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

Payments to research subjects.

Martin Wilkinson1

  • 1School of Population Health, University of Auckland, New Zealand.

Monash Bioethics Review
|July 13, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

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

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

Nature chemistry·2026
Same author

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

Nature chemistry·2025
Same author

Postbiotics: a perspective on their quantification.

Frontiers in nutrition·2025
Same author

Kinetic Steering of Amyloid Formation and Polymorphism by Canagliflozin, a Type-2 Diabetes Drug.

Journal of the American Chemical Society·2025
Same author

Residues 2 to 7 of α-synuclein regulate amyloid formation via lipid-dependent and lipid-independent pathways.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2024
Same author

CryoET of β-amyloid and tau within postmortem Alzheimer's disease brain.

Nature·2024
Same journal

Autonomy under uncertainty: the structural limits of substituted judgment in clinical practice.

Monash bioethics review·2026
Same journal

Clinical ethical issues in paediatric practice: exploring the awareness and opinions of paediatricians in order to grow paediatric clinical ethics services in a Malaysian teaching hospital.

Monash bioethics review·2026
Same journal

Should Australia implement regulatory changes to include Normothermic Regional Perfusion in organ donation and change our definition of death?

Monash bioethics review·2026
Same journal

The challenge of forming solidarity in Germany as a culturally diverse society during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Monash bioethics review·2026
Same journal

Changing Discourse on In Vitro Gametogenesis: Expectation, Scientific Reality, and the Ethics of Hype.

Monash bioethics review·2026
Same journal

Public engagement and bioethics as natural allies.

Monash bioethics review·2026
See all related articles

Paying participants in clinical research is ethically permissible. This paper argues that labor market principles justify compensating research subjects, addressing concerns about bodily involvement and the gift relationship.

Area of Science:

  • Bioethics
  • Clinical Research Ethics
  • Economic Ethics

Background:

  • Significant ethical opposition exists regarding payment for human research participants.
  • Previous work provides a foundation for reconsidering payment permissibility.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To present arguments supporting the ethical permissibility of compensating research subjects.
  • To explore the analogy between payment in the labor market and research participation.

Main Methods:

  • Developing an analogy between labor market compensation and research subject payment.
  • Analyzing and refuting arguments against payment, including the 'gift relationship' and bodily involvement concerns.
  • Assessing the validity of the 'gift relationship' argument against market norms in research.
Keywords:
Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Arguments for payment in the labor market are largely transferable to research participation.
  • The argument that research is unique due to bodily involvement is found to be unconvincing.
  • The 'gift relationship' argument, while highlighting some market drawbacks, is considered the most substantial objection to payment.

Conclusions:

  • Payment for research participation is ethically justifiable, drawing parallels with labor market practices.
  • While the 'gift relationship' argument has some merit, it does not definitively preclude payment.
  • Further consideration of market coordination advantages is needed when evaluating payment for research subjects.