Ethics in Research and Publication Grant Heller

Ethical Responsibilities of Researchers Each individual scientist has the ethical responsibility to seek knowledge and to strive to improve the quality of life (Shaughnessy, Zechmeister, & Zechmeister, 2003) Requirements of scientists: competence Report results accurately Manage resources honestly Acknowledge others Consider the consequences (Diener & Crandall, 1978)

Each individual scientist has the ethical responsibility to seek knowledge and to strive to improve the quality of life (Shaughnessy, Zechmeister, & Zechmeister, 2003)

Requirements of scientists:

competence

Report results accurately

Manage resources honestly

Acknowledge others

Consider the consequences

(Diener & Crandall, 1978)

Need for ethical guidelines Nuremberg code Tuskegee Syphilis study Milgram’s (1963) obedience study Humphreys’s (1970) “tearoom study”

Nuremberg code

Tuskegee Syphilis study

Milgram’s (1963) obedience study

Humphreys’s (1970) “tearoom study”

The Belmont Report 3 overarching principles 1.) Respect for persons Informed consent Coercion is unethical 2.) Beneficence Ethical decision making (cost-benefit analysis) 3.) Justice placebos

3 overarching principles

1.) Respect for persons

Informed consent

Coercion is unethical

2.) Beneficence

Ethical decision making (cost-benefit analysis)

3.) Justice

placebos

The Institutional Review Board Required by all institutions receiving federal funding Consists of members from both scientific and unscientific disciplines At least one member must be a local community member not associated with the institution Research cannot be conducted without prior approval of the board

Required by all institutions receiving federal funding

Consists of members from both scientific and unscientific disciplines

At least one member must be a local community member not associated with the institution

Research cannot be conducted without prior approval of the board

Cost-Benefit Model Cost/Risk: Low Benefit: High Cost/Risk: Low Benefit: Low Cost/Risk: High Benefit: High Cost/Risk: High Benefit: Low

Decision Cube Model

A pain scale for psychological research in animals (Orlans, 1993)

Costs of Research Time & effort Participants’ welfare Physical risk Psychological risk (anxiety, depression, altered self concept, loss of confidence in others, boredom) Confidentiality (social, legal, and economic risks of participating) Financial issues…research is expensive Negative stereotypes for the profession

Time & effort

Participants’ welfare

Physical risk

Psychological risk (anxiety, depression, altered self concept, loss of confidence in others, boredom)

Confidentiality (social, legal, and economic risks of participating)

Financial issues…research is expensive

Negative stereotypes for the profession

Potential Benefits Basic Knowledge Improvement of research or assessment techniques Practical outcomes Benefits for researchers Benefits for research participants

Basic Knowledge

Improvement of research or assessment techniques

Practical outcomes

Benefits for researchers

Benefits for research participants

Experimental Tx isn’t always better Tx Tell participants about assignment to conditions, along with potential risks and benefits of experimental treatment Offer the new Tx free of charge to control condition participants if it proves efficacious

Tell participants about assignment to conditions, along with potential risks and benefits of experimental treatment

Offer the new Tx free of charge to control condition participants if it proves efficacious

Ethical considerations Informed consent Provide information about the study Obtaining informed consent Informed consent form Elements to be included

Informed consent

Provide information about the study

Obtaining informed consent

Informed consent form

Elements to be included

Problems with attaining informed consent Compromising the validity of a study Participants who are unable to give informed consent Ludicrous cases of informed consent

Compromising the validity of a study

Participants who are unable to give informed consent

Ludicrous cases of informed consent

Ethical considerations, cont. Invasion of privacy Coercion to participate Physical and mental stress Minimal risk Deception Debriefing – 4 goals 1.) clarification 2.) remove stress 3.) obtain reactions 4.) should feel good about participating Confidentiality

Invasion of privacy

Coercion to participate

Physical and mental stress

Minimal risk

Deception

Debriefing – 4 goals

1.) clarification

2.) remove stress

3.) obtain reactions

4.) should feel good about participating

Confidentiality

Margin of support for animal research (Plous, 1996)

Animal research, cont.

Animal research, cont.

3 R’s of Animal Research Reduction Replacement Refinement

Reduction

Replacement

Refinement

Scientific Misconduct

“ Scientists Behaving Badly” (Martinson, Anderson, & de Vries, 2005)

Normal Misbehavior (de Vries, Anderson, & Martinson, 2006) Serious (but rare) scientific infractions F.F.P. Falsification Fabrication Plagiarism Misconduct is generally more mundane… 4 categories The meaning of data The rules of science Life with colleagues The pressures of production

Serious (but rare) scientific infractions

F.F.P.

Falsification

Fabrication

Plagiarism

Misconduct is generally more mundane…

4 categories

The meaning of data

The rules of science

Life with colleagues

The pressures of production

Normal Misbehavior (de Vries, Anderson, & Martinson, 2006)

Steps for ethical decision making (Shaughnessy, Zechmeister, & Zechmeister, 2003) 1.) Know the facts 2.) Identify the relevant ethical issues 3.) Determine what is at stake 4.) Identify alternative methods or procedures 5.) Decide on the action to be taken

1.) Know the facts

2.) Identify the relevant ethical issues

3.) Determine what is at stake

4.) Identify alternative methods or procedures

5.) Decide on the action to be taken

Case Study: Stanley Milgram’s study of obedience (1963)

Ethical issues of the Milgram study Participants were mislead as to the purpose of the study A confederate posed as another participant Participants were led to believe they were shocking another person…this was likely disturbing to them Participants experienced considerable stress as the experiment continued: They sweated, trembled, stuttered, swore, and laughed nervously as they delivered increasingly intense shocks Participants’ attempts to withdraw from the study were discouraged by the experimenter’s insistence that they continue.

Participants were mislead as to the purpose of the study

A confederate posed as another participant

Participants were led to believe they were shocking another person…this was likely disturbing to them

Participants experienced considerable stress as the experiment continued: They sweated, trembled, stuttered, swore, and laughed nervously as they delivered increasingly intense shocks

Participants’ attempts to withdraw from the study were discouraged by the experimenter’s insistence that they continue.

Milgram’s Obedience Study: Follow-up 92% responded to the survey Attitudes about volunteering 84% positive 15% neutral 1% regretful

92% responded

to the survey

Attitudes about

volunteering

84% positive

15% neutral

1% regretful

Common Courtesy (Leary, 2004) Chief complaints of research participants The researcher: Failed to show up or was late Was not adequately prepared Was cold, abrupt, or downright rude Failed to show appreciation for the participant

Chief complaints of research participants

The researcher:

Failed to show up or was late

Was not adequately prepared

Was cold, abrupt, or downright rude

Failed to show appreciation for the participant