ETHICAL ISSUES IN PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH

Research can be evaluated by many "yard sticks" including ethics. It all started with
Milgram and the obedience research he conducted. When the study was published, the
questions were raised: Why has this been done? Should it have been done?

In the USA a Code of Ethics for psychologists was drawn up. Until then it had been a
case of common sense and obeying the law. Milgram did not break any laws, but what
he did is generally considered unethical. Britain then followed with a Code of Ethics
drawn up by the BPS (British Psychological Society), which does differ from that of
America's.

Most psychological research is conducted with human participants. Working with

humans requires that we consider their welfare as part of our research planning
process. Ethical guidelines such as those developed by the American Psychological
Association (APA) and the federal policy outlined in the Federal Register (1991)
emphasize sensitive and humane treatment that minimizes risks to research
participants. When we begin our ethical decision-making process, we should consider
each of the following issues.

Why Is This Important? We do research because we want to make contributions to

our profession and to society. Those who agree to be a part of our studies join with us
to meet these larger goals. They become partners in research and, as such, deserve to
be treated well. Our ethical guidelines help us to think through how we can do high-
quality research at the same time that we treat our research participants with respect.

Benefits of the Research: When we conduct research, we make an implicit contract

with our participants that our study has the potential to yield some larger benefit
beyond our own personal interests. We ask questions that are grounded in theory and
previous psychological research. We also make sure that our studies are sufficiently
well designed to provide meaningful information. Anything other than our most
careful work would be a waste of participants' time and effort.

Responsibility: As researchers, we must take full responsibility for our studies. Even
if we are in a class or working on a thesis where others are helping us with our
research, we must take full responsibility for how we conduct the study. This
responsibility extends to research assistants. If we have students helping us to collect
or compile data, we also must make sure that they know about and follow ethical
principles.

Physical and Psychological Risks: Psychological research can cause physical and/or
psychological discomfort. For example, imaging studies are increasingly popular in
research on cognitive processing. Participants may feel physical discomfort from the
heat generated by the imaging machines or anxious and claustrophobic from the noise
and enclosed space.

As researchers, we are obligated to accurately estimate the degree of risk in our

research. We typically do this by reading the literature and consulting with colleagues.
Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) also will help researchers estimate the degree of
risk involved in their studies. An IRB is a group of professionals and members of the
community at large who review research proposals to make sure that they follow
ethical standards. Every institution that receives federal funding is required to submit
all proposals for research with human participants to the IRB. The IRB is an
important safeguard but the ethical responsibility for the research ultimately rests with
the investigator. Student research, especially research conducted as part of a class,
typically involves little or no risk.

BPS CODE OF ETHICS

In a nutshell, if you do nothing to hurt others, or hurt the reputation of psychology,

you will be following the BPS code of ethics (Ray White). There are three codes
drawn up by the BPS – one concerning work with humans, one concerning work with
animals, and one for psychological practitioners.

1. Introduction
Mutual respect and confidence is needed between investigators and
participants. Ethical guidelines are to clarify conditions under which
psychological research is acceptable.
2. General
Investigation should be considered from all standpoints, including the
 participants'. Ethical implications and psychological consequences must
always be considered. Where gender, race, culture or ethnic differences occur
in the participants, the best judges of the implications for the investigation
would be people from their peer groups.
3. Consent
Informed consent should be obtained wherever possible. This involves
informing the participant of the reasons for the study and what is expected of
them. There are few cases where this is not required: if someone is doing
something in public where they would normally expect to be observed, they
are giving permission to be observed.
4. Deception
Never deceive participants about any aspect of the study they are taking part
in. (Much research looked at so far was conducted before the code of ethics
was written.)
5. Debriefing
Active intervention is the key, discuss the research and findings with the
participants. They should leave in the same state they arrived in, as far as
possible. If people suffer as a result of your research, then it is your
responsibility to cover all the costs of getting them back to their initial state.
Milgram may have incurred costs exceeding £1 million.
6. Withdrawal
Participants must be informed of their right to withdraw from the study,
without penalty, at any stage of research. After debriefing, participants still
have the right to withdraw their data and see it destroyed in their presence.
7. Confidentiality & Privacy:
The Data Protection Act protects participants. Their identity and details must
remain hidden. But, there is a duty to break this if human life is in danger: e.g.
suicide threat.
8. Protection of Participants
Never ask participants to take risks they would not normally take. Always
check they do not suffer from a medical condition that may be affected by the
study.
 9. Observational Research
Participants may not always be able to give informed consent, but always
respect the people you are studying.
10. Giving advice to Participants
If you become aware that a participant has a problem, refer them to someone
qualified to deal with it, should they wish.
11. Monitoring Colleagues
We all have responsibility to monitor our own work and that of others to
ensure that this code is being followed. This applies to all levels, including
student investigations.
12. Publication
It is your responsibility to attempt to have your research published. This is
because in the real world, research takes a long time and costs a lot of money.
If your research fails and you do not publish it, someone else will eventually
have the same idea and invest a lot of time and money in coming up with the
same conclusions as you – this is waste. More is learned from failed research
than successful research.

Guidelines for Socially Sensitive Research with humans

The BPS also produced guidelines for Socially Sensitive research – this is where the
results may cause a group of people a real or perceived problem.

An example is a study of homosexual behaviour in relation to AIDS. This led people

to believe that AIDS was just a "gay disease". Another example is a study of racial
differences in intelligence. This study failed, was not proved, but because it was even
carried out led people to believe that there was a difference in intelligence related to
race.

The Guidelines are as follows:

• Privacy: Some research may shape public policy, so privacy is of the utmost
importance.
• Confidentiality of Data: e.g. someone confessing to have AIDS but not
telling their partner. Never breach confidentiality.
 • Sound and Valid Methodology: Check a million times if the results could find
a way into the public domain that the research and results is sound. Always
ensure that you have valid reasons for conducting the research in the first
place.
• Deception: Avoid all forms of deception, even self-deception. E.g. publishing
a study showing that girls were better than boys at math’s. Would girls stop
studying?
• Informed Consent: Same as before, but more so.
• Justice and Equitable Treatment: Research techniques or finding should not
result in some people being treated unfairly. E.g. withholding experimental
drug or educational technique from some but not others.
• Scientific Freedom: Must be weighed against the interests of wider society.
Some research should be, and are, carefully monitored. Discuss your study
with others in the field before publication. Michael Rutter researched whether
a gene of criminality existed (proven false), but much discussion occurred
publicly before the research was completed and the results known.
• Ownership of Data: Welcome openness, but data in the wrong hands could
be potentially explosive.
• Value & Epistemology of Social Scientists: Our own preconceived ideas
should not interfere. E.g. does race affect IQ? This statement infers that you
believe that it does, otherwise you would not research it.

Risk / Benefit Ratio: Does the end justify the means? How useful will the study and
results be? Will the results, even if you are right, outweigh the cost of research (to all
involved, not just financial cost). The Risk / Benefit ratio is harder to ascertain in
Socially Sensitive research.