ɫ��ֱ��

Ethics applications are generally associated with the sciences but that’s changing because of the “digital turn”. My field of creative writing is undergoing a dramatic shift driven by the rise of digital publishing, podcasting, social media and multimodal storytelling. Because the field is evolving faster than academic literature can keep pace, doctoral researchers increasingly need to gather primary data to make meaningful contributions.

My creative writing PhD students are engaging directly with audiences, influencers and practitioners to understand and shape new modes of writing and publishing. However, any live interactions with humans involve an element of risk. A creative writing PhD student who wants to engage in such empirical research must apply for ethical approval. Yet, ethics applications can be daunting for students and supervisors alike. 

My own research has, for well over a decade, included ethics applications. For my book The Multimodal Writer, for example, as part of my research into the role of creativity in “future-proofing” digital upskilling, the pedagogical assignments that I developed were empirically tested, requiring full institutional ethical approval. I have longstanding familiarity with the process of making ethics applications, and I enjoy it. 

• How to build trust as a research supervisor
• Research supervisor or tour guide?
• ‘I’ve been a research supervisor for 35 years and I’m still learning’

One reason I enjoy supporting PhD students with ethics applications is this: an ethics application tends to mark the start of a journey to map new territory. A PhD must make an original contribution to knowledge. In the same way that as part of their preparation, an explorer gathers a compass, walking boots and so forth, supervisor and student are marshalling their kit for a new, exciting journey. 

So, how do you help a student make a successful ethics application and find the process rewarding? Here are my top tips.

1. Allow plenty of time 

If any interviews or focus groups don’t have to happen until the second or third year, it can be tempting (for the student and supervisor alike) to delay the ethics application. However, it’s not only the time it takes to write the application that has to be taken into account; it’s also the time the application will take to go through the institutional systems. A PhD can feel pressured enough for the student without adding the sudden realisation that time is running out and ethical approval hasn’t been gained yet. So, supervisors should gently remind the PhD student to put the ethics application at the top of their to-do lists.

2. Reflect early on anonymity 

A default for many science ethics applications is that participants’ identities should be protected. However, a social media influencer or acclaimed author might want to be named; further, their name might be integral to demonstrating the validity of the data. Requesting the right to waive anonymity can add a little work.

3. Pace it 

Once the ethics application is started, there might be a desire to “get it out of the way”. Like so much else, ethics applications are generally online. New boxes tend to reveal themselves as you go along. A single “yes” in one box could trigger a whole raft of new questions, and suddenly a nice, quick form has morphed into something quite a bit longer. It’s well worth advising your student to schedule breaks and get familiar with the “save” button.   

4. Explain the terms 

The language of ethics application forms can seem opaque, so remind students that:

• The “first do no harm” foundational principle of ethics as this principle’s focus is, simply, putting measures in place to ensure that no one is harmed.
• Informed consent is about ensuring participants know what they are taking part in.
• Participants’ right to withdraw from the research recognises that participants may, for all sorts of reasons, change their minds about being involved and should not, at that point, feel forced.

5. Frame it as part of the thinking process 

An ethics application can feel like a practical chore. And, yes, some elements of the application serve a practical function. In imagining all the things that could go wrong with, for example, a questionnaire or survey, and in deciding who will and who won’t be invited to participate, important elements of the PhD are in effect being stress-tested. As a result, the timetabling of the empirical research can be more accurate and the completion of it achieved with more confidence.

To complete an ethics application, a student needs a clear methodology. They must, for example, submit indicative questions for interviews, focus groups, questionnaires or surveys. It can be helpful if the supervisor flags that refining work methods and indicative questions for the ethics application is an important part of the thinking process that is likely to contribute directly, often explicitly, to the PhD. Later in the PhD journey, students tend to find that the ethics application directly informs the critical commentary. Sections may be lifted verbatim. 

Considering ethical implications and then crafting an application is a stimulating and valuable journey. Along the way will come missteps and exciting discoveries. All this helps students build critical and creative thinking.

Josie Barnard is associate professor of creative and digital practice at De Montfort University. She was shortlisted for Outstanding Research Supervisor of the Year in the 2025 Times Higher Education Awards. A full list of shortlisted candidates can be .

If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, . 

For more advice and insight on this topic, see our spotlight: Research supervision that supports and inspires.