Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.

Ethics In Research

  • Soyez le premier à commenter

Ethics In Research

  1. 1. Ethics in Research and Publication Grant Heller, Ph.D.
  2. 2. Ethical Responsibilities of Researchers• Each individual scientist has the ethical responsibility to seek knowledge and to strive to improve the quality of life (Shaughnessy, Zechmeister, & Zechmeister, 2003)• Requirements of scientists (Diener & Crandall, 1978): – Competence – Report results accurately – Manage resources honestly – Acknowledge others – Consider the consequences – Speak out on societal concerns related to are of expertise
  3. 3. Approaches to Ethical Decisions• Balancing obligations to science & society with protecting rights & welfare of participants.• 3 General approaches to resolving ethical issues: – 1.) Deontology • Universal moral code – 2.) Ethical Skepticism • Individual conscience – 3.) Utilitarianism • Costs vs. Benefits
  4. 4. Need for ethical guidelines• Little Albert (1920)• Nuremberg code (1947) – Principles of informed consent, absence of coercion, properly formulated experimentation, beneficence to participants.• Milgram’s (1963) obedience study• Tuskeegee syphilis study (1932-1972)• Humphreys’s (1970) “tearoom study”• Stanford Prison Experiment (1971)
  5. 5. Tuskegee Syphilis study (1932-1972)
  6. 6. The Belmont Report• 3 overarching principles 1.) Respect for persons – Informed consent – Coercion is unethical 2.) Beneficence – Ethical decision making (cost-benefit analysis) 3.) Justice – Equitable distribution of risks & benefits
  7. 7. APA Ethics Code (2002)• General Principles – Principle A: Beneficence & Nonmaleficence – Principle B: Fidelity & Responsibility – Principle C: Integrity – Principle D: Justice – Principle E: Respect for People’s Rights & Dignity
  8. 8. APA Ethics Code Standard 8: Research & Publication• 8.01 Institutional Approval• 8.02 Informed Consent to Research• 8.03 Informed Consent for Recording Voices & Images• 8.04 Client/Patient, Student, & Subordinate Research Participants• 8.05 Dispensing with Informed Consent• 8.06 Offering Inducements for Research Participation
  9. 9. APA Ethics Code Standard 8: Research & Publication• 8.07 Deception in Research• 8.08 Debriefing• 8.09 Humane Care & Use of Animals in Research• 8.10 Reporting Research Results• 8.11 Plagiarism• 8.12 Publication Credit• 8.13 Duplicate Publication of Data• 8.14 Sharing Research for Verification• 8.15 Reviewers
  10. 10. The Institutional Review Board• Required by all institutions receiving federal funding• Consists of members from both scientific and unscientific disciplines• At least one member must be a local community member not associated with the institution• Research cannot be conducted without prior approval of the board
  11. 11. IRB criteria for reviewing & approving research 45 CFR 46.111• Risks to subjects (Ss) minimized• Risks reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits• Selection of Ss equitable• Data monitored for Ss safety• Ss privacy protected & confidentiality of data maintained• UDM’s IRB
  12. 12. IACUC• Institutional Animal Care And Use Committee (IACUC)• Review board for animal research, study, and teaching• UDM’s IACUC
  13. 13. Cost-Benefit ModelCost/Risk: High Cost/Risk: HighBenefit: Low Benefit: HighCost/Risk: Low Cost/Risk: LowBenefit: Low Benefit: High
  14. 14. Decision Cube Model
  15. 15. A pain scale for psychological research in animals (Orlans, 1993)
  16. 16. Costs of Research• Time & effort• Participants’ welfare – Physical risk – Psychological risk (anxiety, depression, altered self concept, loss of confidence in others, boredom) – Confidentiality (social, legal, and economic risks of participating)• Financial issues…research is expensive• Negative stereotypes for the profession
  17. 17. Potential Benefits• Basic Knowledge• Improvement of research or assessment techniques• Practical outcomes• Benefits for researchers• Benefits for research participants
  18. 18. Experimental Tx isn’t always better Tx• Tell participants about assignment to conditions, along with potential risks and benefits of experimental treatment• Offer the new Tx free of charge to control condition participants if it proves efficacious
  19. 19. Ethical considerations• Informed consent – Provide information about the study – Obtaining informed consent • Informed consent form • Elements to be included – Purpose of study (brief) – Activities involved – Risks/benefits – Right to refuse/withdraw without penalty – How confidentiality will be handled – Primary investigator contact info – Signature lines for participant & researcher
  20. 20. Problems with attaining informed consent• Compromising the validity of a study• Participants who are unable to give informed consent – e.g., children • Consent from parent/guardian • Assent from participant• Ludicrous cases of informed consent – No more than minimal risk – Waiver will not adversely affect rights/welfare – Research could not be feasibly carried out otherwise
  21. 21. Ethical considerations, cont.• Invasion of privacy• Coercion to participate• Physical and mental stress – Minimal risk• Deception• Debriefing – 4 goals • 1.) clarification • 2.) remove stress • 3.) obtain reactions • 4.) should feel good about participating• Confidentiality
  22. 22. Margin of support for animal research (Plous, 1996)
  23. 23. Animal research, cont.4000000350000030000002500000200000015000001000000 500000 0 Dogs & Cats Dogs & Cats in Primates in Euthananized by Research Research HS Series1 3500000 88572 54998
  24. 24. Animal research, cont.
  25. 25. 3 R’s of Animal Research• Reduction• Replacement• Refinement
  26. 26. Scientific Misconduct
  27. 27. Misconduct Damages our Credibility
  28. 28. Normal Misbehavior (de Vries, Anderson, & Martinson, 2006)• Serious (but rare) scientific infractions – F.F.P. • Falsification • Fabrication • Plagiarism• Misconduct is generally more mundane… – 4 categories • The meaning of data • The rules of science • Life with colleagues • The pressures of production
  29. 29. Normal Misbehavior(de Vries, Anderson, & Martinson, 2006)
  30. 30. “Scientists Behaving Badly” (Martinson, Anderson, & de Vries, 2005)
  31. 31. Steps for ethical decision making (Shaughnessy, Zechmeister, & Zechmeister, 2003)1.) Know the facts2.) Identify the relevant ethical issues3.) Determine what is at stake4.) Identify alternative methods or procedures5.) Decide on the action to be taken
  32. 32. Case Study:Stanley Milgram’s study of obedience (1963)
  33. 33. Ethical issues of the Milgram study• Participants were mislead as to the purpose of the study• A confederate posed as another participant• Participants were led to believe they were shocking another person…this was likely disturbing to them• Participants experienced considerable stress as the experiment continued: They sweated, trembled, stuttered, swore, and laughed nervously as they delivered increasingly intense shocks• Participants’ attempts to withdraw from the study were discouraged by the experimenter’s insistence that they continue.
  34. 34. Milgram’s Obedience Study:Follow-up• 92% responded to the survey – Attitudes about volunteering • 84% positive • 15% neutral • 1% regretful
  35. 35. Common Courtesy (Leary, 2004)• Chief complaints of research participants – The researcher: • Failed to show up or was late • Was not adequately prepared • Was cold, abrupt, or downright rude • Failed to show appreciation for the participant

×