Chapter 3 – Ethics
• Ethics were brought to people’s attention after WWII because of the crimes
against humanity.
Nuremberg trials of nazi war criminals led to a consciousness and need
for ethical controls in scientific research. Did the Nazis all have the same
intent? Or were they just following orders? Many of them were just
following orders.
Increased interest in social psychology
More government funding
Milgram (1963)
Obedience studies: trying to understand what makes people obey
authority. Milgram’s experiments were a series of experiments
conducted in jail. The experimenter was an authority figure who told
one participant to give another participant electric shocks when
getting something wrong (word-pairing experiment). His testing
suggested that many of the participants administer up to 240
voltages of shocks, just because they were being told to administer
them (violating their own moral beliefs). (Milgram was that he would
be lucky to find even one person who would go all the way)
• Was Milgram’s Study Ethical?
o It’s up for debate:
Yes
Bad outcome was not foreseeable (the research team did not realize that
the teacher would actually feel guilty for administering the shocks)
Made psychological help available after
84% of P’s said it was a good experience
Debriefed the P’s
Valuable study
No
Deception=unethical
No informed Consent
Stressful
Participants not free to quit at any time
Explanation for Nazi behavior?
o His work was really important and it should be noted that in the beginning,
he wasn’t aware that so many people would go all the way to the end.
How his study worked:
-The learner was unknown to the teacher, but the learner is part of the experiment.
-The learner does not actually receive the electric shocks, although the teacher thinks
he is actually administering them.
• Unethical Studies
o Landis (1924) – facial expressions experiment
Investigating universal expressions (disgust, shock, joy, etc)
, Participants’ faces painted to study movements (to study facial muscle
movements)
He exposed the participants to gruesome images and actions
Asked to behead a live rat
1/3 did it- just because Dr. Landis told them to do it (mostly incorrect
– suffering to animal) (his study shows the willingness to obey
authority)
Those who refused – Dr. Landis did it
• Regularly Reviewed Ethics Code
A number of codes have been developed
The APA Code: Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of
Conduct.
consensus of the psychology profession about what is considered
acceptable practice.
All psychologists have to abide by this APA colde.
Local and Federal Laws
Institutional Review Board (IRB) made up of 5 members for each
review of a research proposal
Dept of Health and Human Services
Federal Drug Administration
o The IRB – decides if it’s ethical or not, what needs to be changed and
refined.
▪ Approves ALL research on humans
▪ Their goal is to minimize risk and check for validity (checks for
technical validity)
▪ Must include 1 non-scientist and 1 person that’s not affiliated with
the institution (to get other viewpoints and to diminish risk of
conducting the study for financial benefits) (IRB-minimum 5
members)
▪ Considers risks in relation to benefits
▪ Majority is needed for approval (approval by simple majority)
▪ Review can be expedited
• Meaning doesn’t require approval from the full IRB
committee and usually faster
• Usually those that present minimal risk to participants and
falls into a certain category
! EX: Category 5 – non research data (i.e. demographic
information)
! EX: Category 7 – surveys, wide range of other low-
risk activities
• Research that prevents minimal risk (information on
demographics, surveys, etc.)
, o
o APA Ethics Code: Responsibility of Investigator and protection from
harm
o Responsibility of Investigator – protection from harm
Conflict between two sets of values:
1. Expanding knowledge of behavior/benefiting society
2. Cost of research to participants
Investigator is responsible for conducting research
Overall in charge of a study. Holds greatest responsibility to see that
ethical principles are followed
Researchers must assess how stressful the situation is (can be physical stress or
psychological stress).
Would they willingly put themselves in the situation?
They need to think about what special groups need to be excluded in
different situations (heart patients, epileptic patients)
▪ Common conflicts: a desire to collect info vs. privacy and thinking
about how the participant would feel.
▪ Must be mindful of vulnerable groups.
▪ Entitles participants to efficiency and being safe (to a competent
investigator, to be protected from harm)
• Also entitled to a written informed consent form that
details in everyday language —>Subject Responsibilities,
Full Reason for Study, Guarantee of Privacy)
• *Debriefing may be necessary for the informed consent
document
o Informed Consent—> Must have:
o 1. Purpose of research, duration & procedure
o 2. Right to decline
o 3. Foreseeable consequences of declining
o 4. Potential risks, discomfort
o 5. Research benefits
o 6. Limits of confidentiality
o 7. Incentives for participation
o 8. Contact info for questions/more information
o What happens when they cannot legally give
consent? (example: the adult has a mental illness)
o 1. Provide explanation
o 2. Seek assent (the child’s willingness to participate in
the study)
, o 3. Consider person’s best interests
o 4. Obtain permission from legally authorized person
o When you don’t need consent?
o 1. Educational/classroom settings, anonymous
questioners, naturalistic observations, archival
research
o 2. Must ensure that if it is anonymous, naturalistic or
archival research that they would not be identified or
put them in harms way, or damage their reputation or
financial standing etc..
• Coercion Should Not be Used
Should avoid inappropriate amounts of financial or other inducements for
research participation which might constitute a sort of coercion
Finding the balance between
The right to not be disturbed or right to privacy
Investigators have to make clear that participants can withdraw at
any time without penalty
Welfare of society some information thought uncomfortable to reveal is
impt for the betterment of society.
Psych 101 students
Option to fulfill requirements other ways
o Sometimes, an immense incentive can be considered “coercion”.
o Must find the balance between privacy and the need for information.
o For students who need to be part of it as an academic requirement, an
alternative must be provided.
• Deception in Research
Used if alternatives aren’t feasible.
Can’t do if it will cause harm
Should be explained as soon as possible.
Debriefing - told the purpose and expected results of experiment. Usually
at the conclusion of their participation but before data collection. This is
done to remove possible harmful effects of deception (you have to inform
the participant of the true nature of the experiment as soon as possible)
o As a last resort
o Must not cause harm
o Should be debriefed asap.
• Ethics in Scientific Writing
Reporting of research results
No fabrication of data
If errors discovered after publication, psychologist have to correct errors
by submitting erratum or retraction
• Ethics were brought to people’s attention after WWII because of the crimes
against humanity.
Nuremberg trials of nazi war criminals led to a consciousness and need
for ethical controls in scientific research. Did the Nazis all have the same
intent? Or were they just following orders? Many of them were just
following orders.
Increased interest in social psychology
More government funding
Milgram (1963)
Obedience studies: trying to understand what makes people obey
authority. Milgram’s experiments were a series of experiments
conducted in jail. The experimenter was an authority figure who told
one participant to give another participant electric shocks when
getting something wrong (word-pairing experiment). His testing
suggested that many of the participants administer up to 240
voltages of shocks, just because they were being told to administer
them (violating their own moral beliefs). (Milgram was that he would
be lucky to find even one person who would go all the way)
• Was Milgram’s Study Ethical?
o It’s up for debate:
Yes
Bad outcome was not foreseeable (the research team did not realize that
the teacher would actually feel guilty for administering the shocks)
Made psychological help available after
84% of P’s said it was a good experience
Debriefed the P’s
Valuable study
No
Deception=unethical
No informed Consent
Stressful
Participants not free to quit at any time
Explanation for Nazi behavior?
o His work was really important and it should be noted that in the beginning,
he wasn’t aware that so many people would go all the way to the end.
How his study worked:
-The learner was unknown to the teacher, but the learner is part of the experiment.
-The learner does not actually receive the electric shocks, although the teacher thinks
he is actually administering them.
• Unethical Studies
o Landis (1924) – facial expressions experiment
Investigating universal expressions (disgust, shock, joy, etc)
, Participants’ faces painted to study movements (to study facial muscle
movements)
He exposed the participants to gruesome images and actions
Asked to behead a live rat
1/3 did it- just because Dr. Landis told them to do it (mostly incorrect
– suffering to animal) (his study shows the willingness to obey
authority)
Those who refused – Dr. Landis did it
• Regularly Reviewed Ethics Code
A number of codes have been developed
The APA Code: Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of
Conduct.
consensus of the psychology profession about what is considered
acceptable practice.
All psychologists have to abide by this APA colde.
Local and Federal Laws
Institutional Review Board (IRB) made up of 5 members for each
review of a research proposal
Dept of Health and Human Services
Federal Drug Administration
o The IRB – decides if it’s ethical or not, what needs to be changed and
refined.
▪ Approves ALL research on humans
▪ Their goal is to minimize risk and check for validity (checks for
technical validity)
▪ Must include 1 non-scientist and 1 person that’s not affiliated with
the institution (to get other viewpoints and to diminish risk of
conducting the study for financial benefits) (IRB-minimum 5
members)
▪ Considers risks in relation to benefits
▪ Majority is needed for approval (approval by simple majority)
▪ Review can be expedited
• Meaning doesn’t require approval from the full IRB
committee and usually faster
• Usually those that present minimal risk to participants and
falls into a certain category
! EX: Category 5 – non research data (i.e. demographic
information)
! EX: Category 7 – surveys, wide range of other low-
risk activities
• Research that prevents minimal risk (information on
demographics, surveys, etc.)
, o
o APA Ethics Code: Responsibility of Investigator and protection from
harm
o Responsibility of Investigator – protection from harm
Conflict between two sets of values:
1. Expanding knowledge of behavior/benefiting society
2. Cost of research to participants
Investigator is responsible for conducting research
Overall in charge of a study. Holds greatest responsibility to see that
ethical principles are followed
Researchers must assess how stressful the situation is (can be physical stress or
psychological stress).
Would they willingly put themselves in the situation?
They need to think about what special groups need to be excluded in
different situations (heart patients, epileptic patients)
▪ Common conflicts: a desire to collect info vs. privacy and thinking
about how the participant would feel.
▪ Must be mindful of vulnerable groups.
▪ Entitles participants to efficiency and being safe (to a competent
investigator, to be protected from harm)
• Also entitled to a written informed consent form that
details in everyday language —>Subject Responsibilities,
Full Reason for Study, Guarantee of Privacy)
• *Debriefing may be necessary for the informed consent
document
o Informed Consent—> Must have:
o 1. Purpose of research, duration & procedure
o 2. Right to decline
o 3. Foreseeable consequences of declining
o 4. Potential risks, discomfort
o 5. Research benefits
o 6. Limits of confidentiality
o 7. Incentives for participation
o 8. Contact info for questions/more information
o What happens when they cannot legally give
consent? (example: the adult has a mental illness)
o 1. Provide explanation
o 2. Seek assent (the child’s willingness to participate in
the study)
, o 3. Consider person’s best interests
o 4. Obtain permission from legally authorized person
o When you don’t need consent?
o 1. Educational/classroom settings, anonymous
questioners, naturalistic observations, archival
research
o 2. Must ensure that if it is anonymous, naturalistic or
archival research that they would not be identified or
put them in harms way, or damage their reputation or
financial standing etc..
• Coercion Should Not be Used
Should avoid inappropriate amounts of financial or other inducements for
research participation which might constitute a sort of coercion
Finding the balance between
The right to not be disturbed or right to privacy
Investigators have to make clear that participants can withdraw at
any time without penalty
Welfare of society some information thought uncomfortable to reveal is
impt for the betterment of society.
Psych 101 students
Option to fulfill requirements other ways
o Sometimes, an immense incentive can be considered “coercion”.
o Must find the balance between privacy and the need for information.
o For students who need to be part of it as an academic requirement, an
alternative must be provided.
• Deception in Research
Used if alternatives aren’t feasible.
Can’t do if it will cause harm
Should be explained as soon as possible.
Debriefing - told the purpose and expected results of experiment. Usually
at the conclusion of their participation but before data collection. This is
done to remove possible harmful effects of deception (you have to inform
the participant of the true nature of the experiment as soon as possible)
o As a last resort
o Must not cause harm
o Should be debriefed asap.
• Ethics in Scientific Writing
Reporting of research results
No fabrication of data
If errors discovered after publication, psychologist have to correct errors
by submitting erratum or retraction
