Forschungsethische Prinzipien und methodische Güte in der Umfrageforschung

Standardized surveys are a central empirical method in the social sciences, this also applies to communication and media studies. Surveys are used to research opinions, attitudes and knowledge and to retrospectively investigate behaviors or intentions to act. As the results often also play an important role in the context of political decisions or in the public discourse, great attention is paid to the methodological quality of the studies and the demand for valid and reliable data is high. With regard to its principles and modes of action, surveys have therefore been systematically researched in many respects and methodologically optimized accordingly, e.g. with regard to the cognitive process underlying response behavior, potential sources of error or specific response heuristics. However, the exclusive consideration of methodological aspects is not sufficient to ensure scientific quality in all facets. Aspects of research ethics and their connection with methodological requirements must also be considered as part of good scientific practice. However, methodological requirements, such as valid and reliable procedures, as well as ethical requirements can also contradict each other. The resulting dilemmas can arise at any stage of the research process. In such cases, a systematic balancing of ethical concerns and methodological requirements is necessary; this is the responsibility of ethics committees, but often also of the researchers themselves. Accordingly, scientists bear a special responsibility in the context of empirical research with human subjects. The welfare, rights and interests of the participants must be respected. In this sense, research ethics—understood as the respectful and appreciative treatment of all persons involved in empirical research projects—is an essential component of good scientific practice. Balancing requirements of both method and research ethics poses specific challenges for standardized surveys. In this article, we address these areas of tension and discuss them using the example of standardized surveys of different designs.

Building on a literature-based analysis of general ethical-methodological challenges, we present results of semi-structured interviews from 2021 conducted as part of the BMBF-funded project Research Ethics in Communication and Media Research (FeKoM). We interviewed empirical researchers working in the field of communication and media studies. We examined the following research question: What kind of research ethics challenges do empirical communication researchers face in standardized survey studies and how do they deal with them? In doing so, we referred to a partial data set (n = 29), namely to those interviewees who addressed research ethics practices and challenges in survey research.

The article considers how the interviewees made and justified decisions at the individual level and how they proceeded in specific individual cases. We thus concentrated on the micro level of research ethics decisions and only included other reference levels, such as contextualization through institutional (meso level) or legal requirements (macro level), if they played a role in the statements of the interviewees. This applied in particular to data protection considerations. As a justiciable framework condition, however, we argue that they are only implicitly the subject of research ethics considerations. However, these two aspects influence each other to a large extent.

The results illustrate the diversity and complexity of the numerous ethical and methodological decisions in individual cases when conducting standardized surveys. As part of the analysis, we identified five topics that address different aspects of the three research ethics principles (respect for autonomy, nonmaleficence/beneficence, and justice) and relate to different aspects of the research process: 1) formulation of the questionnaire, 2) use of stimulus material, 3) deception in experimental designs, 4) voluntariness and anonymity in surveys, and 5) interviewing vulnerable target groups.

The results show that the interviewees do not prioritize either aspect, but strive to reconcile methodological and ethical requirements. At the same time, challenges in individual cases and fundamental concerns regarding the importance of research ethics become clear. The interviews provided an insight into individual decision-making processes and showed not only the awareness of the problem but also the struggle for methodological and ethical quality in favor of scientific excellence.