Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Inducement in research.

Martin Wilkinson, Andrew Moore

    Bioethics
    |October 20, 2001
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    This study argues in favor of providing inducement payments to research participants, challenging the widespread ethical guideline opposition. Most arguments against these payments are unconvincing, except in very specific situations.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Transcriptomic profiling of the embryonic <i>C. elegans</i> intestine with single-cell resolution.

    bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2026
    Same author

    Author Correction: High-throughput discovery of fluoroprobes that recognize amyloid fibril polymorphs.

    Nature chemistry·2026
    Same author

    Performance of bilateral bronchoalveolar lavage during routine transplant surveillance bronchoscopy changes management.

    JHLT open·2026
    Same author

    Predicting Future Organ Support Needs Using Longitudinal Emergency Department Data: A Proof-of-Concept Study.

    Research square·2026
    Same author

    Correction: Strong constitutive NF-κB signaling in B cells drives SLL/CLL-like lymphomagenesis and overcomes microenvironmental dependencies.

    Leukemia·2026
    Same author

    Research integrity and cannabis in the "real world".

    Pain·2026
    Same journal

    Transhumanism Without Transindividuation in the Age Without Epochality: Stiegler, Vice, and Radical Human Enhancement.

    Bioethics·2026
    Same journal

    Between Safeguard and Constraint: Navigating Patient Autonomy in Protective Laws for Medical Assistance in Dying.

    Bioethics·2026
    Same journal

    Bioethics of Space Exploration: Life, Risk, and Responsibility Beyond Earth.

    Bioethics·2026
    Same journal

    The Concept of Harm in Medical Ethics.

    Bioethics·2026
    Same journal

    On the Destruction and Humanitarianisation of the Health System in Gaza and the Need for a Biopolitical Bioethics.

    Bioethics·2026
    Same journal

    Shaping Future Children, Sex Selection, and "Normal" Human Capacities.

    Bioethics·2026
    See all related articles

    Area of Science:

    • Bioethics
    • Clinical Research Ethics
    • Research Subject Compensation

    Background:

    • Ethical guidelines universally oppose inducement payments for research subjects.
    • This opposition is considered an international orthodoxy in research ethics.
    • Existing ethical frameworks present a strong consensus against compensating participants.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To present a case supporting the ethical justification of inducement payments for research participants.
    • To critically analyze and evaluate the primary arguments against providing such payments.
    • To determine the validity and limitations of objections to participant compensation.

    Main Methods:

    • Argumentative analysis of ethical principles.
    • Critical evaluation of existing literature and ethical guidelines.
    Keywords:
    Analytical ApproachBiomedical and Behavioral Research

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Development of counterarguments to established objections.

    • Main Results:

    • The study provides a reasoned argument in favor of inducement payments.
    • Key arguments against participant compensation were found to be unconvincing.
    • A narrow set of circumstances where opposition may be valid was identified.

    Conclusions:

    • The prevailing opposition to inducement payments for research subjects is challenged.
    • Ethical considerations support the provision of payments to research participants in most cases.
    • Re-evaluation of ethical guidelines regarding participant compensation is warranted.