Research with Human Participants
ETH Zurich strives for the best protection of participants and their data in research. Research with humans or their data must therefore be approved either by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission or by a Kantonale Ethikkommission before it starts.
The responsibilities of the different commissions are lined out below. Once you are sure that the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission is in charge of reviewing your project, check out the application instructions. See the guidelines and the alphabetical index for specific information.
The following research projects with persons, health-related personal data or biological material are subject to the external page Human Research Act and must be approved by a Cantonal Ethics Committee before they start:
- Research concerning diseases: Research on the causes, prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and epidemiology of impairments of physical and mental health in human beings
- Research concerning the structure and function of the human body: Basic research, in particular on human anatomy, physiology and genetics, and non-disease-related research concerning interventions and impacts on the human body
- Trials with medical devices: Investigation involving one or more persons undertaken to assess the safety or performance of a device and performance studies with in vitro diagnostic devices
These research projects fall into one of the following external page categories:
- Clinical trial: The effect of a health-related intervention is tested. It can be preventive, diagnostic, therapeutic, palliative, or rehabilitative in nature (see external page Art. 2 KlinV).
- Non-clinical research with persons: The research participants themselves are studied, rather than the effect of an intervention. Data are collected or material is sampled.
- Non-clinical research without subjects: Further use of data or samples, research involving deceased persons, foetuses, etc.
- Trial with medical devices: Investigation involving one or more persons undertaken to systematically assess the safety or performance (validity) of a device (cf. external page Art. 2 ClinO-MD). According to external page Art. 3 of the Medical Devices Ordinance, medical devices are, i.e., "instruments, apparatus, appliances, softwares, implants, [...] or other articles" which are used, i.e., for the "diagnosis, prevention, monitoring, prediction, prognosis, treatment or alleviation of disease [...], injuries or disabilities" or the examination of the human body.
Technical assistance systems such as prostheses or orthoses are also considered medical devices. According to the guideline external page Leitfaden Technische Assistenzsysteme – Medizinprodukte in der Humanforschung (German), certain projects in the early development phase of technical assistance systems involving healthy subjects or patients are exempt from the review by a Cantonal Ethics Committee. However, other projects must be approved if they meet one of the following criteria in accordance with this guideline:
- Validation: The systematic assessment of the performance and safety or acceptability of a system has priority
- Collecting health-related data for the purpose of this validation
- Measuring the rehabilitative effect of a system
- Aiming for certification of the product
- Also subject to approval are trials with in vitro diagnostics, register studies, and research with embryonic stem cells.
Procedure
If you are sure that your research project must be approved by a external page Cantonal Ethics Committee, you must submit your application in external page BASEC to the responsible committee. If the research takes place in Zurich, submit it to the Cantonal Ethics Committee Zurich.
If you are not sure whether your research project has to be approved by a Cantonal Ethics Committee, you can obtain a clarification of responsibility in external page BASEC (top left) (cf. guidance (German)).
If a Cantonal Ethics Committee does not claim responsibility for your research project and it involves participants (i.e. not just the further use of data or material) the project should be submitted to the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission for approval. Please enclose the declaration of non-responsibility of the Cantonal Ethics Committee with your application.
Clinical trials abroad must be approved by the locally responsible ethics committee and the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission. Parallel submission is possible.
Useful Links
- external page BASEC (Submission portal for applications)
- external page Categorisation of medical research projects (German)
- external page Basic Research: Guidance for researchers
- external page Leitfaden Technische Assistenzsysteme – Medizinprodukte in der Humanforschung
- external page Cantonal Ethics Committee of Switzerland
- external page Kantonale Ethikkommission Zürich (German)
Human Research Act and Ordinances
- external page Human Research Act (HRA)
- external page Therapeutic Products Act (TPA)
- external page Human Research Ordinance (HRO)
- external page Clinical Trials Ordinance (ClinO)
- external page Ordinance on Clinical Trials with Medical Devices (ClinO-MD)
- external page Medical Devices Ordinance (MedDO)
- external page Ordinance on In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices (IvDO)
Research with humans or their data that does not fall under the responsibility of a Cantonal Ethics Committee must be approved by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission before it starts. This includes in particular research from the humanities and social sciences such as:
- Surveys, interviews, focus groups, workshops
- Behavioural studies (observational, experimental)
- Research in social networks (see guidelines)
- Research with students and their data (see guidelines)
- Research with personal data
Medical research with participants for which a Cantonal Ethics Committee does not claim responsibility (e.g., certain physiological measurements) must be approved by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission. Please attach any declaration of non-responsibility to your application.
Exempt research
See exempt research.
Collaborations with other research institutions
If a project is conducted by members of different institutions, the institution of the PI is normally responsible for the ethical review. The other institutions may accept the approval of the leading house or request their own review. Please contact the of the ethics commission at an early stage.
Research abroad
Medical research with participants abroad must be reviewed by the locally responsible ethics committee and the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission. Field or lab research abroad should also be reviewed by a local ethics committee to ensure compliance with local ethical norms and laws (see Research Abroad). For online experiments with participants from abroad, the review by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission is sufficient.
Bachelor's, Master's and Doctoral Theses
Human research projects of students of ETH Zurich for which they or other members of ETH Zurich are responsible (PI at ETH) are subject to approval and must be submitted to either a Cantonal or the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission.
If the principal investigator (PI) of the research project is not affiliated with ETH Zurich, it is their responsibility to obtain ethics approval, if necessary. In consultation with the supervising person at ETH Zurich, a review by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission may be considered (e.g., if the Cantonal Ethics Committee declares non-responsibility). Please contact the of the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission if you have any questions.
Bachelor's and Master's theses are reviewed faster by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission (cf. How long it takes).
Clarification of responsibility
If you are unsure whether your project needs to be reviewed by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission, the secretariat can advise you. Please describe your project in this .
Exempt from review are data collections for quality assurance where no scientific use of the data is intended (e.g., teaching evaluation).
Running a project without ethics approval may have negative consequences depending on who is responsible for evaluation:
- Cantonal Ethics Committee: monetary penalty or custodial sentence (external page HFG Art. 62 und 63)
- ETH Zurich Ethics Commission: The PI is personally liable in the event of damage. Moreover, the Vice President for Research may take measures related to the PI's employment.
In many cases you will also be asked for an ethics approval by funding agencies or publication platforms.
Make sure to submit your ethics proposal in time in order to avoid any obstructions.
Application system eResearch
Please submit your ethics application on eResearch using the current application form. The previous system Etappo is now closed. All previous applications are accessible on eResearch.
Please note that no ethics applications can be submitted between December 15 from 5 CET to January 5. Any applications initiated in 2025 but not yet submitted by this deadline cannot be continued in 2026, as the 2025 application period closes. You will have to start a new application for 2026.
To apply for ethical approval of a new project, follow these steps:
- Make sure the ETH Ethics Commission is responsible for your project.
- Read up on the required documents.
Then open a new ethics application on the platform eResearch:
- Register or log-in to eResearch
- Open a new application under “My Applications”
- Go to “New Application”, click on “Apply” under “ETH Zurich Ethics Commission”
- Fill out the required fields, upload all required documents and submit your application
For detailed information on how to submit an ethics application over eResearch you can follow Download this guide. (PDF, 116 KB)
For technical support, please contact .
For questions on the process reach out to .
Please note that no ethics applications can be submitted between December 15 from 5 CET to January 5. Any applications initiated in 2025 but not yet submitted by this deadline cannot be continued in 2026, as the 2025 application period closes. You will have to start a new application for 2026.
When creating your proposal in eResearch, please have the following documents ready:
- Application form (V2025 Download English (DOCX, 88 KB)/Download German (DOCX, 85 KB)) including information sheet(s) and consent forms (as will be shown to participants e.g., screenshots in PDF form).
- All surveys, questionnaires, interview questions, stimuli, etc. in their final version
- Recruitment material as shown to participants
- Contracts and approval / waiver by local authorities / IRB (if applicable)
- Contracts with panellist (if applicable)
- CVs of the primarily responsible researchers
- Please do not submit grant proposals or reports addressed to funding agencies
The ETH Zurich Ethics Commission reviews research projects with regard to its ethical tenability and the wellbeing of participants. Some key criteria are as follows:
- Providing participants with adequate information and obtaining their consent (see guidelines).
- Identification of risks for participants and society and appropriate precautionary measures.
- Protection of personal data, either by not collecting unnecessary data or by taking appropriate protection or anonymisation measures.
- Clear regulations in the case of collaboration with companies and institutions.
The Ethics Commission weighs the fulfilment of these and other criteria and any remaining risks against the expected societal and scientific benefit of the research.
As soon as the commission have made their decision, you will receive a formal notification. Further steps depend on the commission's decision:
Approval without reservation
You may immediately start your project.
Approval with reservation
You may start those parts of the project that are not subject to reservations by the Ethics Commission. You will need to meet these reservations in order to obtain the full approval of your project.
Revise
There are serious reservations concerning your project that make it impossible to start it yet. You may be required to implement comprehensive revisions ("revise and reply") or to resubmit the complete proposal ("revise and resubmit").
Rejection
The project cannot be approved for ethical or procedural reasons.
Not evaluated
The commission has not evaluated your proposal, e.g., because an evaluation is not necessary based on the commission's statutes or because the project lies in the competence of the Cantonal Ethics Committee.
You will receive an email with a decision letter. In case your proposal is approved with reservations, or rejected, you must reply to the comments of the Ethics Commission. The most basic reply consists of two documents:
- A reply letter which answers the Commission's reservations directly point by point (numbered as in the decision letter).
- The revised proposal form with changes marked in yellow.
Replies are to be submitted on eResearch:
- Log on to eResearch, go to “My Applications” and select the application for which you wish to submit a reply. The application status will be “returned”.
- Click “Edit”, which will bring you to the “revision” page. Upload your response letter and revised proposal with changes marked in yellow and add any additional information if required.
- Click “Save And Close” and then “Submit”.
For more detailed information, see Download this guide (PDF, 116 KB).
The applied start date of the project (incl. first contact with participants) should not be earlier than two months after the submission of the application. Please schedule the following times:
- 3-8 weeks until the first decision;
- 2-3 more weeks if your application is rejected and you have to respond to the Commission's reservations before you can start your project.
Human subject research for Bachelor's or Master's theses can be reviewed quicker. The student character of the project will be indicated in the approval letter.
You may not start a study before it has been approved.
If you wish to modify or extend an already fully approved project, you must submit a change request (amendment) for review. The following documents are required:
- a summary of the changes including an explanation why they have become necessary
- the revised research protocol (changes marked yellow)
- if applicable: changed documents such as questionnaires or consent forms
Change requests are to be submitted over eResearch:
- Log in and go to "My Grants” where you select the application you wish to amend. Only projects with the status “Approved”, “Active” or “Complete” can be changed. Click the "Edit" button.
- Click “Requests”, then select “ETHICS Change Request” from the drop-down menu and click on “Create Request”.
- Fill in the fields and upload the required documents (cf. above).
- Click "Next" and then "Submit".
If you wish to see more detailed information, see page 3 of Download this guide (PDF, 116 KB).
If you are planning greater changes (e.g., completely new study design, repetition), please consult the of the Ethics Commission to discuss possible solutions.
Study participants contribute time, effort, and their data, without which research could not take place. In many contexts, it is appropriate to compensate them for their efforts in a monetary or non-monetary way, or even to provide incentives for participation. An appropriate compensation should recognise the status of participants as co-subjects in the social process of scientific research. The ETH Zurich Ethics Commission decides on a case-by-case basis on the appropriate balance between the risks and burdens for participants and the intended compensation. The following guideline provides general and specific recommendations that can help when choosing the appropriate compensation.
General recommendations
Transparency
When compensation is provided, the type, amount, and conditions should be disclosed to participants using concise language. In the application to the Ethics Commission, the rationale for the chosen compensation scheme should be explained.
Fairness
Ideally, the selection of participants and study locations would be guided by scientific reasons. Easy availability or affordability should not motivate selection of participants as to avoid exploitation of participant vulnerabilities – be they economic or social.
Participants should not bear financial loss through their participation. Out-of-pocket expenses by participants (travel expenses or meals) should be reimbursed. Consider compensating non-financial loss such as time, inconvenience, loss of income (opportunity cost) when possible. In other cases, a show of appreciation such as a gift may be appropriate. Please have fair procedures in place for cases where participants withdraw from a study without finishing it.
Voluntariness
Participation in research should be voluntary. The level of compensation should not undermine this condition by influencing the participants' autonomous decision to a significant extent. A compensation too high could induce people to participate against their better judgement or to take risks they would otherwise not incur.
Anonymity
Wherever possible, the collection of identifying data (names, email addresses, etc.) should be avoided. However, this data is often required for the payment of compensation. If collection of personal data cannot be avoided, identifying data should be stored separately from the collected research data and deleted as soon as its purpose has been fulfilled (cf. ETH Act, external page Art. 36d).
The following specific recommendations complement, yet do not supersede, the general ethical principles outlined above.lance between the risks and burdens for participants and the intended compensation. The following guideline provides general and specific recommendations that can help when choosing the appropriate compensation.
Specific recommendations
Online studies and lab sessions with financial compensation
Interviews, workshops, focus groups
Research in LMICs
Medical research
Educational research
Further reading
Online studies and lab sessions with financial compensation
Time range for study completion
To value participants’ time, pre-testing may help estimate the time-range it takes to complete a study. This estimate should allow sufficient time to fully understand participant information, as well as any instructions, accommodating for slower readers and those for whom instructions may be entirely new.
Fairness in financial compensation
For studies taking place over multiple sessions, it is recommended that compensation be provided for each session independently, rather than being conditional on completing all sessions. Ideally, all participants who complete the study would be compensated in full, regardless of response completeness or the outcome of attention checks. When this is not feasible or impacts the quality of the study unproportionally, please explain the rationale in the application.
Consider collaborating with labs or research groups who maintain established payout procedures (e.g., the Decision Science Laboratory). Whenever possible, the study should be run via an ETH Zurich account.
Interviews, workshops, focus groups
Financial or other incentives may be offered to lay people or professionals for participating in interviews, workshops, or focus groups if the feasibility and validity of the study make this necessary. However, the motivation for participation often lies in contributing to research and the social benefits of the project itself. Instead of incentives and as a token of appreciation, consider offering a small gift at the end of the data collection process – without prior announcement.
When professionals are interviewed regarding their subject matter, they are typically not remunerated (wage compensation) as their participation in the study is part of the responsible fulfilment of their professional role, or they provide the expertise during work hours and are thus remunerated by their employer.
Research in LMICs
General considerations
When conducting research abroad, especially in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs), consider local practices and national guidelines. Actively involve local partners, researchers, and communities to determine appropriate ways to compensate or show appreciation to research participants. Community discussions can help define what is fair and appropriate. Research in LMICs should generate benefits for the local community or country, ideally within the framework of long-term research partnerships. For more information, consult the guideline on research abroad.
Promote equity: ethical concerns arise when researchers offer compensation to research participants in LMICs that is significantly lower (in relative terms) than what would be paid to participants in higher-income settings.
Inflationary effect: Conversely, overcompensating in low-income settings may
- create community disruption,
- distort local economic balances,
- exert undue influence potentially compromising an individual's ability to freely decline participation,
- make it harder for local researchers to recruit participants, thus effectively sidelining local researchers and students from empirical research.
Country specific minimum wage: Compensating participants in low-income countries based on country-specific minimum wage rates may also be inadequate. If daily equivalents do exist, they can fall below the international daily poverty threshold, which should be the minimum standard – yet may still be too low for a decent living in many contexts.
Considerations for compensation
To mitigate the challenge of balancing the risk of exploitation with an inflationary effect and undue inducement in low-income countries, it may be helpful to consider these recommendations for compensation of common types of research engagements:
- The level of compensation to each survey participant should be valued at the international poverty line per day (currently USD $3) even if the time investment was small (e.g., a one-hour interview).
- Cash or no cash? In many contexts, providing monetary compensation in the form of cash should be avoided as it may cause unintended conflict among those who had the chance to participate and those who did not. It may also unduly influence people who would otherwise decline participating, feeling they have to for affordability reasons. In other settings, however, such as when participants engage in longer research activities (e.g., a one-day workshop), in marginalised communities or in conflict settings, it may be more appropriate to provide monetary compensation to participants to offer greater agency.
- Pay for costs associated with participation (e.g., travel or communication costs)
- In some contexts, it may be culturally appropriate to give a reward or gift to the community or household rather than individuals.
Ultimately, the form and level of compensation should be adapted to the specific research context at the discretion of the research team and at least aligned with the international poverty line yet, more importantly, be guided by local norms which can be much higher.
Choosing an appropriate gift
A gift can for example be goods (pens, stickers, key rings, water bottles, t-shirts or chargers, small luxuries such as candy, chocolate, a book, snacks and refreshments or other small tokens of appreciation) or services (i.e., translation, information sharing, mentoring, contacts, photographs, etc.). Selecting an appropriate gift in lieu of cash can be challenging if the researcher is not familiar with the research context. To avoid negative unintended consequences when choosing a gift it is recommended to:
- Involve local expertise: All research projects conducted outside the researcher's home country should involve a local researcher or partner. Ideally, compensation schemes should be co-designed with the involvement of such local expertise or the communities where the research takes place. This expertise is essential for understanding local norms, guiding the culturally appropriate selection of a gift – as even nominal items like soap or sugar might carry unintended meaning.
- Offer a choice: Make two gifts of similar value available to participants and allow them to choose which they prefer. This approach helps ensure that a participant receives something they value in exchange for their time.
Different types of data collection
- For surveys and qualitative interviews, it is generally recommended to provide each participant with a non-cash gift valued at the international poverty line per day or adapted to local standards if these are higher. Hence, irrespective of their time commitment, a full day equivalent of appreciation or gift is offered. When applicable, all direct participation costs (e.g., travel, communication) are to be reimbursed.
- For expert interviews, monetary remuneration is not advised, instead, it is standard practice to share relevant research results and perhaps a small, possibly symbolic gift, similar in value to other participant gifts.
- In randomised controlled trials (RCT), if the intervention benefits the experimental group, the control group should also receive it free of charge after the study, provided the intervention had no negative effects. This principle applies broadly whenever participation may offer a benefit to one group over another.
Working with enumerators
When conducting research in LMICs, the enumerators who administer questionnaires require special consideration regarding their compensation and working conditions. Although it is common to engage a local firm, researchers may find the following points useful to ensure that enumerators have fair working conditions.
- Fair pay and contracts: Verify that all enumerators have a formal contract detailing their hiring agreement. Ensure the daily compensation is fair and reasonable. Ideally, pay is not contingent on the number of successful interviews, which may compromise both participant voluntariness and fair pay. Check that expenses incurred by the enumerator when traveling to site are covered.
- Ask to see the contract: It is a good idea to ask the firm to see the full contract enumerators have signed. By knowing the terms enumerators were hired under, the researcher has more transparency to determine whether these terms are fair or if a discussion with the survey company needs to take place to adjust the terms.
Further reading
Porisky, A.,MacLean, L. M. (2025). The Ethics of Compensation in Political Science Research. Comparative Political Studies, 0(0). external page https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140251349650
Medical research
For the compensation of participants in medical research, please refer to the swissethics guideline external page Finanzielle Zuwendungen an Patienten für die Teilnahme an Forschungsprojekten (DE/FR).
For medical research in LMIC contexts, please refer to this guidance: Link.
Further reading
external page Guide on Good Clinical Practice
Educational research
The use of incentives in educational research studies should be guided by the principle that participation should primarily be motivated by intrinsic or societal benefits. The following considerations help to ensure that incentives support ethical and voluntary participation without introducing undue influence, coercion, or bias. Please refer to the educational research guidelines for further information on the ethical conduct of educational research studies.
Immaterial rewards
Participation in educational studies should, by design, be intrinsically rewarding for participants. Studies should be interesting, intellectually engaging, or offer opportunities for personal growth. Alternatively, the contribution to society should be argued, with clear communication to participants about how their involvement may help advance educational practice and understanding. Within the risk-benefit analysis of any study proposal, these immaterial rewards should be described and justified.
Incentives and compensation in classroom research
If the study is conducted during class time, no material incentives, including financial incentives, should be offered, as these may lead to sample bias or compromise the voluntariness of participation. To express appreciation to participants, tokens of appreciation, such as a small gift, are more appropriate. These should be given to all students at the end of the study and without prior announcement. Otherwise, incentives are only appropriate in exceptional cases (e.g., the study is longitudinal and requires repeated engagement over an extended period (e.g., regular surveys spanning months or years)). In such cases, the investigators should discuss strategies to minimize the risk that incentives distort the sample or introduce feelings of obligation.
Financial losses incurred by students because of their participation (e.g., travel expenses, meals) should be reimbursed by the investigators.
Incentives for studies during students' free time
If university students or other adult learners participate in educational research studies that take place independent of their regular classes, i.e., in their free time, financial rewards may be provided and should be commensurate with local minimum wage standards. Remuneration may be based on hourly rates, travel compensation, or other forms of compensation for inconvenience or opportunity cost, particularly in laboratory settings.
Academic Rewards (ECTS or Bonus Points, Grade Incentives)
Participation in studies may not be rewarded with ECTS credits. Incentives in the form of bonus points or other grade-related benefits are generally inadmissible, too, as they may introduce coercion and conflict with the requirement for voluntary participation. If such incentives are proposed, strict conditions must be met and detailed in the ethics proposal:
- Students who do not wish to participate in the research must be offered an alternative means of earning equivalent rewards through tasks of comparable effort and learning value, entirely outside of data collection.
- Similarly, if grade-relevant benefits such as extended one-on-one tutoring with senior course personnel are offered to participants, non-participants must be granted access to equivalent opportunities.
Incentives for participants at ISCED Level 0-2
Direct financial incentives to ISCED Level 0-2 students (ca. 3-18 y.o.) are not permitted. When incentives are provided, they should generally take the form of a contribution to class petty cash (e.g., for outings or communal purchases such as snacks), should directly benefit the participating classrooms. These rewards should not be contingent upon individual participation, but rather on the opportunity being offered to the class. Participation must remain voluntary, with appropriate parental or legal consent. Any arrangement that conditions the incentive on a minimum participation threshold (e.g., “at least half the class must participate”) is inadmissible, as it may foster coercion or group pressure.
Direct financial compensation to classroom instructors is deemed problematic, except for documented reimbursement of necessary expenses such as travel for preparatory meetings or debriefing sessions. In any case, the financial reward should be transparent and documented in the Informed Consent Document available to students, and, if applicable, their parents.
Studies conducted abroad
Educational research conducted abroad should only be considered when the international context is integral to the research question, such as cross-cultural studies of educational interventions. The practice of recruiting participants primarily to “buy samples” abroad is inadmissible, especially when there is any doubt regarding the voluntariness of participation (exceptions might be foreign participants that are recruited through trustworthy online platforms). Local power imbalances between instructors and students must be discussed and addressed, and financial rewards to instructors or their institutions avoided. Researchers must ensure that all participation, regardless of jurisdiction, meets the same high ethical standards as required in Switzerland.
For further reading
Guidelines on Compensation, Incentives, and Reimbursement by other universities or organisations:
- external page University of Toronto
- external page University of Oxford
- external page The European Network of Research Ethics Committees
- external page A Framework for Ethical Payment to Research Participants
These guidelines have been published by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission in November 2025.
Before participants enrol in a study, they must be informed in writing and sometimes additionally orally about the research project (objective, method, procedure), the expected risks and their rights during their participation. Following this information, the participants must provide written or otherwise documented consent to participate. Advice on this process can be found in our application form, the EU guidelines external page Ethics in Social Science and Humanities (Section 4) or in Article 16 of the external page Human Research Act in the case of biomedical research with participants.
The information sheet and consent form should be written in an inclusive language that is easy to understand. Please refer to the external page swissethics guidelines (German) for informing patients.
Whenever possible, the information sheet and consent form should be handed out in paper form (one copy each for the participant and the researcher). If informed consent is obtained digitally (mail/web/app), the application to the Ethics Commission must indicate how the study information is shown to participants directly (no links), and how consent is obtained (e.g. via consent button).
Signed consent forms or other records of consent should be kept separately and securely from other data by the principal investigator (PI) for at least 5 years beyond the completion of the study. Please clarify well in advance who will be responsible for archiving and the destruction of the consent forms in the event of a change of personnel.
Please also note the further information regarding Research involving children and adolescents, Research abroad, and the use of Deception and partial disclosure for methodological reasons.
Principally, researchers should provide a prospective participant with full disclosure of all information necessary for making an informed decision to participate in a research project (see Informed consent of participants). Withholding or omitting information from participants (e.g., about the methods or objective) or the use of deception for methodological reasons entail risks for participants and the researchers’ reputation. However, if certain socially relevant research questions cannot be answered without the use of these means, they may be approved by the Ethics Commission.
Examples of incomplete disclosure
- Participants are informed about the purpose of the study in vague, general terms. While these are true, participants are not informed about the specific focus and therefore the actual objective of the study.
- Participants are asked to complete a quiz without being told that the research question is how background noise affects their ability to concentrate.
- Participants are asked to read a list of words or look at a series of pictures without being told that their memory is being tested.
Examples of deception
- Participants complete a quiz and are falsely told that they did very poorly, regardless of their actual performance.
- There is an "ally" of the researcher among the participants who pretends to be a participant themself, although their behaviour is part of the experimental intervention.
Requirements
If deception or incomplete disclosure are necessary means of a study, the following requirements apply:
(i) Deception and partial disclosure in research should only be used when alternate study designs would be inadequate to answer the research question. The application to the Ethics Commission should thus explain why the study objective cannot be achieved without these means.
(ii) The use of deception or partial disclosure must be justified by an anticipated major scientific or societal benefit of the research project.
(iii) Whenever possible, participants should be informed of the withheld or false information once participation is finished. The application to the Ethics Commission should include the intended text for such a debriefing, which (a) informs participants that incomplete information was provided, or that they were deceived; (b) indicates what information was withheld or falsified; (c) explains why it was necessary to disclose only partially, or to deceive; (d) gives participants the opportunity to ask questions; and (e) allows them to have their data deleted.
The applicability of these requirements is limited in the case of observational studies without any researcher-participant interaction and collection of personal data (e.g., in public spaces or social networks).
This guideline has been published by the Ethics Commission on May 2022.
Research with students during class time contributes to the development and validation of new methods of teaching and learning and provides students with insight into research practice. Still, educational research entails specific risks due to demands on the curriculum and the dependency of students on lecturers. To protect students in the best way possible, it is therefore required to consider the following points when planning and conducting educational research:
a. If the activities to be tested are performed by some or all students during class time, these activities must be related to the content of the course and contribute to the achievement of its learning objectives.
b. Students must be informed about planned experimental studies or other data collection for research purposes and agree to the use of their data by signing a consent form (or otherwise recorded). The information must be provided in writing and sufficiently early so that students can decide on the use of their data without pressure. The information sheet must clearly state that student consent is required for the use and anonymous publication of data and that this can be refused without incurring any disadvantages. Further information on the consent form can be found in the application form (cf. practical links).
c. Students should not sustain any disadvantages by participating or not participating in research. It should thus be prevented that data collected or refusing to let data be analysed has any impact on the evaluation by the lecturers. For research in education settings, it is recommended to gather data anonymously so that re-identification of individual students is not possible. If this is not feasible for technical reasons or through study design, data should be anonymised by educational researchers as soon as possible or, if necessary, be coded/pseudonymised. When data is collected in an anonymous form, students should be given the option within the data gathering tool (online survey, questionnaire) to specify whether they would like their data to be used for scientific purposes or not.
d. Where educational researchers collaborate with lecturers, lecturers may only have insight to consent forms and identifying raw data once course grading has been completed, and only if this is necessary for the use of data before anonymisation.
e. Generally, principal investigators should not conduct research with their own students. If this should nevertheless be the case, special care must be taken to ensuring voluntary participation and to prevent influencing grading by the data collected or refusals to participate. Consent forms and identifying raw data may only be viewed after courses have been graded and the dual relationship as teacher and researcher to students has ended. In the application to the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission, this dual role towards students should be justified and precautionary measures taken should be made explicit in the proposal and information sheet provided to students.
f. If (some) participants in an experimental study achieve a greater learning success than the other students, this comparative advantage needs to be redressed afterwards. This can be achieved, for example, by a debriefing or by offering all students the opportunity to go through the experimental activity.
g. If studies take place during courses, participation should not be compensated as it contributes to the achievement of learning objectives (cf. point a). Participation in studies that take place in student’s free time can be compensated, but not with ECTS credits.
Requirements and Focal Points
Research projects with students must be approved by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission before they start. This also applies to the planned collection and use of data from ongoing teaching without intervention for research purposes (e.g. log files from course management systems or exam results). In both cases, informed consent of the students is required. In justified cases, the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission may waive the requirement to obtain informed consent.
Studies to improve your own teaching (reflective teaching / instructor development) and anonymous surveys for quality assurance purposes do not require approval but cannot be used for publications. The Unit for Teaching and Learning (UTL) offers advice and support. The contractually regulated use of such student data not available to lecturers (e.g., enrolment data, academic origin data, data from academic applications) can be requested from the Head of Academic Services.
These guidelines have been published by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission in November 2021.
Data protection means the protection of personal data. This is information that relates to a person, such as their name, contact details, IP address, health data, information on political views or posts on social networks. It is always the project management who is responsible for ensuring compliance with data protection in a research project.
This includes compliance with the Swiss Data Protection Act (external page FADP). If the research involves people abroad or their data, local data protection regulations must also be complied with (e.g. external page GDPR in the EU).
The following principles must be observed when planning and conducting a research project with participants:
- Anonymous data collection
If the aim of the study permits, no personal data should be collected, i.e. the collection of names, contact details, IP addresses, etc. should be avoided. If collecting personal data is absolutely necessary, it must be anonymised as soon as the purpose of the data processing permits (external page ETH Act Art. 36d). Anonymisation of data means that re-identification of individuals with this data (or in combination with other data) can be ruled out with certainty. - Data minimisation
If collection of personal data is necessary, it should be limited to the information that is absolutely necessary to answer the research question or to conduct the study. The more data is collected from a person, the higher the risk of later re-identification of this person. - Personal data requiring special protection
Certain personal data are particularly sensitive and require heightened protection. This includes, for example, information on ethnic origin, religious beliefs, genomic or biometric data, political opinions and affiliations, health data, sex life or sexual orientation (see external page Art. 5 let. c FADP). The collection of such sensitive personal data should be omitted. Collection of such data must be justified through the social benefit of the research project and the methodological necessity. If processing of sensitive personal data involves a "high risk to the personality or fundamental rights of the data subject", a data protection impact assessment must be carried out (external page Art. 22 FADP). Contact ETH Legal Services for this purpose. - Transparency: How are participants informed?
Participants must always be informed about what data will be collected from them, how their data will be used and what rights they have in relation to this data before they agree to participate.
The information sheet for participants (see template in application form Appendix A) should answer all W-questions: What data is being collected and for what purpose? Who does what with the data? Who else is involved and how? How long will the data be kept? Where is it stored and processed, if necessary on which clouds and IT platforms (with a link to their terms and conditions)? To which countries will the data be transferred? To whom is it disclosed and how (anonymised or pseudonymised)? When will the data be anonymised or pseudonymised? When will the data be deleted? What rights do participants have? - Privacy by Design and by Default
Appropriate technical and organisational measures must be taken to ensure data security commensurate with the risk. Already at the start of new projects, observe the requirements for the protection of personal data and document your protective measures (separately or e.g. in a data management plan). - Data collection with service providers
When collaborating with an external partner for data collection (e.g. a survey company), it must be contractually ensured that this takes place in compliance with the external page FADP or external page GDPR. A data processing contract may be needed with the external partner. Information on such additional contracts is available from Legal Services. - Importing or exporting personal data
When collecting data abroad, local regulations must be complied with in addition to Swiss law. This includes regulations on the import and export of personal data and data storage. In some countries, the level of data protection may be lower than in Switzerland. In this case, the higher level of data protection in Switzerland must be contractually agreed with the data recipient. Information is available from Legal Services. Cross-border disclosure of personal data may only take place with the consent of the data subject.
All relevant information on protecting personal data in research can be found on the ). He will advise you on any further data protection issues.
Data storage
ETH Internal data storage
- Separation of personal data from research data
If personal data must be collected (e.g. to re-contact participant later on or for debriefings), it should be kept separately and securely from the research data. This also applies to personalised consent forms, which should be kept in a secure location by the project management. - Do you process health data?
For the processing of health data/patient data, we recommend the ETH's own IT platform Leonhard Med. The "Leonhard Med Secure Scientific Platform Service" allows confidential data to be transferred, stored, managed and analysed securely. Further information can be found on Leonhard Med Secure Scientific Platform.
Use of ETH-external cloud services
Whenever possible, ETH-internal services should be used. The use of ETH-external cloud services is possible, provided that this is done using verified services that have been approved for the respective purpose. The list of released external cloud services can be found here (protected page list).
If the external cloud service you want to use is not on the list of released services, the service must first go through an audit. It is the responsibility of the information owner to carry out the audit, with the Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) supporting you in this. This process can take over eight weeks. Therefore, please contact the CISO well in advance (before you start the audit).
For more information, visit the website on using external cloud services.
The ethical and legal requirements increase when research with participants is conducted abroad – particularly in low-income regions. On the one hand, your research must comply with the ethical and legal requirements of the host country as well as those of Switzerland. On the other hand, research in low-income settings should take place in partnership with local researchers and aim to be of local relevance. Please consider the following items when planning your field research abroad.
Local ethics approval
In addition to a review by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission, you should have your research project approved by an ethics committee of the host country. Attach the approval letter to your application to the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission or submit it upon receipt. Make sure that the applied methodology is compatible with the local legislation and context.
No local ethics approval is required for online experiments and surveys with foreign participants (e.g., on MTurk or Prolific). However, if such a data collection is conducted with a local partner institute, their requirements should be observed. The secretariat of the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission can advise you in such cases, for example regarding a possible acknowledgement of the ethics approval of the partner institution.
Cooperation
Human research abroad should be planned and conducted in partnership with a local research institution. Such collaborations are to be pursued under the conditions for fair, respectful and responsible scientific cooperation among researchers (no "upward accountability"). In this regard, please observe the ) in good time to discuss the necessary travel arrangements. Please also refer to the travel advice of the external page FDFA as well as the Download Safety & Security Recommendations for Research Enterprises Abroad (PDF, 124 KB).
Export of personal data
If personal data (i.e. information relating to a specific or identifiable person) must be exported from the host country to Switzerland for research purposes, this cross-border disclosure must comply with the legislation of the host country. Find out about the applicable regulations at an early stage and refer to the intended export in the information consent letter for the participants.
Damage incurred by participants as a result of taking part in research is usually covered by the ETH Zurich liability insurance (Basler Versicherungen, policy no. 30/4.078.362, (Finance & Controlling).
Study participants are responsible for insuring other losses (e.g. in connection with travel to and from the study).
Damage cases must be reported to the of the Ethics Commission.
The following activities are exempt from ethics approval at ETH Zurich:
(1) Collection of expert knowledge from experts
Expert consultations in form of interviews, Delphi Method, or surveys are exempt from ethics approval if all of the following conditions are met:
a) The data collection focuses exclusively on expert knowledge. The expert acts as an informant and is not the object of the research itself. In most cases, a person's status as an expert is based on their professional role (e.g., as an urban planner, farmer, software developer).
b) No wage compensation is offered.
c) The data collection has no experimental feature whatsoever (e.g., deception or incomplete information on the study, intervention or stimuli, etc.).
The following requirements apply to such data collections:
1) Data protection: The researcher is responsible for the protection of personal data and complying with the applicable data protection laws (cf. information on data protection).
2) Informed consent: The researcher is responsible for obtaining informed consent from the experts before data collection starts (cf. information on informed consent). Therein, information is provided about the possible collection and use of personal data, and the experts shall be asked in what form they may be cited in publications (e.g., with name, with description, being mentioned at the end of the publication (list), not being mentioned in any publication, etc.). A template for an informed consent form can be found at the bottom of the ethics application form (here).
3) Voluntariness: Participation must be voluntary. Enquiries on participation and particularly obtaining informed consent should be made by the researcher and not by the expert’s employer.
Examples of exempt research:
- Semi-structured interviews with urban planners and architects on implemented climate regulation measures in urban centres.
- A survey with farmers about crops affected by the straw fly and the precautionary measures taken.
- Qualitative interviews with forest management officials on the economic resilience of cantonal forestry companies.
Examples of research that is subject to approval:
- Ethnographic interviews with members of the Hadza community about the impact of climate change on hunting practices and the cultural identity of the Hadza.
- A randomised online survey with commercial clerks to investigate their acceptance of AI use in job interviews.
(2) Use of student data for reflective teaching (without publication)
Anonymous surveys with students for quality assurance purposes and studies to improve one's own teaching (reflective teaching) do not require ethics approval, provided that the data and results are not used for publication purposes (otherwise an ethics approval must be obtained). Students must be informed of the purpose of the data collection whenever possible. Please note the guidelines on ‘Educational Research’.
Ethics approvals can only be applied for specific projects. The commission does not give approval for reusable methods independently of projects.
When you are planning to conduct a series of studies with similar designs, you may obtain approval for the full series and submit new studies in the same framework as an amendment. This is possible when the individual studies are close in time, share the same set of participants, and differences between them are minimal and do not have an impact on ethical considerations. Please contact the secretariat for the procedure.
In addition to verbal or written information of participants in childhood or adolescence, their legal representatives (parents, legal guardians) usually receive the complete study information and sign the consent form. Please refer to the swissethics external page guidelines (German) and test with representatives of the age group whether the study information is comprehensible (e.g. terms such as "science" and "research" should be explained to children).
For research at schools, please clarify with the respective rectorate whether the research project must be approved by the rectorate in addition to the review by the Ethics Commission. For research with students at ETH Zurich, the guidelines on educational research apply.
Developing technical products (e.g. orthoses, wheelchairs, exoskeletons, e-textiles) often involves testing with external participants (healthy / target group) or on researchers themselves. These tests investigate, for example, the basic functioning or certain properties of the products.
If a medical device is to be tested with regard to its safety or performance, approval must be obtained from a Cantonal Ethics Commission (see responsibility of the Cantonal Ethics Commission and the external page Leitfaden Technische Assistenzsysteme – Medizinprodukte in der Humanforschung (German)).
Tests with medical devices or other technical products that do not have to be reviewed by a Cantonal Ethics Commission must be approved by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission prior to their start, provided that
- the participants are not researchers or students who are involved in the development of the products, and
- you intend to publish the results or data of the tests in a scientific medium.
In contrast, tests involving ETH internal or external participants do not require approval if there is no such intention to publish the results, or if the products are tested only on those researchers or students who are involved in their development. In this case, the secretariat of the ethics commission may issue a declaration of non-responsibility (“waiver”) for publication purposes (send us a Download clarification of responsibility (DOCX, 47 KB) before the start of the testing). Self-testing on researchers must not endanger their wellbeing.
For all tests and measurements that do not have to be reviewed by an ethics commission, the participants should sign a Download Participation Agreement (DOCX, 43 KB).
Contact
ETH Zurich
Scientific Integrity and Research Ethics
WEC E 17
Weinbergstrasse 11
8001
Zurich
What is social media research?
Research may take place on social media platforms, chat rooms, discussion forums, comment fields, blogging sites and other. Online platforms may be used to recruit participants, exploring digital lives or collecting data. The blurred boundaries of public and private spheres on social media, the difficulty to receive informed consent, and particular exposure of participants and researchers, makes research using social media distinct to other methods of social research. Data gathered on social platforms online can broadly be distinguished as passive data gathering, or active social media research where researchers interact with participants.
Any kind of social media research is generally subject to approval by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission. Researchers should take these guidelines into account when planning social media research.
Informed consent
Even though data, images, and content are widely available to the general public on social media, valid consent may still be required when using such data for research. When evaluating in how far the data is public or informed consent necessary, the reasonable expectation of being observed by strangers and expectation of privacy a user may have on a specific site and context is central. The research context and applied methods need to be considered to decide what form of consent is appropriate.
For studies where researchers interact with participants or ask them to perform certain actions, such as to comply with a particular intervention, prior informed consent should be collected. See our guidelines on informed consent and deception and partial disclosure.
If additional information is combined with data gathered from the social media accounts of participants, prior informed consent is necessary. An example: in a first step, a study collects survey data from a sample of Twitter users. The researchers obtain informed consent on the starting page of the survey, but for the survey only, as revealing the research goals would compromise the study. In a second step, the researchers collect information on how participants behave on Twitter. Researchers may not link this data without the consent of participants.
Prior consent may be omitted when the expected value of the research outweighs the need for consent and if at least one of the following conditions holds true:
When publishing direct quotes or other content that may easily re-identify individual participants, researchers must obtain informed consent before the dissemination stage.
Legal aspects
Researchers should spend time getting to know the medium they intend to use, both in policies (privacy restrictions, user settings, legal restrictions) and culture. When using social media for their research, researchers also accept the contractual conditions of the specific platform. Social media platforms generally forbid the use of data crawling (locating and indexing data by systematically scanning online) or scraping (extracting specific information from a specific platform).
Protecting the privacy and safety of participants and wider communities
Researchers have a duty of care to identify who could be vulnerable in the specific research context and what kind of harm they might be exposed to. Researchers should develop further mitigating measures, should the wellbeing and safety of participants, researchers or external persons be threatened.
Protecting researchers
When to pause or stop the project
When designing a study, researchers should define specific criteria, under which circumstances the study will be put on hold or terminated. This is particularly salient for intervention studies where researchers intervene with participants to observe behavioural changes on a social media platform. Researchers need to continuously monitor the development of participant’s behaviour and stop the intervention when necessary, e.g., if:
Further resources
You may find further information on ethical social media research and internet mediated research in these guides:
These guidelines have been published by the ETH Zurich Ethics Commission in March 2023.