Tuesday 9-11 (Group 2) & Tuesday 11-1 (Group 3) Tom Mitchell: [email protected].
uk, T15
Reminder of where to access resources relating to
ethics in Psychology. Studies which resulted in the development of ethical guidelines in Psychology. Q & A: key terms quiz Ethics in Psychological research assessment overview.
School of Psychology research ethics documents. www.abdn.ac.uk/psychology/research/ethics.shtml BPS Code of Conduct- links to PDF document. http://www.bps.org.uk/what-we-do/ethics-standards/ethicsstandards ESRC Research Ethics Framework http://www.esrc.ac.uk/about-esrc/information/researchethics.aspx American Psychological Association www.apa.org
Think back to some of the key studies mentioned in Psychology;
Milgram (1963) was interested in researching how far people would go in obeying an instruction if it involved harming another person. Stanley Milgram was interested in how easily ordinary people could be influenced into committing atrocities. Procedure: Volunteers were recruited for a lab experiment investigating learning (re: ethics: deception). Participants were 40 males, aged between 20 and 50, whose jobs ranged from unskilled to professional. At the beginning of the experiment they were introduced to another participant, who was actually a confederate of the experimenter. They drew straws to determine their roles leaner or teacher although this was fixed and the confederate always ended to the learner. There was also an experimenter dressed in a white lab coat, played by an actor. The learner (Mr. Wallace) was strapped to a chair in another room with electrodes. After he has learned a list of word pairs given him to learn, the "teacher" tests him by naming a word and asking the learner to recall its partner/pair from a list of four possible choices. The teacher is told to administer an electric shock every time the learner makes a mistake, increasing the level of shock each time. There were 30 switches on the shock generator marked from 15 volts (slight shock) to 450 (danger severe shock). The learner gave mainly wrong answers (on purpose) and for each of these the teacher gave him an electric shock.
65% (two-thirds) of participants continued to the highest level of 450 volts. All the participants continued to 300 volts. Stark authority was pitted against the participants strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the participants ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not. The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation.
Would you trust this man???
Let us review some of the original materials used in the study:
Ethics application: http://www.prisonexp.org/pdf/humansubjects.pdf Information provided to participants: http://www.prisonexp.org/pdf/geninfo.pdf Consent form: http://www.prisonexp.org/pdf/consent.pdf
Prisoner rules used once experiment had begun: http://www.prisonexp.org/pdf/rules.pdf
Principles for Research Participation
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Voluntary participation Informed consent to participate Right to withdraw at any time Confidentiality of data Duty of care by the researcher - participants must be protected from mental and physical harm Benefits must outweigh the costs to the participant
In groups come up with a) a definition of points 1-4, and b) how you would achieve points 1-4 in a research proposal. 5 minutes then class discussion.
Consent form
Inform participants on the consent form about 1. purpose of the research, expected duration, and procedures; 2. right to decline to participate and to withdraw once started; 3. foreseeable consequences of declining or withdrawing; 4. factors that might affect willingness to participate (e.g. potential risks, discomfort, or adverse effects); 5. any prospective research benefits; 6. limits of confidentiality; 7. incentives for participation; 8. who to contact for questions. Researcher should provide opportunity for prospective participants to ask questions and receive answers.
Special Groups
Problem of groups who cannot give informed consent (children, mentally ill, demented, elderly). Patients (requires special ethical review by NHS committee) Obtain informed consent from caregivers. Where procedures involve risk/harm etc. obtain informed consent from the individual as well, plus further consult an ethics committee. Anyones avoidance of testing (child or adult) should be taken as withdrawal of consent.
Informed Consent
1. 2. 3. Full information Voluntary participation Consent involves capacity to make a decision - ability to: understand relevant information
appreciate situation and its consequences
reason with the information and weigh up consequences logically communicate decision
Informed Consent and Power Relationships
Prisoners, institutionalised individuals, and students may feel they are not in a position to say no. Participation as part of training/experience.
Coercion prohibited When an overt threat of harm is intentionally presented by one person to another in order to gain compliance.
But also applies to implicit perceived threats.
Levels of Deception
Deception varies in extent; for example: Participant gives informed consent to participate in one of various conditions, but does not know which one they are allocated to (e.g. drug or placebo). Participant consents to participate in a study but is misled about what the study is about (e.g. Milgrams learning experiments). Participant consents to participate in a study but does not know the full details until afterwards (e.g. vaguely on memory). Participant is involved in a study without prior knowledge or consent (e.g. bystander behaviour).
Observational Research
e.g. Filming and voice recording Experiments, therapy sessions, etc. Make/use recordings only with participants knowledge and consent (afterwards, if deception is involved).
Observational, naturalistic studies in public places No knowledge or consent necessary, as long as individuals cannot be identified or harmed. Respect cultural traditions etc.
Debriefing
Give full explanation of what the participant has been involved in. Avoid evaluative statements. Consider effects of study on self-esteem, etc. Provide contact details for follow-up questions. Does not justify unethical/misleading treatments. If psychological/physical problems are revealed, researcher should alert participant to these, and refer them to an expert for treatment if necessary.
After debriefing, participants have right to withdraw their consent retrospectively, and to demand destruction of their data and any recordings.
Materials for exercise available on myAberdeen, in materials
folder all groups at top of page. You will need to download the document to complete the exercise. You should read through the details of the study, then produce a word document with your student number, tutor name, and group number. - This document should be clearly labelled as subsections 1-10 for each of the questions asked in the exercise. Each question/answer is equally weighted at 2 CAS marks per question (with the assessment contributing 10% of your course grade). - a physical copy should be submitted to the office in the first week back after Easter break, and a copy via turnitin on myaberdeen.
The research exercise will be based on the following
paper, which displays many ethical inconsistencies, and would not pass for review in the current system.
The following diagram from the original research paper
may aid in your understanding of the research environment detailed in the methods section within the exercise.
