The Ethics of Relying on Research Participants’ Altruism

Abstract We examine the ethics of enrolling individuals in research that poses net health risks by appealing to their altruism. We argue that it is permissible to enroll individuals who are motivated by altruism when (i) they autonomously consent; and (ii) the net health risks are outweighed by the combination of (ii-a) the extent to which participation furthers their considered aims and thereby contributes to their wellbeing and agency and (ii-b) the study’s social value. Further, it is permissible to enroll altruistic individuals who cannot consent when: (I) their surrogate consents and they assent, ideally because it furthers their aims; and (II) the net health risks are outweighed by the extent to which participation contributes to their wellbeing and agency. This account leads us to suggest a revision of consent forms to include more information about studies’ social value and a reduction of barriers to the enrollment of participants who cannot consent.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Moral Philosophy
Published
2026-10-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1163/17455243-bja10222
Primary Topic
Ethics in Clinical Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Ethics of Relying on Research Participants’ Altruism

Alex Voorhoeve, David S. Wendler, Aaron Segal
Journal of Moral Philosophy
Ethics in Clinical Research
article

The Ethics of Relying on Research Participants’ Altruism

Alex Voorhoeve, David S. Wendler, Aaron Segal
article en

Abstract

Abstract We examine the ethics of enrolling individuals in research that poses net health risks by appealing to their altruism. We argue that it is permissible to enroll individuals who are motivated by altruism when (i) they autonomously consent; and (ii) the net health risks are outweighed by the combination of (ii-a) the extent to which participation furthers their considered aims and thereby contributes to their wellbeing and agency and (ii-b) the study’s social value. Further, it is permissible to enroll altruistic individuals who cannot consent when: (I) their surrogate consents and they assent, ideally because it furthers their aims; and (II) the net health risks are outweighed by the extent to which participation contributes to their wellbeing and agency. This account leads us to suggest a revision of consent forms to include more information about studies’ social value and a reduction of barriers to the enrollment of participants who cannot consent.

Journal of Moral Philosophy
National Institutes of Health (US), Center for Practical Bioethics (US), London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 35%
Ethics in Clinical Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.