ethical issues

• ways of dealing with ethical issues

  risk assessment and management

  consent and debriefing

  research ethics committee
• can a high risk low benefit study go ahead?

  no
• can a low risk low benefit study go ahead?

  no
• can a high risk high benefit study go ahead?

  maybe
• can a low risk high benefit study go ahead?

  yes
• how to prevent possible risks

  identifying possible risks

  considering vulnerable groups

  balancing risk and benefit

  ethical descion making
• reducing risks

  informed consent procedures

  monitoring and support

  debriefing

  pilot studies (test run)

  ethical reviews

  allowing withdrawal

  confidentiality measures
• what are the 3 types of consent?

  presumptive

  prior general

  retrospective
• presumptive consent

  a similar group of people are asked if the study is acceptable

  if the group agrees the original participant’s consent is ‘presumed’
• prior consent

  participants give their permission to take part in several studies - including one that will involve deception

  by consenting the participants are effectively consenting to being deceived
• retrospective consent

  participants are asked for their consent having already taken part in the study

  they may not have been aware of participation and may have been subject to deception
• research ethics committee (REC)

  ensures research is conducted responsibly

  essential for upholding ethical standards in psychology
• participants POV on anonymity/ confidentiality

  the general data protection regulation (GDPR) makes confidentiality a legal right
• participants POV on deception

  this prevents being able to give truly informed consent

  however there is a difference between withholding info and falsely informing participants about the aims of the study

  both are deception but the 1st is more acceptable
• participants POV on informed consent

  this is necessary so that participants can make a decision on whether to participate, without full info they cannot do this

  certain participants are unable to give informed consent (e.g. children)
• participants POV on privacy

  people expect to be observed by others in a public place, so this is acceptable

  however there isn’t universal agreement on what constitutes a public place (e.g. listening to some convo on a bus - public or private?)
• participants POV on right to withdraw

  participants often do not fully understand what is involved and / or may simply not imagine how they would feel in certain situations

  thus it is important for them to leave a study if it was not what they expected
• participants POV on protection from harm

  people are robust and can tolerate some anxiety

  however, it is reasonable for a participant to expect at the end of the study to be in the same ‘state’ they were in the beginning (e.g. not less happy/ confident)
• researcher POV on anonymity and confidentiality

  it may nit be possible to keep info anonymous / confidential because some details of a study may lead to an individual’s identification
• researcher POV on deception

  if participants know the research aims this would spoil the study

  it might be argued that some deception is relatively harmless and/ or can be compensated for by adequate debriefing
• researcher POV on informed consent

  asking for informed consent may reduce the meaningfulness of the research because the researcher has to provide info that could reveal the study’s aims

  this may affect the participants behaviour as they know the aim of the study
• researcher POV on privacy

  researches do not wish to alert participants to the fact that they are being observed because that is likely to affect the participants behaviour
• researcher POV on right to withdraw

  the loss of participants may bias the study’s findings because the ones that remain may be more highly motivated or less emotionally sensitive
• researcher POV on protection from harm

  it may not be possible to estimate harm before conducting a study - however, any study should be stopped as soon as any harm is apparent