Research Ethics

Questions we will address today

What is the relationship between ethical principles and laws pertaining to the practice of psychology?

Who monitors and enforces ethical violations among psychologists?

Research Domains

IRB Review

What is an IRB?

Review committees are local rather than centralized. Why?

Expedited review for studies of minimal risk.  What constitutes minimal risk?

Guiding principle with human participants

Respect for autonomy and self-determination by ensuring participants enter study voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently.

                    Koocher & Keith-Spiegel (1998), p. 417

The latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.  The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment.  It is a personal duty and responsibility which cannot be delegated to another with impunity.

The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.  This means that the person involved should have the legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make and understanding and enlightened decision.

                            The Nuremburg Code (1946)

Case 1

Mimi Dogood, Ph.D. complained to a state legislature that prisoners were being subjected to poorly designed, dangerous experimentation procedures in return for $3 a day.  The prisoners strongly objected to her intervention by noting that the money was sufficient to keep them supplied with cigarettes, candy, and other small items that made a big difference in the quality of their day-to-day lives.

Why did Dr. Dogood believe that there was an ethical problem here?

Case 2

Betty Roundup, Ph.D. asked her students to do her a favor by staying after class for a few minutes to fill out a research questionnaire on male-female relationships.  she added that this task was voluntary, but when Skip Busy began to leave, she said, "Well I am glad the rest of you can help me out."  Skip sad back in his chair but was embarrassed and felt he had jeopardized his standing in the class.

What is the ethical problem here? If the teacher gave extra credit would that have been ok?

What constitutes “minimal risk”?

Anonymous data – e.g., mail surveys...no risk to confidentiality

Full disclosure – no deception.

No distress or harm.

Privacy vs. Privilege vs. Confidentiality

When do client's or participant's give up privilege?

When can confidentiality be violated?

Most frequent answers:

When participants agree, when court mandates, in cases involving minors or dependent older adults, in cases of imminent danger to self or others (duty to warn cases).

Steps in ethical decisionmaking1. Describe the parameters of the situation. 2. Define the potential issues involved. 3. Consult the guidelines…Ethical Principles, Federal

Register, NIH or FDA, State and Federal Laws, College or University Guidelines.

4. Evaluate the rights, responsibilities, and welfare of all affected parties.

5. Generate alternate decisions for each issue. 6. Enumerate consequences of each decision and respective

likelihood's of different consequences occurring. 7. Make the decision.

  Koocher & Keith-Spiegel (1998), p.19

Case 3

Sub Terfuge, Ph.D. was conducting a field study of homosexual encounters in public men's lavatories.  Using a set of unobtrusive timing devices and a periscopic videotape apparatus, Dr. Terfuge concealed himself in a toilet stall and recorded a variety of casual homosexual encounters throughout a period of several months.  When he published an account of this findings in a professional journal, the local district attorney attempted to subpoena his videotapes in order to prosecute the people studied under an "unnatural acts" statute.

What was wrong with the way Dr. Terfuge conducted his study?

Case 4Amy Bushed was outraged to learn that the purpose of a study was not to evaluate her ratings of the film she was shown, but rather to observe her reactions to a young man's crude and forceful attempts to convince a disinterested and protesting woman to leave the theater with him and go for a ride.  Although she said nothing, Amy was upset about the young woman's welfare.  When Amy learned that the entire incident was staged just so others could observe her reaction, her guilt over her non-involvement turned to rage and insult.  The IRB also learned that the investigator and his assistant spent more than an hour with Amy, attempting to explain why the study was important.  They also reassured her that her response was not uncommon and that she should not feel badly about herself.

Did the researchers act unethically in the current case?  If you were on the IRB, how would you judge the researchers' actions?

All informed consent forms should include:

1. Description of the study's purpose. 2. Statement re: compensation. 3. Statement re: freedom to withdraw at any

time. 4. Statement re: risks and benefits. 5. Statement re: confidentiality of records.

Assessing risks and benefits:

Randomization and the problem of "placebo conditions"

Termination of study when one treatment is demonstrably effective or harmful

Experimental treatments and "incurable disease" -- the case of AIDS

Case 5Toni Alumni questioned the potential for privacy invasion by Nate Snoop, Ph.D.  Dr Snoop sent surveys to graduates of the university at which he held a full time teaching position.  Information about their relationship with their mentors when they were students was requested, including sensitive questions related to their professor's ideology, attitudes toward the campus administration, and knowledge of their private lives.  Although anonymity was stressed and the actual names of mentors were not requested, demographic data about the mentors (sex, department, rank, age, and teaching specialty) were solicited, which Toni believed would be sufficient to glean the actual identities of the mentors who the alumni were asked to characterize.   Toni approached the IRB with concerns that the survey could potentially damage Dr. Snoop's colleagues.

Does Toni Alumni make a reasonable claim here?  Is Dr. Snoop acting ethically in the way he is conducting this research.