Transcript Ethical Issues in Psychological Research

Research Methods in Psychology
Ethical Issues in the
Conduct of
Psychological Research
Morality versus Ethics
• Morality: differentiates "good" and "bad"
intentions, decisions and actions
•
•
A moral code is a system of morality
a moral is any one practice or teaching within a
moral code “do not tell lies”
• Ethics is the philosophy of morality
– explicit reflections on moral beliefs and practices
– Used for recommending concepts of right and
wrong conduct
Ethical Standards
• APA Ethics Code
– All psychologists (including students) must
follow the APA guides for ethical behavior.
– The five general values or principles for
ethical conduct are
• Beneficence and Non-Malfeasance
• Fidelity and Responsibility
• Integrity
• Justice
• Respect for People’s Rights and Dignity
Ethical Decision Making
•
Clarify values
–
•
Identify relevant facts and stakeholders
–
–
•
Which option will produce the most good and do the least harm?
Which option best respects the rights of all who have a stake?
Consult ethical resources
–
–
–
•
Do I know enough to make a decision?
What individuals and groups have an important stake in the outcome?
Identify possible actions & implications
–
–
•
Could this decision or situation be damaging to someone or to some
group?
APA Ethics Code
Advise from experiences individuals
Guidance from IRB
Make a decision
–
–
If I told someone I respect—or told a television audience—which option I
have chosen, what would they say?
How did my decision turn out and what have I learned from this specific
situation?
Ethical Competence
• Moral imagination: Sensitivity to ethical issues
• Recognition of the ethical implications of
situations and choices
• Ability to critically evaluate ethical dilemmas
• Ethical responsibility (decide and act)
• Tolerance for ambiguity
Ethical Issues to Consider Before Beginning Research
• Prior to conducting any study, the proposed
research must be reviewed to determine if it meets
ethical standards.
– Institutional Review Board (IRB):
• Human Subjects Research Committee (HSRC)
– At least 5 members with varying backgrounds and expertise.
– Scientists and nonscientists, at least 1 person not affiliated with the
institution.
– Reviews proposals to protect rights and welfare of human
participants.
…Before Beginning Research (continued)
– Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee
(IACUC)
• Reviews research to make sure animals are treated
humanely.
• In addition to reviewing research procedures, these
committees review the animals’ living quarters and the
training procedures for those who work with animals.
• Include at least one scientist, one veterinarian, and one
person not affiliated with the institution.
Risk/Benefit Ratio
• The risk/benefit ratio is a subjective evaluation of
the costs and benefits of a research project to:
– participants
– society
– the researcher and institution
• Is the research worth it? Are the benefits greater
than the risks? Will the study produce valid and
interpretable results?
• There are no mathematical answers; IRB and
IACUC members strive for consensus of opinion.
• Committee members can require changes to
research procedures before approving a project.
Risks in Research
• Different types of risk: physical injury,
psychological injury (mental or emotional
stress), social injury (embarrassment)
• Researchers are ethically obligated to protect
participants from all risk.
• In many psychology studies, emotional or mental
stress may be great — including stress that
might arise from participants’ misconceptions
about the task.
Minimal Risk
• Minimal risk means that the harm or discomfort
participants may experience is not greater than
what they might experience in their daily lives or
during routine physical or psychological tests.
• If risks are considered more than minimal,
individuals are considered to be “at risk.”
• When individuals are at risk, researchers are
ethically obligated to protect participants’
welfare.
• Research that places participants at risk should
not be carried out if there are alternative
methods available that have lower risk.
Confidentiality
• One way to protect participants from social risk
is to keep their responses confidential.
– remove any identifying information
– report results in terms of statistical averages
– “confidential” is not the same as “anonymous”
— responses are anonymous when individuals do not provide
any identifying information.
• Confidentiality is a special problem in Internet
research, even though participants perceive
their responses to be anonymous.
Is Risk Present?
• Consider whether participants are at risk in the
following situation.
– College students complete an adjective checklist
describing their current mood. The researcher seeks
to identify depressed students, so that they can be
included in a study examining cognitive deficits
associated with depression.
Is Risk Present?
• Consider whether participants are at risk in the
following situation.
– A psychologist administers a battery of achievement
tests to elderly adults in the dayroom at their nursing
home. The psychologist seeks to determine if there is
a decline in mental functioning with advancing age.
Is Risk Present?
• Consider whether participants are at risk in the
following situation.
– Students in a psychology research methods class see
another student enter their classroom in the middle of
the class period, speak loudly and angrily with the
instructor, and then leave. As part of a study of
eyewitness behavior, the students are then asked to
describe the intruder.
Is Risk Present?
• Consider whether participants are at risk in the
following situation.
– A researcher recruits students from introductory
psychology classes to participate in a study of the
effects of alcohol on cognitive functioning. The
experiment requires that some students drink 2
ounces of alcohol (mixed with orange juice) before
performing a computer game.
Informed Consent
• Researchers and participants enter into a social
contract, often using an informed consent
procedure.
– Researchers are ethically obligated to make clear to
participants the nature of the research (what they will
do in the experiment) and any possible risks.
– Written informed consent is essential when
participants are exposed to more than minimal risk.
– Informed consent is not necessary when researchers
observe public behavior.
FIGURE 3.4 The issue of informed consent is especially important
when children participate in research.
– Informed consent must be obtained from legal
guardians when individuals are not able to provide
consent (e.g., children, mentally impaired individuals).
– Individuals unable to provide legal consent must provide
their assent to participation.
Informed Consent (continued)
– Potential participants must be informed of all aspects of
the research that might influence their decision to
participate.
– Research participants must be allowed to withdraw their
consent at any time without penalties.
– Individuals must not be pressured to participate in
research.
– Obtaining informed consent is a special problem in
Internet research.
FIGURE 3.5 Deciding what is public or what is private behavior is not
always easy.
• In some situations researchers are not required to obtain informed
consent.
• The clearest example is when researchers are observing individuals’
behavior in public places without any intervention.
Is Informed Consent Necessary?
• Consider whether informed consent is
necessary in these situations.
– In a study of the drinking behavior of college students,
an undergraduate working for a faculty member
attends a fraternity party and records the amount
drunk by other students at the party.
Is Informed Consent Necessary?
• Consider whether informed consent is
necessary in these situations.
– As part of a study of the gay community, a gay
researcher joins a gay baseball team with the goal of
recording behaviors of the participants in the context
of team competition during the season. (All games
are played outdoors and may be watched by the
public.)
Is Informed Consent Necessary?
• Consider whether informed consent is
necessary in these situations.
– The public bathroom behavior (e.g., flushing, hand
washing, littering, graffiti writing, etc.) of men and
women is observed by male and female researchers
concealed in the stalls of the respective washrooms.
Is Informed Consent Necessary?
• Consider whether informed consent is
necessary in these situations.
– A graduate student investigates the cheating
behaviors of college students by concealing himself in
a projection booth in an auditorium during an exam.
From this vantage point, he can see with the aid of
binoculars the movements of most students. He
records head movements, paper switching, note
passing, and other suspicious exam behaviors.
Privacy
• Privacy is the right of individuals to decide how
information about them is communicated to
others.
• The researcher should explain to participants
the ways in which their information will be
protected and kept confidential.
• Informed consent is not required when
researchers observe people’s behavior in public
settings.
Privacy (continued)
• Three major dimensions should be considered
when trying to decide whether people’s behavior is
public or private:
– 1. the sensitivity of the information
• more sensitive information is typically regarded as more private
(e.g., sexual practices, religious beliefs)
– 2. the setting of the information
• in public settings, people give up a certain degree of privacy
(e.g., sporting events, concerts)
– 3. Method of dissemination of the information
• sensitive information should be reported in ways so that specific
individuals cannot be identified (e.g., group averages)
Deception
• Deception occurs:
– when information is withheld from participants
– when participants are intentionally misinformed about
an aspect of the research.
• Deceiving people for the purpose of getting them
to participate in a research project is always
unethical.
FIGURE 3.6 In the 1960s, participants in Stanley Milgram’s experiments were not
told that the purpose of the research was to observe people’s obedience to
authority, and many followed the researcher’s instructions to give severe electric
shock to another human being. For an update on this research, see Burger (2009).
Pros and Cons of Deception
• Pros: Why do we deceive?
– Deception allows researchers to study individuals’
natural behavior.
– Deception allows opportunities to investigate
behaviors and mental processes not easily studied
using nondeceptive methods.
Pros and Cons of Deception (continued)
• Cons: Why should we not deceive?
– Deception contradicts the principle of informed
consent.
– The relationship between researcher and participant
is not open and honest.
– Frequent use of deception may make individuals
suspicious about research and psychology.
Deception (continued)
• Deception is justified only
– when the study is very important,
– no other methods for conducting research are
available, and
– deception would not influence individuals’ decision to
participate in the research.
Deception (continued)
• When deception is used, the researcher must
– Inform participants after the experiment the reasons
for the deception,
– discuss any misconceptions they may have, and
– remove any harmful effects of the deception.
• This is called debriefing.
Debate over use of Deception
• Con
– Unwarranted cost to society
– Unethical to deceive
– Reduces trust
• In scientists
• within participants
• Pro
– Necessary for some research
• More benefit then risk
– Similar to other life events
• Illusions, games or parodies
– Cost is small
• Small effect on trusting scientists
Research with Animals
• Should animals be used in research?
– The answer to this question is fiercely debated.
• APA Ethical Standards and IACUCs:
– The researcher who uses animal subjects is ethically
obligated to look out for their welfare and to treat
them humanely.
– Any pain, discomfort, or death must be justified by the
potential scientific, educational, or applied goals.
Reporting Psychological Research
• Publication credit:
– acknowledge fairly those who have contributed to a
research project.
– authorship should be based on the scholarly
importance of individuals’ contributions.
Reporting Psychological Research
(continued)
• Plagiarism
Don’t present substantial portions or elements of
another’s work as your own.
– Ignorance and sloppiness are not legitimate excuses.
– Cite the sources of your ideas when you use the exact words
(with quotation marks and page number) and when you
paraphrase.
Plagiarism (continued)
Example of a Correctly Cited Direct Quote
“Informed by developments in case law, the police
use various methods of interrogation —
including the presentation of false evidence
(e.g., fake polygraph, fingerprints, or other
forensic test results; staged eyewitness
identifications), appeals to God and religion,
feigned friendship, and the use of prison
informants” (Kassin & Kiechel, 1996, p. 125).
Plagiarism (continued)
Example of Plagiarism (No Citation Accompanying
Paraphrased Material)
Research investigations of deceptive
interrogation methods to extract confessions are
important because police use false evidence
(e.g., fake test results) and false witnesses when
interrogating suspects. Interrogators also
pressure suspects by pretending to be their
friends.
Plagiarism (continued)
Example of Paraphrased Material with Correct
Citation
Research investigations of deceptive
interrogation methods to extract confessions are
important because police use false evidence
(e.g., fake test results) and false witnesses when
interrogating suspects (Kassin & Kiechel, 1996).
Kassin and Kiechel also state that interrogators
pressure suspects by pretending to be their
friends.
Thinking Critically about Ethical Issues in
Psychology
• How do we decide whether a proposed research
study is ethical?
• What if people disagree? (and they will)
• Is there a right answer? (often, no)
• The best we can do is follow steps for making
ethical decisions.
Steps for Ethical Decision Making
• Find out all the facts of the situation (procedure,
who will participate, etc.)
• Identify the ethical issues that are relevant (e.g.,
risk, informed consent, privacy, confidentiality,
deception, debriefing).
• Decide what is at stake for all parties involved
(e.g., participants, researchers, institutions,
society).
Steps for Ethical Decision Making (continued)
• Identify alternative methods or procedures, and
discuss the practical constraints, consequences,
and ethical implications of each alternative.
• Decide on the action to be taken. Judge the
“correctness” of the decision in terms of the
process that was followed, not whether the
decision makes the researcher happy.