year2 psy282 ethics

8/14/2019 Year2 PSY282 Ethics

1/10

Alan Cummins 1165236 PSY282 1

In relation to research already conducted, describe the major ethical

guidelines for research and discuss some of the dilemmas that can

arise.

Student: Alan Cummins No. 1165236

Course: Carrying Out Investigations in Psychology, PSY282, Carmel ONeill


2/10


INTRODUCTION

In order to discuss ethics and how it relates to carrying out psychological

investigations this essay will be broken into several areas. A definition, description and

discussion of ethics and more specifically research ethics shall be given and how it relates to

the scientific process. Mention will be given briefly to the main organisations involved in

determining the ethical guidelines that all scientists and psychologists should adhere to.

Ethics will be then be discussed in relation to before, during and after an experiment is

carried out with reference given to why ethics should or should not be used during the life-

cycle of an experiment.

ETHICS - A DEFINITION

Psychological experimentation is about the scientific study of hypotheses and the

formulation of theories based on the research carried out. Such research should be carried

out with an empirical and sceptical approach but also with consideration given to the

consideration of ethics both morally and scientifically so as to uphold the scientific goal of

accurate and beneficial study. Integrity of the scientific approach can only be maintained by

each researcher taking responsibility to seek knowledge in a competent manner and report

the results accurately and honestly in an attempt to improve the quality of life and its

effects on society. This is an ethical obligation. Ethics is defined as a set of principles of right

conduct, of dealing with values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and

wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of motives and ends of such

actions. It is a system of morals and beliefs held in common by a group of people regarding

right and wrong, moreover in relation to research we must consider research ethics,

namely, a system of beliefs that scientists hold in common about what is morally right and


3/10


what is morally wrong for researchers to do while conducting research. Morals can be

affected by culture or personal opinion but such principals are tied to the scientific

community so should provide adequate thought and consideration to the general right and

wrong of conduct in research. There are many bodies such as the Ethical Principles by the

British Psychological Society (BPS) (2000) and the American Psychological Association (APA)

that produce ethical guidelines for research and as Gale (1995) suggests, due to the regular

review and revision of such they remain abreast of changing social and political contexts in

which the research takes place. However as these standards are provided as a guideline for

a wide range of areas within psychology they are at times too generic and confusion and

ambiguity can occur in interpretation of them. Joscelyne (2002) discusses such issues in

relation to relationships with former clients. Such ambiguities however over time can be

clarified and specified in particular research cases by Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) that

provide a sanity check on ensuring ethical and scientific integrity is upheld.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS BEFORE RESEARCH

Before carrying out a psychological experiment consideration should be given to the

ethical ramifications and pitfalls that may occur. Sufficient safe-guards can then be put in

place prior to beginning the research to ensure the scientific and ethical integrity is

maintained. Before beginning any experiment the researcher must consider if they

participants time will be wasted or essential in carrying out that experimental task. There is

an ethical obligation to ask a participant to help in an experiment only if they are required to

do so and their involvement will help to aid the experiment. In designing and carrying out

the experiment the researcher should consider if it will undermine the scientific process.

The experiment should seek to enhance the field of knowledge under study. Rather than try


4/10


to undermine the scientific process it should seek to add support and evidence to such.

Impediment of knowledge not only wastes the participants time but also undermines and

shows no respect for the work carried out by previous researchers and participants in the

area. This does not mean that prior scientific findings should not be criticised but rather that

they should be constructively criticised with the aim to improve the current research

findings. The experimenter should pay heed to the penalties and sanctions that may be paid

if the ethics of the experiment are broken. They have a responsibility to their organisation,

their participants, to previous work in the area and to themselves to ensure that they are

aware of the seriousness of breaking ethical guidelines. There is also an obligation to ensure

that the results are reported accurately and concisely and to that end the various reporting

bodies provide research protocols which should be followed. It is an ethical obligation to

ensure that instruments and procedures follow these guidelines and strict adherence to

every step is given and if any over-sight or omission is found that correct re-submission

processes are followed. In carrying out research often there is a risk/benefit balance that

needs to be addressed. The right of the participant in terms of dignity, privacy and self-

determination needs to be weighed against the right of society and science to further

knowledge of a given area of investigation Myers (1994). There can be a conflict between

the two and as such a cost/benefit analysis must be carried out as put forward by Aronson

(1992). The researcher in guidance with their relevant professional body must determine if

the costs of using methods that place participants in harm can be justified and balanced

against the research being carried out. Risk involves harm to the participant in terms of

mental, emotional, social and physical stress and also time, effort, attention and resources

that must be volunteered. Lower risk procedures should be used where available and the

concept of minimal risk, the procedure not exceeding those encountered in normal day-to-


5/10


day life, considered. Weighting of personal versus societal cost / benefit is subjective by its

very nature, and it is the place of IRBs to ensure that all dilemmas of such a nature are

thought out and discussed before moving forward. In designing and preparing the

experiment participants should be requested to voluntarily give up their time or resources

without coercion. In order to make a full and honest decision they should be made aware of

the risks and benefits involved. The aim is to have willing participants who will remain

honest in their participation rather than for example taking part in an experiment purely for

financial benefit. Informed consent should be given where all necessary and relevant

information is provided to the participant before agreeing to take part in an experiment.

This brings about several dilemmas. In order to be fully aware participants should be told

that they are taking part in an experiment but in doing so this brings into question

techniques such as unobtrusive observation. Also if informed consent is required it can pre-

empt the results of the experiment and colour the responses of the participants. This brings

about the question of deception and whether it should be used or if it can in fact be avoided

at all in carrying psychological research as discussed by Krupat and Garonzik (1994). The

question is how natural behaviour can be studied without deception. Demand

characteristics and expectancy effects can negatively affect the outcome and should be

avoided if the researcher is to try to accurately measure the variables of the experiment.

Finally research is ethically bound to protect the participants from physical and

psychological harm such as worry, embarrassment, failure and loss of self-esteem. This in of

itself is open to subjective deliberation and the measurement of psychological harm is

extremely difficult in of itself.


6/10


ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS DURING RESEARCH

As much consideration as is possible and as is required by the various psychological

bodies should be given to ethical issues as addressed above before beginning an

experiment. However issues do arise during the course of the experiment. Experiments are

not always tightly controlled within the laboratory setting and as such are subject to

frequent and uncontrollable change. Unexpected reactions can also occur and it is

impossible to have a mapped out response procedure in place for all eventualities. During

the experiment the researchers identity should be made clearly and accurately to the

participants but in doing so this may affect the natural setting of the experiment. As the

experiment is carried out behavioural changes can occur in the participants. There is an

ethical obligation on behalf of the researcher to monitor these changes and ensure that

they are not of harm to the participant. These once more cause a dilemma as the researcher

must ascertain if these changes are harmful or are naturally or unnaturally occurring in the

participant. The participants are giving their time and resources in order to aid the

betterment of the scientific community; they should be given due care and attention by the

researcher. Considerate treatment should be given, not only after the experiment has

concluded but also during the experiment to protect the participants. Participants should

have been given all necessary and relevant information with which to make an informed

consent but during the course of the experiment itself circumstances may have changed and

in doing so the participant has the right to retract their consent. The participant should feel

at no time undue pressure to continue with an experiment. This causes a dilemma as the

purpose of the experiment may be the measurement of compliance and coercion affects

and so by their very nature undue pressure is exerted.


7/10


ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS AFTER RESEARCH

Once an experiment has been concluded considerate treatment of the participants

should continue to be considered. Debriefing should be given to all participants to provide

them with all relevant information about the experiment they have just taken part in. This

debriefing should take into account factors such as the possible effects of the experiment on

the well-being of the participants, ensuring that participants leave the experiment as having

learnt and given benefit to research and their role in such and the removal of harmful

effects such as may be caused by deception. Christensen (1988) reports that participants

once informed of deception in debriefing dont mind and Millgram (1977, 1992) reports

further that participants are enthusiastic and impressed by the significance of their part in

experimentation involving deception. It should be noted however that this in of itself is not

enough ethical justification to blindly allow deception to be used in experimentation.

Aftercare should not be used as a justification to cause harm during an experiment.

Anonymity and confidentiality should be given to all participants and it is unethical to reveal

data about a participant without their informed and unpressurised consent. Typically

experiments make use of a comparison control group. All groups should be given access to

the same after-care and attention and if restricted access to certain procedures during an

experiment should be given full access to any benefits that non-control groups had. This

raises issues relating to anonymity where the researcher in order to provide full and

adequate after-care must have knowledge of all participants. This places the researcher into

a role of trust and responsibility and is fraught with ethical dilemmas. The scientific process

requires the experimenter to accurately report their findings. This involves clear and concise

data reporting and analysis in an objective, empirical and sceptical manner. Reference


8/10


should be given to all work used in performing and reporting on an experiment and

acknowledgement should be given to all those that helped in the experiment, particularly

participants. Plagiarism should be avoided at all costs.

MILLGRAM EXPERIMENTS, ETHICAL DILEMMAS ILLUSTRATED

Taking the issues listed above a brief listing of Millgrams experiments and insight

into ethics in research shall be given. Millgram (1963) obedience experiment gives good

example of the use of deception and brings about the discussion if deception was not

allowed that such important experiments would not be allowed or investigated Millgram

(1977, 1992). Millgram (1974) made great efforts to debrief his participants and showed

that in doing so the participants had a strong sense of having taken part in valid and

worthwhile experiments. He suggests that the justification for allowing any scientific

procedure is not wholly given by a governing body or IRB but rather from the participants

themselves, Millgram (1974). He does acknowledge that there are ethical questions to be

answered however in using such research, Millgram (1977, 1992)

CONCLUSION

This discussion does not give reference to the specific areas of ethics in relation to

animals which is of great concern in the area of scientific experimentation, nor to the

specific area of ethics in drugs research. It is advised that the reader follow up and read the

detailed guidelines in relation to such as provided by BPS and APA. Ethics are fraught with

dilemmas that can only be decided from a subjective view-point. At all times during, before

and after an experiment the participants and the benefits to society as a whole should be

considered in relation to ethical principles. The governing bodies, such as BPA and APA in


9/10


conjunction with IRBs, should act as a guiding hand to ensure procedures are followed to

closely reflect the constantly changing moral viewpoint of society and the shifting increasing

rights of the individual. If one is to truly follow the scientific approach and call one self a

psychologist consideration should be constantly given to ethics.


10/10


References

Aronson, E. (1992) The Social Animal (6th

Ed.). New York: W.H. Freeman & co.

British Psychological Society (2000) Code of Conduct, Ethical Principles & Guidelines.

Leicester: BPS.

Christensen (1988), cited in Krupat and Garonzik (1994)

Gale, A. (1995) Ethical issues in psychological research. In A.M. Colman (ed.) Psychological

Research Methods and Statistics. London: Methuen.

Joscelyne, T. (2002) Time for a change? The Psychologist, 15(4), 176-7.

Krupat, E. and Garonzik, R. (1994) Subjects expectations and the search for alternatives to

deception in social psychology. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 211-22.

Millgram, S. (1963) Behavioural study of obedience.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67,

371-8.

Millgram, S. (1974) Obedience to Authority. New York: Harper Torchbooks.

Millgram, S. (1977) Subject reaction: the neglected factor in the ethics of experimentation. The

Hastings Centre Report, October, 19-23.

Millgram, S. (1992) The Individual in a Social World (2nd

Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Myers, D. (1994) Exploring Social Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.

year2 psy282 ethics

Documents