Prompt
You volunteer for a small nonprofit that surveyed residents of a 200-unit apartment complex about their living conditions. Residents were promised that their answers would be anonymous, but each form records the unit number so that volunteers could track which doors they had knocked on. Many responses describe broken heating, leaks and a building manager who ignores complaints. The owner of the complex, who donates a third of the nonprofit's budget, now asks for the full responses with unit numbers, saying his maintenance team wants to fix problems unit by unit. Your director asks you what the nonprofit should do. What would you recommend?
Practice this question
After you practice: what this question tests and how to approach it
What this question tests
- Ethical reasoning
- Critical thinking
- Health systems and advocacy
How to approach this question
This research ethics station tests whether you'll honor a promise of anonymity to residents when a major donor asks to break it for a reason that sounds helpful. Name the stakeholders: residents who complained about their homes, the nonprofit and its funding, the owner, and future residents who'd stop trusting surveys. Point out the risk that unit numbers identify people who criticized the building manager, which could expose them to retaliation. Consider options that serve both goals, such as sharing a summary of problems by floor or building section, or asking residents for consent before passing on their unit numbers. Weigh the donor relationship against the nonprofit's integrity, then give a clear recommendation. When the responses reveal a possible risk to someone vulnerable, explain how you'd balance the anonymity promise against a duty to make sure the right authority knows.
More on research ethics
All 9 questions on this topicMock interviews
If you want to practice with a person, we run mock MMI and panel interviews with feedback on every answer.
