Ethical costs of conducting research
Introduction:
Ethical issues occur in research when there is a clash between the
needs of the researchers who want to produce results that benefit
society and the economy and the needs of participants who have a
right to be treated fairly
Protecting participants can reduce the value of findings making this
issue controversial
There are likely more ethical issues in psychology than any other
science because:
o Psychology wants to investigate human behaviour so carries out
research on living creatures unlike other sciences
o Unpleasant truths about human behaviour can be discovered
especially in socially sensitive topics
o Psychology can discover knowledge that may be used to control
people so could be dangerous in the wrong hands
Ethical dilemmas can show how difficult it can be making a decision
regading costs and benefits – different people will reach different
decisions as to what they would do and these decisions can change
based on the information one has available
Individual participants:
In terms of ethics, Watson and Raynors research was heavily
criticised for causing a risk of stress, anxiety, humiliation or pain and
therefore psychological harm
Little Albert (9 months old) was used to see if phobias could be learnt
through classical conditioning. He was systematically frightened using
a rat and a loud noise until he developed a phobia of fury objects
The procedures lasted over nine months and clearly illustrated harm to
the participant. Watson and Raynor claimed their intention was then to
counter condition him but Albert sadly left the study before this could
happen
Valid consent was also a controversial issue because the researchers
were leading physicians at the hospital where Little Albert’s mum
worked, and it is possible they used their authority to coerce her into
giving consent
This also questions whether Albert was exposed to undue stress,
anxiety and humiliation
, However, Watson and Raynor did protect Albert’s confidentiality by
naming him Albert B and over 100 years later we can’t be certain who
little Albert really was
Bowlby’s research into correlation between early deprivation and
becoming a psychopath has also been criticised for its ethics
One reason for this is valid consent which is questionable as he
conducted the research in the guidance clinic in which he worked.
Many of the children selected were vulnerable and without parental
support. Critics argue that Bowlby took advantage of his position by
‘using’ the children in his care
Bowlby also chose to publish the data 5 years later which may have
identified the children involved as he published private assessment
details with their surname and first name initials which creates the
issue of confidentiality
Risk of humiliation and anxiety and therefore psychological harm
was an issue as Bowlby labelled individuals as thieves and affectionless
psychopaths which could undoubtedly affect self-esteem
However, participants did benefit as those with severe emotional
difficulties got access to the support and therapy needed. Also,
Bowlby conducted this research before the BPS ethical guidelines
had been established
Milgram is heavily criticised for the ethics of his research, especially
as it was conducted after the APA guidelines were established
He is criticised for deception - participants were actively deceived
about the aim of the research, the nature of the activity, and who the
other participants were
Participants were also exposed to undue risk of stress, anxiety,
humiliation and pain
Stress was evident, three participants had a seizure and all
participants learnt something negative about themselves and what
they are capable of, with one participant stating, “You thought you
were really giving the shocks, and nothing can take away from you the
knowledge of how you acted.” This shows psychological harm was
caused
However, Milgram disputes many of these criticisms and claimed
deception was essential to avoid demand characteristics
He also fully debriefed his participants at the end of the study during
which 84% of participants reported they were glad to have taken part
and many had learned something important about themselves
Introduction:
Ethical issues occur in research when there is a clash between the
needs of the researchers who want to produce results that benefit
society and the economy and the needs of participants who have a
right to be treated fairly
Protecting participants can reduce the value of findings making this
issue controversial
There are likely more ethical issues in psychology than any other
science because:
o Psychology wants to investigate human behaviour so carries out
research on living creatures unlike other sciences
o Unpleasant truths about human behaviour can be discovered
especially in socially sensitive topics
o Psychology can discover knowledge that may be used to control
people so could be dangerous in the wrong hands
Ethical dilemmas can show how difficult it can be making a decision
regading costs and benefits – different people will reach different
decisions as to what they would do and these decisions can change
based on the information one has available
Individual participants:
In terms of ethics, Watson and Raynors research was heavily
criticised for causing a risk of stress, anxiety, humiliation or pain and
therefore psychological harm
Little Albert (9 months old) was used to see if phobias could be learnt
through classical conditioning. He was systematically frightened using
a rat and a loud noise until he developed a phobia of fury objects
The procedures lasted over nine months and clearly illustrated harm to
the participant. Watson and Raynor claimed their intention was then to
counter condition him but Albert sadly left the study before this could
happen
Valid consent was also a controversial issue because the researchers
were leading physicians at the hospital where Little Albert’s mum
worked, and it is possible they used their authority to coerce her into
giving consent
This also questions whether Albert was exposed to undue stress,
anxiety and humiliation
, However, Watson and Raynor did protect Albert’s confidentiality by
naming him Albert B and over 100 years later we can’t be certain who
little Albert really was
Bowlby’s research into correlation between early deprivation and
becoming a psychopath has also been criticised for its ethics
One reason for this is valid consent which is questionable as he
conducted the research in the guidance clinic in which he worked.
Many of the children selected were vulnerable and without parental
support. Critics argue that Bowlby took advantage of his position by
‘using’ the children in his care
Bowlby also chose to publish the data 5 years later which may have
identified the children involved as he published private assessment
details with their surname and first name initials which creates the
issue of confidentiality
Risk of humiliation and anxiety and therefore psychological harm
was an issue as Bowlby labelled individuals as thieves and affectionless
psychopaths which could undoubtedly affect self-esteem
However, participants did benefit as those with severe emotional
difficulties got access to the support and therapy needed. Also,
Bowlby conducted this research before the BPS ethical guidelines
had been established
Milgram is heavily criticised for the ethics of his research, especially
as it was conducted after the APA guidelines were established
He is criticised for deception - participants were actively deceived
about the aim of the research, the nature of the activity, and who the
other participants were
Participants were also exposed to undue risk of stress, anxiety,
humiliation and pain
Stress was evident, three participants had a seizure and all
participants learnt something negative about themselves and what
they are capable of, with one participant stating, “You thought you
were really giving the shocks, and nothing can take away from you the
knowledge of how you acted.” This shows psychological harm was
caused
However, Milgram disputes many of these criticisms and claimed
deception was essential to avoid demand characteristics
He also fully debriefed his participants at the end of the study during
which 84% of participants reported they were glad to have taken part
and many had learned something important about themselves
