Ethicists—people trained in the theory and practice of moral reasoning—are sometimes viewed as a sort of “advice columnist” for those seeking guidance on serious matters. When, if ever, am I allowed to lie? Should I allow my children to participate in sports with a higher risk of head injuries? Should I pursue chemotherapy for my elderly dog?

And just like with your favorite advice column, the guidance provided by ethicists may be unsatisfactory if you are seeking a definitive answer. Ethicists can help people reason from a set of guiding principles, but often, no single best course of action exists, given the complexity and nuance of most ethically challenging situations. Of course, wrong courses of action definitely are possible!

For biomedical and behavioral research involving human participants, those guiding principles can be found in the Belmont Report, which was released in 1979 and informed the development of the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects (also known as the Common Rule). The Belmont Report set forth three ethical principles and corresponding requirements:

• The principle of respect for persons requires obtaining informed consent.
• The principle of beneficence requires maximizing potential benefits and minimizing risks to participants.
• The principle of justice requires that the burdens and benefits of research are distributed fairly.

Ensuring that research is ethically sound requires careful consideration and application of these (and other) principles by institutional review boards (IRBs), research funders, and study teams. The practice of moral reasoning requires examining underlying assumptions, assessing evidence, and grappling with potentially difficult scenarios. Guidance documents and protocols play an important role but cannot automate the process and resulting decision.

Clinical trials of behavioral interventions are subject to the same rigorous review as trials of biomedical interventions. In addition to physical risks (e.g., injury from exercise as part of a behavior change intervention), psychological risks from study design strategies (e.g., use of concealment or deception) or a focus on sensitive topics (e.g., traumatic experiences) are a possibility. Even studies that involve only the secondary use of existing data carry risks resulting from breaches of confidentiality, loss of privacy, or poor research practices (e.g., inappropriate use of genetic data). To help uphold high ethical standards, OBSSR supported the recent update of the Good Clinical Practice (GCP) Training for Social and Behavioral Research.

Basic behavioral and social sciences research can enhance both the ethical and scientific integrity of the research enterprise. Many areas of basic behavioral and social sciences—including research on altruism, trust, behavioral economics, and counterfactual thinking—can inform strategies to enhance research participation and engagement, facilitate the translation of evidence into practice through improved science communication, and build greater trust in and understanding of the scientific process (Trans-NIH Research Opportunities in the Basic Behavioral and Social Sciences 2021).

The careful application of ethical principles and guidance from behavioral and social sciences can improve our research, with the ultimate goal of healthier and longer lives for all. The reasoning and research processes may be difficult, but the more robust findings and insights are typically more helpful—and satisfactory—than a quick response from your local advice columnist.