Week 4.1

Question 1

How are ethics usually taught?

Answer 1

Ethics taught separate - but should be integrated with rest of course

Question 2

Teaching of ethics (5)

Answer 2

1) Specific ethics classes [pure] versus integrating ethics in all psychology courses [applied] - applied better
2) Ethics theory versus case study - with the close connection of ethics to the law and law being based on precedent - case study approach preferred
3) Integrating a historical perspective - again - evolution of ethics and precedence - historically OK, but currently unethical
4) Striking examples - given most research is ethical, it is the striking examples that clearly demonstrate ethical misconduct
5) Active learning to learn skills - problem-solving approach - lecture set up to get students to work through ethical dilemmas - but not in small groups [to discuss why there is a dilemma] and not active [students can rote learn for the exam]

Question 3

In the past, with ethics…

Answer 3

Used to trust what lecturers told you - get Milgram type experiments

Question 4

Australian guidelines to research ethics

Answer 4

National Health and Medical Research Council - Australian code for the responsible conduct of research

Question 5

There are separate guidelines for…

Answer 5

Separate guidelines for doing research with Indigenous people

Question 6

There have been…

Answer 6

There have been many cases that have triggered changes to ethic standards

Question 7

Major principles in research ethics (6)

Answer 7

1) Informed consent
2) Debrief
3) Protection of participants
4) Deception avoidance
5) Confidentiality
6) Right to withdraw

Question 8

The Tuskegee Study

Answer 8

1) Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment

2) Milgram’s obedience studies

Question 9

The Tuskegee Study

Answer 9

The ‘Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male’ was an infamous clinical study conducted between 1932 and 1972 by the US Government. The purpose of this study was to observe the natural progression of untreated syphilis (STD) in rural African-American men in Alabama under the guise of receiving free health care. The study was conducted to understand the disease’s natural history throughout time and to also determine proper treatment dosage for specific people and the best time to receive injections of treatments. No people in the study were given penicillin when in 1947 it became the standard treatment for syphilis

Question 10

About the Tuskegee Study

Answer 10

• No intention of treating them - wanted to know natural progression of the disease but knew consequences since 1880s
• Syphillis (STD) makes you go crazy - discovered in the 1880s
• Medical model - Syphillis - mental illness symptoms ; a medical problem
• Not one doctor ever reported experiment - it was reported to public by journalist, and rest of population stopped it

Question 11

Ethical breaches of the Tuskegee Study

Answer 11

• Never told patients they had syphilis [diagnosed as having “bad blood”]
• Told they would be treated, but there was no intention to do so
• Told the study would last six months, but it lasted 40 years
• Once a viable treatment appeared in 1947, all but a wait list control group should have been immediately treated
• They withheld information about penicillin and its effectiveness
• Prevented patients seeking alternate treatments available to others in their community

[primarily examples of breeches of informed consent here but all ethical principles (except maybe confidentiality) were breached]

Question 12

What do we need to think about as well?

Answer 12

But who else did it expose the disease to? - wives, girlfriends etc.

Question 13

Who reported the study?

Answer 13

Only made public by a whistleblower, Peter Buxtun [social worker who heard about the study from fellow US Public Health employees]

Question 14

Milgram obedience studies

Answer 14

Milgram [beginning in 1961] ran a series of experiments under the guise of a studying the effect of punishment on learning. However he was really studying the level of obedience of subjects to illegitimate commands from a legitimate authority. The results showed that over 60% of subjects went to the end of the experiment which resulted in them believing they had killed an innocent victim. Subjects were immediately debriefed after the experiment [and met the victim who assured them they were not harmed]. Subjects were followed up over the next couple of years, and Milgram reported that 28 [or 3.68%] of the subjects reported seeking counselling or psychotherapy as a direct consequence of participation in this study

• When people asked to withdraw - had prompts like you must continue
• 85% said thought the experiment was valuable/taught them something

Question 15

Ethical breaches of Milgram obedience studies

Answer 15

• Informed consent/Deception- the subjects were not told the real objective of the study and therefore could not “know” what they would experience
• Protection of participants- the subjects were subjected to severe mental trauma and while they were immediately debriefed and had long-term follow-up - there was psychological harm (some people went out believing they were capable of killing someone)
• Right to Withdrawal- subjects were not given an opportunity to withdraw. In fact, there were four verbal prompts discouraging withdrawal

(Milgram breached all but debriefing and confidentiality - but if don’t give people enough information, debrief not really useful)