Behavioral and social science experiments

When we move from medicine to the behavioral and social sciences, the direct risks to experimental subjects are less acute, but so are the possible benefits to the subjects. Consider, for example, the experiments conducted by psychologists in their study of human behavior.

152

EXAMPLE 7 Keep out of my space

Psychologists observe that people have a “personal space” and get annoyed if others come too close to them. We don’t like strangers to sit at our table in a coffee shop if other tables are available, and we see people move apart in elevators if there is room to do so. Americans tend to require more personal space than people in most other cultures. Can violations of personal space have physical, as well as emotional, effects?

Investigators set up shop in a men’s public restroom. They blocked off urinals to force men walking in to use either a urinal next to an experimenter (treatment group) or a urinal separated from the experimenter (control group). Another experimenter, using a periscope from a toilet stall, measured how long the subject took to start urinating and how long he kept at it.

This personal space experiment illustrates the difficulties facing those who plan and review behavioral studies.

The “Ethical Principles” of the American Psychological Association require consent unless a study merely observes behavior in a public place. They allow deception only when it is necessary to the study, does not hide information that might influence a subject’s willingness to participate, and is explained to subjects as soon as possible. The personal space study of Example 7 (from the 1970s) does not meet current ethical standards.

We see that the basic requirement for informed consent is understood differently in medicine and psychology. Here is an example of another setting with yet another interpretation of what is ethical. The subjects get no information and give no consent. They don’t even know that an experiment may be sending them to jail for the night.

153

EXAMPLE 8 Domestic violence

How should police respond to domestic violence calls? In the past, the usual practice was to remove the offender and order the offender to stay out of the household overnight. Police were reluctant to make arrests because the victims rarely pressed charges. Women’s groups argued that arresting offenders would help prevent future violence even if no charges were filed. Is there evidence that arrest will reduce future offenses? That’s a question that experiments have tried to answer.

A typical domestic violence experiment compares two treatments: arrest the suspect and hold him overnight or warn the suspect and release him. When police officers reach the scene of a domestic violence call, they calm the participants and investigate. Weapons or death threats require an arrest. If the facts permit an arrest but do not require it, an officer radios headquarters for instructions. The person on duty opens the next envelope in a file prepared in advance by a statistician. The envelopes contain the treatments in random order. The police either arrest the suspect or warn and release him, depending on the contents of the envelope. The researchers then monitor police records and visit the victim to see if the domestic violence reoccurs.

The first such experiment appeared to show that arresting domestic violence suspects does reduce their future violent behavior. As a result of this evidence, arrest has become the common police response to domestic violence.

The domestic violence experiments shed light on an important issue of public policy. Because there is no informed consent, the ethical rules that govern clinical trials and most social science studies would forbid these experiments. They were cleared by review boards because, in the words of one domestic violence researcher, “These people became subjects by committing acts that allow the police to arrest them. You don’t need consent to arrest someone.”