ethical implications of research

• ethical implications (definition)

  the impact that psychological research may have in terms of the rights of other people especially participants. this includes, at a social level, influencing public policy and/or the way in which certain groups of people are regarded.
• social sensitivity (definition)

  studies in which there are potential consequences or implications, either directly for the participants in the research or for the class of individuals represented by the research
• ethical implications

  ethical issues may arise when there is a conflict between psychologys need to gain valid and valuable research findings whilst, at the same time, preserving the rights and dignity of participants. thus, ethical guidelines were established to help protect those involved in research. what may be more difficult to guard against, however, is the social impact of psychological research once it has been conducted. although researchers may exercise considerable control over the methods they select and the way they treat participants, they may have relatively little say in terms of how their research findings are represented (or misrepresented) in the media, the impact of their work on public policy, and how it may influence our perception of particular groups in society. this amounts to a concern with wider ethical implications of research
• socially sensitive research

  clearly, some areas of research are likely to be more controversial, and be subject to greater social sensitivity, than others. a study that examines the cognitive processes involved in LTM is unlikely to have far-reaching consequences for those that take part or for the broader social groups the participants represent. research investigating the genetic basis of criminality on the other hand, might. studies that tackle socially sensitive 'taboo' topics, such as aspects of race or sexuality, also attract a good deal of attention; not merely from other psychologists but also from the media and the public at large. however, just because this is the case, it should not lead to psychologists 'shying away' from research that may be socially sensitive. in fact, because of the undoubted importance of such research, psychologists may have a social responsibility to carry it out.
• ethical issues in socially sensitive research

  Sieber and Stanley have identified a number of concerns that researchers should be mindful of when conducting socially sensitive research: implications, users/public policy and the validity of the research
• ethical issues in socially sensitive research: implications

  the wider effects of such research should be carefully considered as some studies may be seen as giving 'scientific' credence to prejudice and discrimination, such as studies examining the racial basis of intelligence. however, the implications of research may be difficult to predict at the outset.
• ethical issues in socially sensitive research: users/public policy


  what is the research likely to be used for? and what would happen if it was used for the wrong purpose? this is related to the idea that findings may be adopted by the government for political ends or to shape public policy.
• ethical issues in socially sensitive research: the validity of the research


  some findings that were presented as objective and value-free in the past have actually turned out to be highly suspect, and in some cases, fraudulent. however, many modern social constructionist researchers- who may tackle socially sensitive areas of research- are much more upfront about their own biases and preconceptions, and include comment on the reflexive nature of their work in their publications.
• research that influence public policy: Burt


  Burt was influential in establishing the 11+ examination in the UK, which was used to determine whether children had a secondary modern education or went on to a grammar school (a decision which arguably had a significant impact on their subsequent life chances). Burt's views were based on the evidence he produced that intelligence was genetic, citing studies of twins that showed a heredibility coefficient of .77. discrepancies in his 'data' later revealed that burt had made much of it up, as well as inventing two research assistants, and he was publically discredited. the 11+ however, and the idea that children should be separated on the basis of their 'natural' intelligence, remained for a good few years afterwards and still lingers.
• research that influenced public policy: Bowlby


  Bowlby's research into attachment and maternal deprivation saw him become an adviser for the World Health Organisation in the early 50s. Bowlby's argument, that mother love in infancy is as important for mental health as vitamins are for physical health, influenced the way in which at least a generation of children were raised. it may also have influenced the government's decision not to offer free child care places to under five (despite the fact that this is typical in other European countries). finally, Bowlby's work could have had an indirect effect on the legal 'norm' that mothers are granted custody of the children in divorce and separation cases (whereby previously, it was invariably given to fathers)
• evaluation: benefits of socially sensitive research


  despite the ethical implications associated with research into controversial and 'taboo' topics, Scarr argues that studies of underrepresented groups and issues may promote a greater sensitivity and understanding of these. this can help reduce prejudice and encourage acceptance. similarly, socially sensitive research has benefitted society, for instance, research into the (un)reliability of eyewitness testimony has reduced the risk of miscarriages of justice within the legal system. this suggests that socially sensitive research may play a valuable role in society.
• evaluation: framing the question

  Sieber and Stanley warn that the way in which research questions are phrased and investigated may influence the way in which findings are interpreted. cross-cultural research may be blighted by cultural superiority and ethnocentrism on the part of the researchers. also, Kitzinger and Coyle note how research into so-called 'alternative relationships' has been guilty of a form of 'heterosexual bias' within which homosexual relationships were compared and judged against heterosexual norms. this suggests that investigators must approach their research with an 'open mind' and be prepared to have their preconceptions challenged if they are to avoid misrepresenting minority groups
• evaluation: who gains?


  socially sensitive research has been used by the government and other institutions to shape social policy, despite the sometimes dubious nature of its findings and without full consideration of the moderating effects of the environment on characteristics such as intelligence. there is other research that may seem harmless but also has socially sensitive consequences. for example, in the 50s, research into the persuasive effects of subliminal messages were used by marketing companies to advertise their products. one study claimed the sales of coca-cola and popcorn increased significantly when images of these were flashed up on cinema screens too quickly for audiences to be aware of them. it was later revealed by the author of the study had made this findings up. although there was little damage dome in tis context, research that seeks to manipulate the public have obvious ethical implications. it also raises the issue of who benefits from such research-which may be particularly difficult to manage once the research is 'out there
• evaluation: social control


  in america in the 20s and 30s, a large number of US states enacted legislation that led to the compulsory steralisation of many citizens on the ground that they were 'feeble-minded' and a drain on society. this included people deemed to be of low intelligence, drug or alcohol addicts and the mentally ill. the rationale. supported by many sections of the scientific and psychological community at the time, was that feeble-minded people were 'unfit' to breed. the fact that socially sensitive research has been used to 'prop up' discriminatory practices in the past is an argument against its widespread adoption.
• evaluation: costs and benefits


  research that carries with it possible ethical implications, or is socially sensitive, may be subject to scrutiny by an ethical committee- and it is their job to weigh the potential costs against the possible benefits of the research. however, we have already seen that some of the social consequences of research involving vulnerable groups may be difficult to anticipate. as such, assessments of the 'worth' of such research are invariably subjective, and the real impact of research can only ever be known once it has been made public