Midterm 2 - Chpt. 3 Flashcards
Nuremberg code
established in response to human experimentation in established in response to human experimentation in WW2
Catalyst for international debate on how to respect human dignity
Emphasized importance for informed consent & updated international codes of ethics
Countries and scientific societies began codifying ethical practices for all research involving humans
TCPS
The Tri-Council Policy Statement
reminds researchers to consult and follow laws of the jurisdictions in which the research is conducted
3 basic ethical principles:Researchers, in addition, must also comply with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadian privacy of information laws, and relevant provincial laws
Varying legal contexts is one of the reasons why the TCPS2 is considered a set of guidelines rather than a set of rules
Adopting guidelines rather than specifying rules acknowledges the reality of research as an innovative and constantly evolving enterprise
Cannot predict every single specific situation posed by all future research questions
3 basic ethical principles:
- Respect for persons
- Concern for welfare
- Justice
Respect for persons
Researchers must respect the autonomy of research participants, and protect those who have “developing, impaired, or diminished autonomy”
Respecting autonomy means enabling people to choose participation freely and without interference
Concern for welfare
Researchers must attempt to minimize risks associated with participating in research, while maximizing the benefits of that research to individual participants and to society
When coupled with respect for persons, participants must be free to choose whether the balance of risk and benefits is acceptable to them
Justice
Researchers must treat people fairly and equitably by distributing the benefits and burdens of participating in research.
Demonstrating justice includes recruitment methods that offer participation to people from a diverse range of social groups, and excluding groups only when scientifically justifiable
Promote concern for welfare by…
minimizing risks and maximizing benefits
Concern for welfare:
refers to the need to maximize benefits and minimize any possible harmful effects of research participation
Risk-benefit analysis:
in decisions about the ethics of research, we are required to calculate potential risks and benefits that are likely to result
Benefits to participants & society:
Benefits include education about the scientific process, acquisition of a new skill, or treatment for a psychological or medical problem
Material benefits: monetary payment, gift, possibility of winning a prize, points toward a course grade
Satisfaction from contributing to a scientific investigation, could yield benefits for society
Risk of physical harm:
Researchers have affected participants physically in the pursuit of science across many different context
Risks of procedures that require that great care be taken to make them ethically acceptable
There would need to be clear benefits of the research that outweigh the potential risks
Risk of psychological stress:
When pursuing concern for welfare, we ask whether subjecting people to such a stressful experiment is justified, and whether the experience might have any long-term consequences for the participants
A potentially stressful form of research involves getting participants bogus tests of personality or ability
Using deception, researchers provide false feedback stating that the participant has an unfavourable personality trait or low ability score
What steps might be taken in the case of psychological stress?
When stress is a possibility, safeguards must be taken to help participants deal with the stress
Typically, a debriefing session following the study designed to address potential stresses that may arise due to research
Risk of losing privacy and confidentiality:
Includes researches to protect “the right to control information about oneself”
However, definitions are changing in the digital age
For our purpose, important to be aware that using data for purposes other than what was agreed to during the informed consent process may breach participants’ privacy and confidentiality, adding in lost of trust
Confidentiality is especially important when studying sensitive topics
Researchers may need to ask people very sensitive questions about their private lives
Important that individual responses to such questions to be confidential
Responses are completely anonymous - no way to connect any person’s identity with any particular data
No identifying information
Carefully design ways of coding data, storing data, and explaining the procedures to participants, to protect the confidentiality of responses and to ensure anonymity, when possible
In what case would we need to identify individual participants?
- Occurs when people are studied on multiple occasions over time, or when specific personal feedback, such as an accurate test score, must be given to individual participants
- Researchers should create a code to identify the individuals, but should separate this code from the actual data
– Data can’t be linked to specific people
Analysis of risks and benefits:
- Assess potential benefits to participants, science, and society
- Assess potential risks to participants
- Assess whether the potential benefits outweigh the risks
- If YES, carry out research
- If NO, study must be modified
TCPS2 principle - respect for persons:
participants are treated as autonomous, capable of making deliberate decisions about whether they wish to participate in research
Most often applied through informed consent - participants should be provided with all information that might influence their decision to participate or not; can then freely consent to participate in research or refuse to do so
7 components of informed consent forms:
- Purpose of research
- Procedures to be used
- Risks/benefits to p and society
- Compensation
- How confidentiality will be protected
- Assurance of voluntary participation and permission to withdraw without penalty
- Contact information
Cases where forms are so loaded with legal terminology that it’s unlikely…
p’s will fully realize what they’re signing
Should be written in simple and straightforward language, avoiding jargon/technical terms (grade 6-8 reading)
Not in first person, but like a conversation with participant
Other means of effective communication
- EX: translations
Possibilities where informed consent is not necessary or possible
- EX: when not manipulating or influencing the people you are observing in any way
Issue with consent - lack of autonomy:
lack of ability to make a free and informed decision to voluntarily participate
EX: minors - parent/guardian required in addition to agreement by the minor (alone, called assent)
Coercion - threat to autonomy:
any procedure that limits an individual’s freedom to consent is potentially coercive
Withholding information:
Providing too much information can be problematic; invalidating the results of the study if knowing all the details would change a person’s behaviour so that it no longer resembles how that person would normally behave
Acceptable to withhold information about hypothesis, or particular experimental conditions in which the person is participating in, when it doesn’t seem likely to affect a person’s decision to participate and when the information will be provided later, usually during a debrief after the study is completed
Deception:
Can be sometimes used as a tool by researchers when they actively misrepresent information to participants
2 types of deception:
- Misleading participants about a study’s goals
– A false purpose for a study
Staging a situation
Why would deception be used?
Concerns with how participants will alter their behaviour depending on knowledge about the study
Why would deception be used? - Informed Consent
Informed consent can bias who ends up participating in a study, altering characteristics of the example
i.e. people unwilling to participate if they don’t like the experiment
Limits ability to generalize results
Is deception common now?
NO - a recent decrease
Why is deception less common?
- General awareness of ethical issues have lead to using alternatives to using deception
- Ethics committees at universities and colleges now review proposed research more carefully - elaborate deception is likely to be approved only when the research is important and there are no alternatives available
- Elaborate setups are difficult to achieve successfully, sometimes because participants are suspicious of the possibility of deception after learning about it in their courses
– Suspicion can depend on what is being measured
Importance of debriefing:
Debriefing: occurs after the completion of the study
Opportunity to deal with issues of deception, withholding information, and potential harmful effects of participation
Chance to further educate participants about the nature and purpose of the research
Debriefing - If p’s deceived in any way, researcher needs to…
explain why the deception was necessary
Debriefing - If p’s physical/psychological state is altered in someway, researcher must make sure that…
participant is returned to their original state and is comfortable having participated
Should leave with no ill feelings toward the field of psychology
Could form general distrust for researchers
Alternatives to deception
- Windsor Deception Checklist
- Role-playing
- Simulation studies
- Honest studies
Windsor Deception Checklist (Alternatives to deception)
Criteria for whether the use of deception for a study raises ethical concerns and should be reconsidered
Role-playing - Why are they unideal? (Alternatives to deception)
Alternative to deception
However, not considered a satisfactory alternative
Reading descriptions doesn’t convey its real-life effects
Hypothesis can become obvious to participants
Behave in a way that’s consistent with hypothesis
Experimenter might ask for p’s to imagine, predict scenarios from descriptions
Simulation Studies (Alternatives to deception)
Different type of role playing; simulating a real-world situation
Can be used to examine conflict between individuals; driving behaviour using simulators
Such simulations can be highly involving and effectively mimic many elements of a real-life experience
Honest Studies (Alternatives to deception)
any study that doesn’t try to misinform or hide information from participants
Enables systemic observation of many factors related to dating without deceiving anyone about the purpose of the study
Can use naturally occurring events that present unique research opportunities
Most serious defect of role-playing:
No matter what results are obtained, critics can claim that results would’ve differed if participants were in a real situation; based off research that states people aren’t always able to accurately predict their own behaviour or the behaviour of others
Justice
Addresses issues of fairness in receiving the benefits of research as well as bearing the burdens of research risks
Any decisions to include or exclude certain people from a research study must be justified on scientific grounds
If age, ethnicity, gender, or other criteria are used to select participants, there must be a scientific rationale
Evaluating the ethics of research with human participants
Consider: who? How will results be shared? Risks? Deception needed?
Monitory ethical standards at each institution:
Research funding from 3 agencies, depending on the type of research being proposed
Once funded, researchers are responsible for complying with the ethical standards in the TCPS2
Any institution that receives funding from any of the tri-council agencies must have a Research Ethics Board
All research involving participants that is conducted by the faculty, students, and staff associated with the institution is reviewed in some way by the REB
What are the requirements for research that can be exempt from REB review?
Requirements:
Only uses publicly available info that is legally accessible
Only involves observing people in public places without any intervention or interaction by the researcher, and no individuals can be identified when presenting the results
Uses data that have already been collected and are completely anonymous
Exempt Research
Research in which there is absolutely no risk to participants is typically exempt from REB review
Includes naturalistic observation in public places, with no threats to anonymity and no expectation of privacy
Researchers aren’t permitted to decide this
Rather, the institutional REB may create a procedure to allow a researcher to apply for this status
Minimal Risk Research:
risks of harm to participants are no greater than the risks one would normally encounter in daily life
TCPS2 asks researchers to err towards a conservative interpretation of what constitutes daily life
Still adheres to the core principles, but elaborate safeguards are not of great concern
Greater than minimal risk research
Any procedures that place participants at greater than minimal risk is subject to thorough review by the full REB committee
In addition to informed consent, other safeguards may be required before approval is granted
In cases where it’s ambiguous whether the research is minimal risk or greater than minimal risk, REBs will tend to categorize research as greater than minimal risk
Application - Greater than minimal risk research
varies, but typically requires:
1. a description of risks/benefits
2. procedures for minimal risk, procedures for recruiting participants
3. exact wording of the informed consent form
4. how participants will be debriefed, and procedures for maintaining confidentiality and anonymity whenever possible
What part of animal research is affected by ethics?
- Animals used to control environmental conditions
- Long-term studies
- 24 hour study of behaviour
- Drug effects
- Physiological and genetic mechanisms
Only constitutes a small proportion of psychology research
CCAC
Canadian Council on Animal Care
3 R’s of Good Animal Practice
Replacement involves replacing the use of animals with some alternative or avoiding the use of animals altogether
Reduction involves minimizing the number of animals being used
Refinement involves modifying procedures to minimize pain/distress
Ethics codes of the APA and CPA (Professional Ethics in Academic Life)
Ethics codes: ethical principles and standards for all aspects of a professional academic career in psyc
Overview of how far professional ethics extends for all psychologists
BEFORE PAGE 55 IN TEXT - HIGHLIGHTED
Primary responsibility of psychologists is toward the most vulnerable members of society
Scientific Misconduct & Publication Ethics
Must be able to believe the reported results of research, otherwise the entire foundation of the scientific method as a means of knowledge is threatened
Scientific misconduct undermines the nature of scientific investigation and the public’s trust in science
Possible as there’s many points in the publication process where scientists have a great deal of freedom in how data is collected, analyzed, and reported
- Allows them to make decisions that falsely show evidence for a phenomenon
Fraud is committed with:
Fabricating data
Collecting real data but altering the numbers to fit the hypothesis
How is fraud detected?
Often by colleagues or students working with the researcher
People are developing methods for detecting fraud in papers by statistically analyzing the published results
Also, methods to detect whether a set of papers provide good evidence for a phenomenon, based on the observation that when a real effect exists, p-values just below .05 are rather unlikely
Why commit fraud?
Scientists find themselves seeking or holding academic positions with extreme pressure to produce impressive results
Researchers have an exaggerated fear of failure, plus a great need for success and admiration
Ethical Data Analysis:
Statistical analysis of data can be complex and include a level of judgement that may surprise you
- Rounding errors
- Tend to occur in favour of the researcher’s hypothesis, implying intention
Good practice to double check analyses and final reports for accuracy
Improving Science through Publication Reform
Three concrete practices that researchers can adopt:
- Disclosure
- Preregistration
- Open data and materials
Disclosing all info about a study keeps a record of exactly how the research was conducted, facilitating replication attempts, and allows others to better evaluate your research
Plagiarism:
presenting another person’s work or ideas as your own, intentionally or even unintentionally; serious form of scientific misconduct
Papers must give proper citations to all sources
Internet use is increasing cases of plagiarism
Why do people plagiarize?
- Poor writing ability
- Citing sources “weakens” arguments in papers; not original enough
- Not knowing what plagiarism is
