ethical guidelines, peer review and the economy

• what re the 6 main ethical guidelines?

  -Deception

  -Right to withdraw

  -Informed consent

  -Privacy and confidentiality

  -Protection from harm
• deception

  • when participants are deliberately mislead
  • its unethical because it prevents full informed consent so they may be going against their morals when taking part
  • dealt with by doing a full debrief at the end if the study where they should be given the right to withdraw
• right to withdraw

  • having the right to remove themselves or their data at any point
  • its unethical because if not they aren't protected from harm which could cause undue stress
  • dealt with by a full debrief at the end and told the true aim with
• informed consent

  • when someone consents to being in research when they have banefully informed of the aims
  • its unethical because if not, people may be going agaisnt their morals or feel obliged to take part
  • dealt with by prior general consent (agreeing to take part in multiple studies)
• privacy

  • the right to decide how information about them will be shared
  • its unethical because a researcher may obtain too much private information with the participant may not wish to share and can feel embarrassed
  • dealt with by using fully informed consent and the right to withdraw
• confidentiality

  • a participants private information is protected under the DPA during and after the experiment
  • its unethical because a persons data may be used by other parties against their will
  • dealt with by participants producing a fake name or details to remain anonymous
• protection from harm

  • ensuring participants are safe from physical or psychological harm e.g. stress
  • its unethical because if they are harmed, they could suffer with long term effects
  • dealt with by reminding people they have the right to withdraw throughout and after he research and they should be debriefed or referred to counselling
• peer review in scientific process

  • peer review is an independent assessment that takes place before a study is published (done by other psychologists)
  • all psychologists must prepare for their work to be scrutinised
• what re the aims of peer review

  • provide recommendations as to enter the research should be published
  • check the research as high validity
  • assess appropriateness of procedure and method
  • inform allocation of future research funding to worthy investigative processes
• evaluating peer review

  +process helps to prevent any substandard research from entering the mainstream

  +less opportunity for plagiarised work or duplicates of the study to be published

  -can be difficult to find a suitable peer
• implications of psychological research for the economy

  • sometimes reviewing psychological knowledge in the context of the economy can help portray a clearer picture of how people's behaviour is affected (positively or negatively) in the real world
• implications of the economy - attachment example

  • role of the father- Belsky (2009) found men who report higher marital intimacy levels also display a secure father infant attachment
  • implications - research shows both parents are equally capable of enabling healthy developmental outcomes or the child which would allow mothers to return to work and maximising the annual household income