Boundless Psychology

Researching Psychology

Ethical Considerations in Research

 As a result of various unethical experiments carried out
in the United States in the 20th century, several
organizations were put in place to help monitor clinical
research involving humans.

At most colleges and universities, institutional review

boards (ethics committees) are formally chosen to
approve, review, and monitor bio-medical and
behavioral research involving humans.

Key ethical guidelines include the assurance of

con dentiality, informed consent, and debrie ng.

Key Terms

ethical: Of, or relating to, the accepted principles of

right and wrong especially those of some organization
or profession.

Psychological research involving human subjects must take into account

many ethical considerations. Ethical guidelines that govern the use of
human subjects in research are a fairly new but important construct;
these ethical policies serve to minimize harm to human participant’s
mental and physical well being during experimental research.

The Nuremberg Code

An early example of the discussion about ethics in research was the

Nuremburg Code. The Nuremberg Trials were a series of 12 trials of men
accused of committing war crimes and atrocities during World War II;
among those on trial were doctors who had committed crimes against
humanity such as involuntary human experimentation, involuntary
sterilizations, and mass murder under the guise of euthanasia. One
outcome of these trials was the Nuremberg Code, a list of principles for
ethical experimentation that included informed consent, absence of
coercion, and properly formulated scienti c experimentation.

Controversial Experiments
Throughout the 20th century, there were medical and psychological
experiments carried out in the U.S. that generated controversy, then
outrage, once they were revealed to the general public (often many
years after their conclusion).

Tuskegee Experiment

One of the most infamous instances of unethically-performed

experiments was the Tuskegee experiment. From 1932 to 1972, the U.S.
Public Health Service sought to study the natural progression of
untreated syphilis in poor, rural black men who thought they were
receiving free health care from the U.S. government. Out of the 600 men
involved in the experiment, 399 had previously contracted syphilis
before the study; they were never told they had syphilis, however, and
were led to believe they were receiving free general medical care. One
of the most unethical aspects of the experiment was that by 1947,
penicillin was widely recognized as the standard treatment for syphilis.
But the African American men involved in the experiment were not given
the treatment that could cure them, and continued to be studied for 25
years after a cure had been found. By the end of the study in 1972, only
74 of the test subjects were still alive.

Milgram’s Obedience Experiments

The 1961 Milgram experiments examining obedience to authority gures

was a notable series of social psychology experiments conducted by
Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram. The experiments
measured the willingness of study participants to obey an authority
gure who instructed them to perform acts that con icted with their
personal conscience. Participants were asked by the “authority gure” to
act as “teachers” and teach “learners” a particular sequence. The
authority gure and learner were both in on the experiment, in which the
teacher (the experiment subject) was told that the rst time the learner
made a mistake in the sequence, the teacher had to administer an
electric shock to the learner. The teacher was told to increase the shock
for each subsequent mistake the learner made, no matter how much the
learner su ered. While the learner never actually received an electrical
shock, and faked being in pain, the teacher believed that he or she was
actually shocking the learner. The goal of the study was to see how far
people would go, how high a shock they would deliver, if encouraged by
the authority gure to do so. The experiments were controversial and
considered by many to be abusive.

Zimbardo’s Prison Experiment

The 1971 Stanford prison experiment was a study regarding the

psychological e ects of becoming a prisoner or prison guard. The
participants adapted to their roles well beyond expectations, as the
guards enforced authoritarian measures, and ultimately subjected some
of the prisoners to psychological torture. Many of the prisoners passively
accepted psychological abuse and, at the request of the guards, readily
harassed other prisoners who attempted to prevent it. The experiment
even a ected the head researcher himself, who, in his role as the
superintendent, permitted the abuse to continue until the experiment
ended after only six days. Both guards and prisoners stepped beyond
the boundaries of predicted behavior, leading to dangerous and
psychologically damaging situations.

Ethics Organizations

As a result of these and other unethical research studies, many

organizations have been put in place to help monitor clinical research
involving humans. Such organizations include the National Commission
for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral
Research, and the O ce for Human Research Protections. At most
colleges and universities, ethics committees called institutional review
boards (IRBs) are formally chosen to approve, review, and monitor bio-
medical and behavioral research involving humans. IRBs often conduct
some form of risk-bene t analysis in an attempt to determine whether or
not research should be done, and must approve any experiments done
within the organizations they represent.

Ethical Guidelines

To protect the rights and well-being of research participants, and at the

same time discover meaningful results and insights into human behavior,
virtually all psychological research must pass an ethical review process.
At most colleges and universities, this is conducted by the IRB. This
group examines the proposed research to make sure that no harm is
done to the participants, and that the bene ts of the study outweigh any
possible risks or discomforts to people taking part in the study. Minors
are more protected than adults in ethical guidelines, because a minor is
not considered to be able to give fully informed consent.

There is a duty to protect the

rights of people in the study as
well as their privacy and
sensitivity. The con dentiality of
those involved in the study must
be maintained, keeping their
anonymity and privacy secure. A
process of informed consent is
used to make sure that Right or wrong decision: Ethical
guidelines help researchers make
volunteers know what will the right decisions, such as getting
happen in the experiment and informed consent from human
subjects.
understand that they are allowed
to quit the experiment at any
time. Also, a debrie ng is typically done at the conclusion of the
experiment in order to reveal any deceptions used and generally make
sure that the participants are unharmed by the procedures. Today, most
research in social psychology involves no more risk of harm than can be
expected as by routine psychological testing or normal daily activities.

Ethical Guidelines for Animal Research

Animal research raises the controversial question of whether it is ethical

to harm animals with the aim of improving human lives.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

Describe the key ethics around psychological research

involving animals
 KEY TAKEAWAYS

Key Points

Whether researchers are working with human or animal

subjects, their experiments ‘ design and application
must be ethical; however, how to de ne “ethical” across
species is the subject of much debate.

While a person can consent to participating in research

after being informed of its goals and methods (and this
is in fact a mandatory guideline for ethical research
among humans), this is not possible for animals.

From a purely economic standpoint, many argue that

animal research is more a ordable and economically
sound than research conducted on humans.

Two central questions about the ethics of animal testing

are whether animals have rights and, if they do, whether
those rights should be protected.

The principles of replacement, reduction, and

re nement are used to guide more ethical use of
animals in testing and research.

Key Terms

ethical: Of or relating to the accepted principles of right

and wrong, especially those of some organization or
profession.

Controversies in Animal Testing

The use of animals in research is a very controversial topic in today’s

scienti c community. While animal research was once common and
unquestioned, it now raises an important ethical issue: is it ethical to
harm animals with the aim of improving human lives? An experiment’s
design and application must be ethical whether the research subjects
are humans or animals, but how “ethical” is de ned across species is the
subject of much debate.

A key di erence between an animal and a human is that animals cannot

provide informed consent to participate in an experiment because they
cannot understand the risks or consequences of the experiment. While a
person can consent to participate in research after being informed of an
experiment’s goals and methods (and in fact this is a mandatory
guideline for ethical research among humans), this is not possible for
animals, which raises complicated questions about ethics.

The Animal Rights Debate

Two main questions about the ethics of animal testing are whether
animals have rights and, if they do, whether those rights should be
protected. A legal right is a law-based entitlement that applies to all
members of a particular group and is upheld by the justice system.
Those in favor of extending equal rights to animals argue that the
su ering and well-being of other species are just as important as the
su ering and well-being of humans and should be treated accordingly. It
is known that animals can feel pain and distress, and therefore many
consider the act of subjecting animals to pain, injury, or death for the
sake of science to be immoral.

Others argue against extending equal rights to animals, positing that

human interest should be placed above the well-being of animals. Many
argue that animal research has yielded substantial bene ts to the human
race, and that these outweigh the negative e ects on animals.

Current Animal Research

The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) of 1966 is the only federal law in the
United States regulating the treatment of animals in research; while
some other laws and policies may include additional species coverage
or speci cations for animal care and use, all refer to the AWA as the
minimally acceptable standard for animal treatment and care. Some of
the animals covered under the AWA include any live or dead cat, dog,
hamster, rabbit, nonhuman primate, or guinea pig. Animals excluded
from this act are birds, rats, mice, farm animals, and cold-blooded
animals.

Under the AWA, all animal dealers must be registered and licensed, and
all animal testing facilities in compliance with this act are required to
establish a special committee that includes at least one person trained
as a veterinarian and one person who is not a liated with the facility.
These committees regularly assess animal care, treatment, and practices
during research. In addition to compliance with the Animal Welfare Act,
most research institutions have an institutional review board (IRB), which
is a committee that has been formally designated to approve, monitor,
and review biomedical and behavioral research involving humans. Most
studies involving humans must pass IRB approval before they can begin.

A variety of animals are used in experiments. While animals with shorter

life spans and less sophisticated nervous systems tend to be used, this
is not always true. Some advocate that there should be a hierarchy of
animal rights, with more rights granted to sophisticated species, while
others argue that the same rights should be awarded to all living beings.

Replacement, Reduction,
and Re nement

Replacement, reduction, and

re nement (also referred to as
“the three Rs”) exist as guiding
principles for more ethical use of
animals in testing and research.
These guidelines are intended to
Animal Testing by the Numbers:
The proportion of animals used in improve animal welfare and
research testing in Europe in 2005. scienti c quality where the use of
Mice and rats were the most
frequently used animals. animals in experimentation
cannot be avoided and are
implemented in many research
labs worldwide. Replacement refers to the preferred use of non-animal
methods whenever it is possible to achieve the same scienti c goals as
animal research. Reduction refers to methods that enable researchers to
obtain comparable levels of information from fewer animals, or to obtain
more information from the same number of animals. Methods of
experimental re nement aim to alleviate or minimize potential pain,
su ering, or distress and enhance the welfare of the animals used.

Previous Next

Privacy Policy
Ethical Guidelines for Human Research

Ethical guidelines in psychological research serve to minimize harm to

participants’ mental and physical well-being.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

Justify the need for ethical guidelines in psychological

research

KEY TAKEAWAYS

Key Points

Ethical guidelines that govern the use of human

subjects in research are a fairly new but important
construct developed in response to unethical and
harmful experiments such as the Tuskegee syphilis
experiment.