the study, the identity of the researcher(s)
and what will happen to the data collected (including any data
sharing).
- If data are collected verbally through audio or video
recordings, verbal consent agreements can be recorded together with
the data.
- For audio-visual data where the identity of people may be disclosed from the data, it may be important that informed consent is obtained to use the data unaltered for research purposes, sharing and preservation. Voice alteration or image blurring are usually labour and cost intensive and may decrease the research potential of data.
Written consent should be gained wherever possible to ensure that information is being collected and provided in a consistent and uniform way. It may also serve to protect both researchers and participants should any form of dispute arise.
We provide examples of model consent forms.
Some argue that written forms with check boxes for every possible scenario help make all terms and conditions explicit. Others counter argue that such formalisation represents over-bureaucratisation and confusion for the participant, and that it may violate a trust relationship with participants. READ MORE
If a researcher decides against using written consent, then the next preferred option is to obtain oral consent and to audio record the participant granting consent. This approach may be used if the researcher deems that a written form is not the best way to share information and thus provide informed consent. For example, if participants have literacy limitations, if the potential participants are unusually wary of any formal documentation (e.g. refugees and asylum seekers) or in informal research settings, telephone research, etc.
Finally, it should be noted that there are circumstances (e.g. research on illegal activities, some evaluation research, covert research) where no form of consent can be obtained. These situations are exceptional and will need case-by-case review and clear arguments to satisfy the requirements of ethics review boards.
It is not surprising that there is confusion about consent in general and about the need for written consent in particular. Some guidelines and certain Research Ethics Committees, Research Governance boards or other bodies make statements indicating (or strongly implying) that written consent is required or mandatory. This is NOT the case. While the Archive strongly recommends the use of written forms, there are cases where it is not appropriate and flexibility in evaluating projects on their individual merits is essential.
