2.5 Ethical Issues in Psychological Research

Psychologists must consider ethical as well as scientific issues in designing their studies. As an example, recall the experiment on treatments for depression by DiMascio and colleagues. From a scientific viewpoint, these researchers could have improved their study by using a placebo in the nondrug conditions and a fake form of psychotherapy in the nonpsychotherapy conditions. This would have reduced differences among the groups in subject expectancies. But from an ethical viewpoint, the researchers felt that their subjects should know which form of treatment they were getting so that they could make an informed decision about whether or not to participate and could understand any side effects that might arise as treatment progressed.

Research with Humans

In research with humans, ethical considerations revolve around three interrelated issues:

1. The person’s right to privacy. Common safeguards to protect privacy include obtaining informed consent from subjects before they take part, informing subjects that they do not have to share any information about themselves that they do not wish to share, and keeping reports and records in ways that ensure anonymity.
2. The possibility of discomfort or harm. In reality, the great majority of psychological studies involve completely harmless procedures, such as reading rapidly flashed letters, memorizing lists of terms, or carrying on a discussion with other research participants. However, if a planned research study involves some risk of discomfort or harm to subjects, researchers are obliged to determine whether the same question can be answered in a study that involves less risk. If the answer is no, a determination must be made that the risk is minimal and is outweighed by the human benefits of the study. In addition, in any research study, human subjects must be advised that they are free to quit at any time.
3. The use of deception. This is the most controversial ethical issue in human psychological research. In a minority of experiments, the independent variable involves a lie. Subjects may be falsely told or led to believe that something is happening, or is going to happen, so that the researcher can study the effects of that belief. Some psychologists are opposed to all use of deception. They argue that deception (a) is intrinsically unethical and (b) undermines the possibility of obtaining truly informed consent (Bersoff, 2008). Others, however, justify some use of deception on the grounds that some psychological processes cannot be studied effectively without it. These psychologists contend, further, that research deception usually takes the form of benign “white lies,” which are cleared up when the researcher informs the subjects of the true nature of the study after the session has ended, termed debriefing (Benham, 2008). They also point out that informed consent can still be obtained by telling subjects about any realistic dangers they will face and by telling them that some details of the study must be withheld until the data have been collected. Special consideration must be given when subjects are children, people of limited intellectual capacity, or those who have limited abilities to make their own decisions, such as prisoners.

Research with Nonhuman Animals

The use of nonhuman animals in research presents another area of ethical controversy. Most people agree that some procedures that would be unethical to use with humans can be used ethically with other animal species. One can breed animals in controlled ways, raise them in controlled environments, and surgically intervene in their physiology for research purposes. Basic biological mechanisms underlying animal behavior are similar to those underlying human behavior, so such research contributes to our understanding of humans as well as the species studied. Still, research on nonhuman animals can sometimes cause them to suffer, and any researcher who employs animals as subjects has an ethical obligation to balance the animals’ suffering against the potential benefits of the research. Animals must be well cared for and not subjected to unnecessary deprivation or pain.

A rat with an electrode in its brain Experiments in behavioral neuroscience frequently involve operations on animal brains. For scientific as well as ethical reasons, conscientious researchers are scrupulous about minimizing discomfort to the animals. Discomfort can produce behaviors that interfere with those that the researcher wishes to study.

© Aristide Economopoulos/Star Ledger/Corbis

Some people question whether subjecting animals to pain or deprivation for research purposes is ever justifiable. But others, pointing to the enormous gains in knowledge and the reduction in human (and animal) suffering that have come from such research, have turned the ethical question around. In the words of one (Miller, 1986): “Is it morally justifiable to prolong human (and animal) suffering in order to reduce suffering by experimental animals?” Research with chimpanzees, humans’ closest genetic relatives, has caused special concern. Many countries have banned biomedical research with chimpanzees entirely, with only two nations (Gabon and the United States) currently having chimpanzees housed in biomedical research facilities, and this situation is slowly changing toward less biomedical research with chimpanzees in the United States (de Waal, 2012).

Formal Principles and Safeguards for Ethical Research

The American Psychological Association (2002, 2010) has established a set of ethical principles for psychological research, which researchers must follow if they are to publish their results in the research journals of that association. Moreover, in the United States, Canada, and many other countries, publicly funded research institutions are required by law to establish ethics review panels, commonly called Institutional Review Boards (IRBs), whose task is to evaluate all proposed research studies that have any potential for ethical controversy. IRBs often turn down research proposals that once were regarded as quite acceptable; a few studies that are considered classics and are cited in most general psychology textbooks, including this one, would not be approved today. As you read about the studies in the chapters that follow, questions of ethics may well occur to you from time to time. Such questions are always legitimate, as are those about the scientific merit of a study’s design and the interpretation of its results. Psychology needs, and usually welcomes, people who raise those questions.