ethical issues

• Zimbardo's prison study - informed consent 


  p's not told arrested at home

  p's not told of the detail

  = couldn't give fully informed consent

  • defence = arrests were only confirmed at last minute and Zimbardo didn't know what would happen himself
• Zimbardo's prison study - harm 


  prisoners suffered stress, sleep deprivation, humiliation

  guards felt guilty

  • defence= no direct physical aggression used, Zimbardo stopped study early, conducted a thorough debriefing (chance to discuss feelings), follow up counselling
• Zimbardo's prison study - right to withdraw


  one p's asked to leave - instead Zimbardo offered deal of protection for information

  p told others they could not leave so p's felt they didn't have RTW

  Zimbardo should not of played dual role of prison superintendent and psychologist as he showed identification to the role and didn't make RTW clear

  • defence = Zimbardo didn't actually say they couldn't leave, several p's did leave
• Milgram shock study - deception 


  p's were told the study was about effects of punishment on learning but actually on obedience

  told other p was real

  told shocks were real

  • defence = necessary to avoid demand characteristics, full debriefing, only 1.3% reported negative feelings in post-experimental questionnaire
• Milgram's shock study - harm 


  p's suffered extreme stress/fits

  felt guilty at 'killing' someone

  • defence = offered long term counselling, full debriefing reassuring normal, didn't expect p's to experience stress in study as expected disobedience - before study predicted only 1 out of 1000 to be obedient
• Milgram's shock study - right to withdraw


  p's were podded to continue when they wanted to stop

  • defence = necessary as studying obedience - needed to see power of authority, didn't stop all from leaving - only 65% continued to 450V, not physically detained
• debriefs

  1. thank p's for taking part
  2. tell p's the true aim of study detailing the different conditions/procedures
  3. tell p's what finding you are expecting
  4. remind them of ethics including right ti withhold data, reassurance if chance of psychological harm, numbers not names
• cost - benefit analysis 


  before the study the possible benefits of research are weighed up against the cost to p's

  • however = cant predict what benefits are before research is done, cant predict what costs are before study, costs are to p's - the may feel cost greater than psychologist
• DRIP-C


  Deception/Debriefing

  RTW

  Informed consent

  Protection from harm

  Confidentiality/privacy