Chapter 4 Flashcards
Tuskegee Study
Study: US Public Health and Tuskegee Institute wanted to examine the effects of untreated syphilis. At the time (1932), only a dangerous treatment was available. They recruited 400 black men with syphilis and told them they were being treated for bad blood, prevented them enlisting, and didn’t treat them with penicillin when it was found effective. Became known to public in 1972.
i. Ethical violations
1. Not treated respectfully: lies, lack of informed consent, career manipulation, lack of information
2. Harmed; both through commission and omission.
3. Targeted a disadvantaged social group.
Milgram Study
: participants were instructed to give shocks to a learner (who was a confederate) when a mistake was made in a task.
i. Ethical debate
1. Conundrum in deciding whether this research is ethical—trying to balance the potential risks to participants and the value of the knowledge gained.
The Belmont Report
a. Respect for persons: People are 1) Treated as autonomous agents, and 2) Entitled to protection if they have diminished autonomy
i. People free to make up their mind concerning participation
ii. Informed consent: each participant should learn about the project, procedures, risks, and benefits, and should decide independently whether to participate
iii. No coercion or undue influence (extreme incentives)
iv. Protect: children, prisoners, mentally disabled.
b. Beneficence: 1) Do not harm and 2) Maximize benefits, minimize harm
i. Researchers must consider costs and benefits
1. Would a participant encounter similar levels of stress in daily life
ii. Cannot withhold beneficial treatment
c. Justice: Researchers must fairly balance the costs to participants with the benefits
i. Participants should be drawn from the same groups that benefit from the research
5 APA Principles
a. Beneficence and nonmaleficence: Treat people in ways that benefit them. Do not cause suffering. Conduct research that will benefit society.
b. Fidelity and Responsibility: Establish relationships of trust; accept responsibility for professional behavior.
c. Integrity: Strive to be accurate, truthful, and honest in one’s role as a researcher.
d. Justice: Strive to treat all groups of people fairly. Sample research participants from the same populations that benefit. Be aware of bias.
e. Respect for people’s rights and dignity: Recognize the people are autonomous agents. Protect right to privacy consent, and confidentiality. Understand that some populations may be less able to give autonomous consent.
APA Ethical Standard 8
i. Institutional review boards–Informed Consent–Deception–Debriefing–Research misconduct (data fabrication, data falsification, and plagiarism)–Animal research
IRBs
a. Institutional review boards: ethical review boards
i. Act as a check on researcher enthusiasm and as an advocate for participants.
ii. Valuable, but legal necessity for universities or government funded studies.
iii. Composed of 5 members, scientist, academic non-scientist, nonaffiliated, advocate
1. Training (CIC), Application, Review, Approval, Continuing Review
iv. Types of Review
1. Exempt: must meet one of 6 research categories but can come from a governing body other than the IRB
a. Cannot be used if subjects are detained or exposes them to discomfort
2. Expedited: One IRB member may approve proposal, if limited risk.
3. Full Review
v. Application
1. Explain goals and background, describe procedure/materials, explain risk and benefits, provide statistical analysis and threats to validity
Informed consent
i. Reasons to avoid might include complete anonymity, or naturalistic observations where people could expect to be observed
Deception
: Withholding study details or lying to participants
i. Omission = withholding, commission = deliberate misinformation
ii. Not unethical if the study cannot be conducted without it
Debriefing
Participants are given additional details about the study, told about any deception (if applicable), told about the various experimental conditions (if applicable), and are given contact information in case they wish to learn more about the study in the future
Research Misconduct
i. Data fabrication: Changing or inventing data
ii. Falsification: More broadly influencing study’s results by hypotheses and design
1. Influencing subject responses, deleting data
iii. Plagiarism: Representing another’s work as your own
1. Self-plagiarism: reusing your old work
iv. Harm:
1. People may misunderstand state of the world and act differently
2. Damages reputation of scientific field and innocent collaborators
v. Motivations:
1. Pressure to publish, convinced of hypotheses, implications for promotions
Animal Research
i. Replacement: find alternatives to animals when possible
ii. Refinement: minimize animal distress
iii. Reduction: use as few animals as possible
iv. Animal Welfare Act of 1966
1. Mandates an IACUC
v. Arguments
1. Animal rights groups: Argue justice, animals bear risks and harm when they do not benefit
2. Researchers: Argue can be beneficial, sensitive to animal welfare, reduce numbers
