BMC Medical Ethics 18 (1):79 (2017)

Authors
Veerle Provoost
University of Ghent
Abstract
The use of empirical research methods in bioethics has been increasing in the last decades. It has resulted in discussions about the ‘empirical turn of bioethics’ and raised questions related to the value of empirical work for this field, methodological questions about its quality and rigor, and how this integration of the normative and the empirical can be achieved. The aim of this paper is to describe the attitudes of bioethics researchers in this field towards the use of empirical research, and examine their actual conduct: whether they use empirical research methods, and whether they have made attempts at integrating the empirical and the normative. An anonymous online survey was conducted to reach scholars working in bioethics/biomedical ethics/ethics institutes or centers in 12 European countries. A total of 225 bioethics researchers participated in the study. Of those, 200 questionnaires were fully completed, representing a response rate of 42.6%. The results were analysed using descriptive statistics. Most respondents indicated that they use or have used empirical methods in their work. A similar proportion of respondents reported having had at least some training in qualitative or quantitative methods, respectively. Among the ‘empirical researchers’, more than a fifth had not received any methodological training. It appears that only 6% or less of the ‘empirical researchers’ considered themselves experts in the methods that they have used. Only 35% of the scholars who have used empirical methods reported having integrated empirical data with normative analysis, whereas for their current projects, 59.8% plan to do so. There is a need to evaluate the current educational programs in bioethics and to implement rigorous training in empirical research methods to ensure that ‘empirical researchers’ have the necessary skills to conduct their empirical research in bioethics. Also imperative is clear guidance on the integration of the normative and the empirical so that researchers who plan to do so have necessary tools and competences to fulfil their goals.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1186/s12910-017-0239-0
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 60,878
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Empirical Ethics, Context-Sensitivity, and Contextualism.Albert Musschenga - 2005 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (5):467 – 490.

View all 31 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

What ‘Empirical Turn in Bioethics’?Samia Hurst - 2010 - Bioethics 24 (8):439-444.
Bioethics Around the Globe.Catherine Myser (ed.) - 2011 - Oxford University Press.
Bioethics in Ibero-America and the Caribbean.P. R. Figueroa & H. Fuenzalida - 1996 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21 (6):611-627.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-12-23

Total views
27 ( #396,832 of 2,438,955 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #283,008 of 2,438,955 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes