Research Ethics PDF

CHAPTER 2 - INFORMED CONSENT o Differs across fields, but those most relevant to RESEARCH ETHICS psychology ar...

CHAPTER 2 - INFORMED CONSENT o Differs across fields, but those most relevant to RESEARCH ETHICS psychology are: § Individuals must give their consent freely OBJECTIVES (without the use of force, duress, or coercion) 1. Understand the roles of IRBs and the APA Guidelines in the § Individuals must be free to drop out of the ethical conduct of research using human participants; experiment at any time 2. Learn the meaning of animal welfare & how to protect it § Researchers must give subjects a full 3. Learn the meaning of animal rights, and the view of animal explanation of the procedures to be followed, rights activists; and offer to answer any questions about them 4. Understand scientific fraud, and how to avoid it; and, lastly § Researchers must make clear the potential risks 5. Become skilled at ethical considerations of research reports and benefits of the experiment. If there is any possibility of pain or injury, researchers must RESEARCH ETHICS explain this in advance - ETHICALITY § Researchers must assure that all data will o The researcher’s foremost concern in recruiting/using remain private and confidential subjects is treating them ethically and responsibly § Subjects may not be asked to release the o Regardless if with animals or humans, we must researchers (or sponsors, institutions, etc.) from consider their safety and welfare liability – or to waive legal rights in case of injury o Psychological research is not only an attempt to satisfy our curiosities about innermost experiences o Consent should be obtained in writing, and subjects § Rather, responsible research is aimed at should receive a copy to keep. In case the subject is advancing our understanding of feelings, a minor or with disability, researchers need to obtain thoughts, and behaviors in ways that will assent from a parent or legal guardian ultimately benefit humanity o Consent forms need to be written in clear, o The well-being of individual research participant is no understandable language – at appropriate reading less important than the search for knowledge level for participants o Research that is harmful to participants is undesirable, o Researchers need to verbally reinforce information even if it increases wisdom that is important for the subjects to know § As early experience is an important aspect of child development, we should not raise children o Consent provides subjects with the most relevant in isolation – to assess the effects of deprivation information for their participation within the § There is no justification for doing such, no matter experiments how important the knowledge could be § The nature of the experiment § An overview of the procedures - LEGALITY § The duration of the experiment o Researchers are legally responsible for what happens § Potential risks and benefits to research participants § Instructions on what to do § Liability for harm to subjects – may It be physical § Hypothesis does not need to be disclosed (as or psychological, intentional or accidental subject awareness of researcher expectations o To protect subjects, the government formulated legal might become altered) and ethical guidelines, as human participants are protected by federal law - HISTORY o Each institution that accepts research funding from o Scientific research using human subjects has government agencies need a review committee, produced many social and intellectual benefits, but called an Institutional Review Board (IRB) sometimes at ethical cost o The primary duty of IRBs is to ensure that the safety § Especially after World War II, ethics came to the of research participants is adequately protected forefront after the discoveries of cruel and brutal § Decide whether the proposed study puts experiments conducted on Jewish concentration subjects at risk (one who is likely to be harmed camp prisoners by around 200 Nazi doctors in some way due to participation in research) § Following the war, international trials on war § Determine whether any risks are outweighed by crimes gave rise to a code of ethical standards potential benefits or the importance of the for research – the Nuremberg Code of 1947, knowledge to be gained (risk-benefit analysis) which is the basis of ethical standards today § Safeguard individual rights by making certain that each subject at risk gives informed consent § As years went by, this evolved into the Belmont Report (1979) – highlighting three basic ethical to participate principles  1. RESPECT FOR PERSONS. Every human - For experimental research, the following must also be being is an autonomous person, with the clarified at the outset of research: right to make their own decisions about o The experimental nature of the treatment; research. Extra protections for vulnerable o The services that will or will not be available to the groups (sectors with disadvantages, control group/s; disabilities, and/or diminished capacities). o The means by which assignment to treatment Informed consent derived from this and control groups will be made; 2. BENEFICENCE. Minimize risk of harm and o Available treatment alternatives if an individual maximize benefit – not only for society, but does not wish to participate, or wishes to for individuals as well. Risk-benefit analysis withdraw once the study has started; and derived from this o Compensation for or monetary costs of 3. JUSTICE. Fairness in both burdens and participating benefits of research. Sample selection must be fair – not just because they are 2. DECEPTION AND FULL DISCLOSURE disadvantaged, readily available, or easily - The researcher-participant relationship should be as manipulated. Research subjects should open and honest as possible. In some studies, come from groups most likely to reap the however, the true purpose of the study is disguised benefits of their participation - Many important psychological problems cannot be studied without the use of deception – and it may be APA GUIDELINES argued that failing to study important problems is even 1. INFORMED CONSENT less justifiable than using deception to explore them - Required from all participants who are at risk because - Especially in case of experimental research, of research sometimes a small omission – or outright deception – o Minimal risk is no greater in probability and is necessary to appropriately test an experimental severity than that ordinarily encountered in daily hypothesis. This is often done through the use of life – or during the performance of routine CONFEDERATES, or experimenter’s accomplices physical or psychological examinations or tests. Risk that does not alter the participants’ odds of - Milgram Experiment (1963, 1974) being harmed. Informed consent is not always necessary, but researcher must identify potential - APA Standard 8.07 (2002) risk and minimize them before conducting o Psychologists do not conduct a study involving § What proportion of people wash hands with deception unless they have determined that the soap and water in public bathrooms? use of deceptive techniques is justified by the § Observations of public behavior significant prospective scientific, educational, or § Anonymous questionnaires applied value – and that effective nondeceptive § Archival research alternatives are not feasible o Psychologists do not deceive prospective - APA Standard 3.10 (2002) requires psychologists to participants about research that is reasonably inform participants of: expected to cause physical pain or severe o The purpose of the research, expected duration, psychological distress and procedures; o Psychologists explain any deception that is an o Their right to decline to participate or to withdraw integral feature of the design and conduct of an from the research even after participation has experiment to participants as early as is feasible begun; – ideally at the conclusion of their participation, o The foreseeable consequence of decling or but not later than the conclusion of data withdrawing; collection (allowing participants to withdraw their o Reasonably foreseeable factors that may data) influence their willingness to participate such as potential risks, discomfort, or adverse effects; - IMPORTANT: Deception must NOT influence a o Any prospective research benefits; subject’s decision to take part in research. Any o Limits of confidentiality; deception used must be such that subjects would not o Incentives for participation; and refuse to participate if they knew what was really o Whom to contact for questions about the happening research and participant rights o EXAMPLE: It is unethical to recruit subjects for a learning experiment without telling them we will punish incorrect answers by scratching nails on the blackboard. This is because many subjects  would decline to participate in that study, if they - Other professional organizations have also emerged were aware of what was going to happen to promote and protect the welfare of animals – o In contrast, participants of Milgram’s experiment especially in terms of housing, sanitation, nutrition, would most likely consent – even if they knew waste disposal, ventilation, medication, safety, and that the electric shock used to punish the the like learners was not real 2. ANIMAL RIGHTS - In any case, FULL DISCLOSURE is necessary - The basic premise of APA guidelines on animal o Subjects need to be debriefed completely at the research is that it is acceptable to further the end of any experiment – wherein full understanding of behavioral principles – and to explanations are given regarding the true nature promote the welfare of humans and purpose of the study - Despite this, however, the automatic precedence of o Whether the effects of deception can ever be human interests over animal rights is greatly debated fully reversed by debriefing, however, remains a - The most vocal critics of animal research advocate the serious ethical question concept of animal rights – the idea that all sensate o Regardless of any later explanation, the species, particularly those that feel pain, are of equal subject’s anxiety and discomfort during the value, and should have equal rights as well experiments were real. Once done, these cannot - Although humans have benefitted greatly from be undone psychological experiments with animal subjects – o As such, it is important to avoid using any especially for understanding biochemical, behavioral, procedures that are even potentially harmful, physiological, and disease processes – it is important painful, or upsetting that we continue to minimize the infliction of any risk, pain, or death to animals used for research 3. ANONYMITY AND CONFIDENTIALITY - Researchers have the responsibility to protect the FRAUD IN SCIENCE privacy of all participants - Reporting research is a necessary part of the scientific - ANONYMITY. Data should be collected anonymously process. It is also an ethical matter and identified by code numbers or fictitious names. - All research must be reported honestly and accurately – Most psych research uses aggregated or group data both the results, and the procedures and reports statistical results as average scores, so it - APA Standard 8.10a states explicitly that “Psychologists do is not necessary to identify subjects by name not fabricate data.” - CONFIDENTIALITY. Data must likewise be stored in - The safeguards built into scientific reporting to avoid fraud a secure place, and used only for the purposes are the following: explained to the subject 1. Research submitted for publication are reviewed by the - Any identifying information must also be disguised – editor of the periodical – and by several experts in the especially if it can be used to recognize a subject field before being accepted. This is called peer review. Here, experts assess all research submissions – PROTECTING WELFARE OF ANIMAL SUBJECTS looking for problems, suggesting improvements, and - Ethical principles concerning human participants are discerning for strange findings and/or procedures. The obviously important, but are sometimes not extended to reviewers and editor, therefore, are the first line of non-human counterparts defense against data falsification 2. Replication is the second line of defense. Researchers 1. ANIMAL WELFARE often replicate published findings of others – especially - This is why other standards to protect animal welfare if they are surprising, novel, or important. If data was have also be devised – to ensure the humane care of falsified, it is unlikely that the experiment would be and treatment for animals replicated - Similar to human subjects, institutions engaged with 3. The competitive nature of academic psychology works animal research have an Institutional Animal Care and against fraud – even though it may also be the cause. Use Committee (IACUC) – that evaluates research Tenure, promotion, and the like are common before it can be conducted motivators for researchers to commit fraud – due to the - This is also comprised of scientists and laypersons, “publish or perish” culture but also veterinarians with expertise in animal laboratory science - Regardless of motivation, however, scientific misconduct - Before approval, the IACUC must determine that must be avoided – as it is not only unethical, but also illegal. researchers have appropriately researched Consequences can result to suspension, firing, or even alternatives – proving that no other options are imprisonment if convicted in court feasible PLAGIARISM - The more common kind of fraud is plagiarism – which pertains to the representation of someone else’s ideas, words, or written work as our own o It is not only borrowing facts and figures from someone else, it includes using someone else’s ideas without proper credit given - Although tempting, plagiarism is never worth the risk – especially with technology nowadays that can make this form of ethical misconduct so easy to detect - Although allowed, paraphrasing without giving credit is still plagiarism. To prevent this, one must always give credit where it is due - Tips to avoid plagiarism are as follows: 1. Take complete notes – including the complete citation of the source 2. Within reports, identify the source of any ideas, words, or information that are not your own 3. Identify any direct quotes with quotation marks at the beginning and end of the quotes – then indicate where they came from 4. Be careful with paraphrasing (restating someone else’s words). There is a great temptation to lift whole phrases or catchy words from other sources. Use your own words, or instead use quotes. Always give credit to the source 5. Include a complete list of references at the end of any report 6. If in doubt, cite anyway. You will do no harm by being more careful ETHICAL REPORTS - Section 8.12(a) of the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct states that “Psychologists take responsibility and credit, including authorship credit, only for work they have actually performed – or to which they have substantially contributed” o Thesis advisors or department chairs, for example, should not be automatically listed as authors on publications just because of institutional roles or status o To be given authorship credit, they need to have made an important contribution to the research o Using the same logic, students are not automatically listed as authors on publications of professors unless they have made major contributions as well - Researchers must not take credit for the same research more than once o Data that was previously published cannot be republished as if it was original data o Parts of previously published papers can be republished, as long as the initial publication is properly credited