**Description:** Due to historic harms researchers have perpetuated against vulnerable populations, a variety of ethical guidelines and principles have emerged over the years, including but not limited to the Belmont Report and the APA’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. These documents have served as foundations for research training, decision-making, and internal review board (IRB) compliance. However, there are critiques of these standards, namely that they lend themselves to a one-size-fits-all, legalistic approach to research ethics and do not provide guidance on when someone might prioritize one ethical principle over another. In this unconference, we invite researchers from a wide range of research backgrounds to discuss factors that may influence ethical considerations throughout the research process, including but not limited to culture, philosophical approaches to research, and geography. We hope to use these conversations to compile resources for people wanting to learn more about this topic. **Fostering Diversity and Inclusion:** As presenters, we come from diverse research backgrounds, fields, and career stages. We encourage researchers from a range of research backgrounds and experiences to take part in this discussion and are especially interested in hearing how researchers from diverse geographical backgrounds interface with ethical discussions, as the concept of an IRB is not universal. The session will be led primarily in English, but two of the presenters have at least a working knowledge of German. We hope this session will help to broaden our field’s understanding of what it means to be an ethical researcher, beyond the individualistic and legalistic framework often presented by the Belmont Report and similar documents. **Prerequisite knowledge:** None required, but it may be helpful to read any/all of the following (available in this repository) if you aren’t familiar with critiques of the Belmont Report: - Behrens, K. G. (2018). A critique of the principle of ‘respect for autonomy’, grounded in African thought. *Developing World Bioethics, 18*(2), 126-134. - Campbell, R., & Morris, M. (2017). Complicating narratives: Defining and deconstructing ethical challenges in community psychology. *American Journal of Community Psychology, 60*(3-4), 491-501. - Miller, R. B. (2003). How the Belmont Report fails. *Essays in Philosophy, 4*(2), 119-134. - Shore, N. (2006). Re-conceptualizing the Belmont Report: A community-based participatory research perspective. *Journal of Community Practice, 14*(4), 5-26.