WednesdayApr 18 at 9pm
Any type of research which violates the set ethics is termed unethical and forbidden. Borderline areas refer to boundaries which the researcher is not allowed to cross in research since it may cause repercussions on the subjects (APA, 2016). Firstly, research whereby at the end of it the subjects may be negatively affected is not allowed. For example, in 2001, a research study testing on speech remedy was conducted at Lowa University using experimental and control groups. After the research, it was revealed that children who were subjected to negative psychoanalysis developed adverse mental effects while the rest reserved speech complications.
Secondly, a research study which is feared that the results may be disastrous is prohibited. It is dreadful in that it ends up affecting the participants or the environment where it was conducted. For example, subjects may end up experiencing depression, helplessness, and emotional disturbances.
Thirdly, in a case where animals are being used for experimentation, the experiment should not go past ethics realms. This may involve a case whereby the animals may end up being much disturbed, injured, convulsions or even cause their death. For example, a monkey study which was carried out in 1969 on drug trials left many nursing injuries, psychologically disturbed and others were feared to die in a short span of two weeks (Flick, 2014). In addition, exposing the participant to unfavorable condition or chemical which may have a negative impact on them is forbidden.
Fourthly, in any case, a participant wishes to withdraw his or her results from an experiment, there is no reason for pushing the subject to continue with the research. The subject’s move might have been propelled due to unfavorable conditions, and in this case, they should be permitted to halt. If the researcher compels the subject to continue for selfish gains, that is unethical and forbidden (Bell, 2014).
American Psychological Association. (2016). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist
Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research. Sage
Bell, J. (2014). Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
Reply Reply to Comment
COLLAPSE SUBDISCUSSION Jean Henry
ThursdayApr 19 at 3:26pm
Manage Discussion Entry
Wow! Okay, are you collecting these bonuses for a rainy day? This should really help you if you need a reprieve to redo an assignment or need a little leeway in terms of posting assignments for the rest of this week or week 5. In any case, you’ve just earned another bonus! Feel free to use it to request a two day late exception for any week 1,2, 3, 4, or 5 assignment or for a chance to redo one initial post or paper from those weeks. In any case, it is just the two of us. So, feel free to respond to me once or more. That is fine.:)
In any case, we certainly do need to be mindful of participant rights such as the right to withdraw, human protections, appropriate professional conduct of a researcher, etc. Related to those too, deception is important to consider. As we know, interestingly, deception is possible in scientific research credibly, considered ethically appropriate in some situations, and even does have benefits when used properly (both in terms of research and arguably also in terms of the welfare of the participant).
According to the American Psychological Association (2017) Ethics Code, deception can and is used in research credibly at times. If approved to be used though, it needs to be J.E.N.: Justified (a clear experimentally sound rationale for the need for deception), Explained (participants need to know that deception in some way may occur), and Non-harmful (does not pose any notable risk, harm, etc. to participants). For example, having Confederates (essentially, fake study participants) could be Justified (J). Confederates could also be Explained (E) in some ways without disclosing everything that would give them away or harm the study and still be approved. In addition, arguably in most situations, having Confederates would not harm (N) anyone. This is just one of many possible examples.
By the way, a great example of the use of deception with Confederates is the famous study in psychology, the 1973 Darley and Batson Good Samaritan study, which addressed dispositional and situational factors that play a role when people are immersed in an experience (Brooks, 2012). Simply stated, the researchers wanted to know if personal factors and/or situational/environmental factors influenced people’s decisions and actions.
So, they used a Confederate who acted like an injured individual who needed help. People largely walked by, even those for whom that behavior might not be expected (e.g., seminary students, etc.). If the researchers had let others know the Confederate was role-playing, the study could not have happened. It arguably didn’t hurt anyone to have that confederate there, and the study even today would have likely been approved. That said, if you were a researcher and needed to conduct a study using deception in some way, would you do it? If so or not, why or how?
American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and
code of conduct. Retrieved from http://apa.org/ethics/code/index.asp
Brooks, R. (2012). Lessons from social psychology for complex operations.
Georgetown Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 13-043. Retrieved