Ethical considerations in research

Dr Emile van der ZeeUniversity of Lincoln

Overview

• Why bother with Research Ethics?• Tension between Research and Ethics• Where do we get our Ethical Guidance from?• Ethical Theories• Ethical Principles• Ethical Codes• Implementing the codes• Procedures for your programme?• What about you / me?

Why bother with Research Ethics?

Why should we be interested in ethics?

Tension between research and ethicsGet results quickly Fabricate / Plagiarise Disregard (original) evidence(at any costs)

Get interesting results Coerce / -Consent Disregard participants / researchers (at any costs)

Diederik Stapel Marc Hauser

Joseph Mengele Twin experiments

Tension between research and ethics

Publish quickly information pollution Disregard Science & Society(at any costs)

http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/

Where do we get ourEthical Guidance from?

Our own intuitions (!)Ethical Theories / Principles

Professional Codes; BPS, APA, NHS, etc.UniversityDepartment

Environmental factors

Ethical TheoriesAristotelian Ethics: lead a virtuous life / do good.

Deontology (Kant): acts are right if they could be a universal law.

Do as you would be done by; never lie.

Ethical Theories

Utilitarianism (Bentham): maximise benefits and reduce harm.

The greatest good for the greatest number.

Theory of Justice (Rawls): each person has equal rights to basic liberties, such as free speech.

Fairness.

Ethical PrinciplesBeauchamp and Childress (2008) four ‘prima facie’ moral principles when doing (biomedical) research:

Autonomy: capacity to self-govern / personal wishes

Beneficence: maximise benefits for those involved

Non-maleficence: minimise potential harm

Justice: distribute benefits, risks and costs fairly, treat everyone the same, and be aware of power differential

Ethical Codes

• The relevant parties in a research project?• Autonomy:- Participant information (give / take)

- Consent- Data withdrawal (limits specified)

- Protecting those with diminished autonomy(children, those mentally / physically incapacitated)

• Beneficence:- Does participant / science / society benefit?

Ethical Codes

• Non-maleficance:- Care (deception, stress, etc.)

- After-care- Confidentiality (≠ anonymity)- Legal issues (who is liable, who has intellectual property

rights, etc.)

• Justice:- Data storage (7 years)- Debrief- Rewards for participation

Implementing the codesA Case

Imagine that you aim to investigate the relation between psychopathic traits and violent behaviour in sex offenders. For that purpose you carry out a qualitative study which involves interviewing offenders in a secure setting who receive therapy, as well as their therapists.

What issues should be addressed in judging the ethical soundness of this research project?

Implementing the codes

• clarity of research design, method and responsibility• scientific context, including appropriate referencing• issues relating to writing (spelling, sentence

structure, etc) • ethical issues identified• mechanisms used to address the issues• necessary accompanying documents (letters, consent, debrief, etc)

Procedures for your programme?

• University Ethical Guidelines• Professional Guidelines• IRAS approval• See http://www.lincoln.ac.uk/psychology/Ethics.htm

for examples

What about you / me?

Survey of graduate students from 40 training programs in clinical psychology (Mearns & Allen, 1991):

• 49% were aware of unethical behaviors by peers• only 42% confronted peers behaving unethically

Question; where do you go to report ethical violations?

What about you / me?

Survey of counseling and clinical psychology training directors from 75 APA-accredited programmes (Fly, et al 1997):• 89 ethical transgressions by students• confidentiality (25%), professional boundaries

(20%), plagiarism (15%)• 54% of students committing ethical violations

had taken an ethics course

Changing attitude ≠ changing behaviour

Questions?

References• Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to

moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 4, 814-834. http://www.mc.edu/campus/users/sbaldwin/emotional%20dog%20rational%20tail.pdf

• Hauser, M. (2006). Moral Minds: How Nature Designed Our Universal Sense of Right and Wrong. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.

• Hauser, M., Young, L. & Cushman, F. (2008). Reviving Rawls’ Linguistic Analogy; Operative principles and the causal structure of moral actions. In Walter Sinnott-Armstrong (Ed), Moral Psychology; The Cognitive Science of Morality: Intuition and Diversity (pp 107-143). Cambridge, US: The MIT Press. http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~mnkylab/publications/recent/ReviveRawslChpt.pdf

• Kohlberg, L. (1984). Essays on Moral Development. Volume II; The Psychology of Moral Development. San Francisco: Harper and Row, Publishers.

• Lee, S. W. S. & Schwartz, N. (2011). Wiping the Slate Clean: Psychological Consequences of Physical Cleansing. Current Directions in Psychological Science 20(5) 307–311.

• Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgment of the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.

• http://www.lincoln.ac.uk/psychology/Ethics.htm