removing a human subjects research from a study. Subjects may voluntarily withdraw or be withdrawn by the researcher to protect them from harm or ensure the integrity of the study. Subjects who withdraw from a study may request to have their samples removed from the study (i.e. destroyed).

 a person who reports suspected illegal or unethical activity, such as research misconduct or non-compliance with human subjects or animal regulations. Various laws and institutional policies protect whistleblowers from retaliation.

a research subject who has an increased susceptibility to harm or exploitation due to his or her compromised ability to make decisions or advocate for his/her interests or his/her dependency. Vulnerability may be based on age, mental disability, institutionalization, language barriers, socioeconomic deprivation, or other factors. See Decision-making capacity, Informed consent.

the ability to make a free (un-coerced) choice. See Coercion, Informed consent.

an ethical theory that emphasizes developing virtue as opposed to following rules or maximizing good/bad consequences.

a morally good or desirable character trait, such as honesty, courage, compassion, modesty, fairness, etc.

the idea that some things can be ranked on a scale of moral value. For example, one might hold that human beings are more valuable than other sentient animals; sentient animals are more valuable than non-sentient animals, etc. Some defenders of animal experimentation argue that harming animals in research can be justified to benefit human beings because human beings are more valuable than animals.

something that is valuable for its own sake, e.g. happiness, human life.

something that is valuable for the sake of achieving something else, e.g. a visit to the dentist is valuable for dental health.

an ethical-dilemma involving a conflict among different values.