ISSUES - ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS Flashcards
(15 cards)
define ethical guidelines
set of principles set out by the BPS to help psychologists behave honestly and with integrity
define ethical issues
problems that arise when there is conflict between the rights of the ptp and the aims of the researcher(s)
define ethical implications
Seiber and Stanley (1988) used this term to describe studies where there are potential social consequences for the ptps or the group of ppl represented by the research
define social sensitivity
the topic area and/or group studied can have implications for society/certain groups in society
• potentially leading to a change in, or justification for, the way these groups are treated/perceived
• research which has potential implications or consequences, eg leading to prejudice and discrimination
• where a group of people represented in the research might be negatively affected as a result of a study, eg women affected by Bowlby’s work on attachment
• where a study leads to changes in public policy affecting individuals/groups, eg research into IQ in the 1950s leading to educational changes.
Seiber and Stanley (1988) identified 4 aspects in the scientific research process that raise ethical implications in socially sensitive research. what are they?
- the research question
- the methodology used
- the institutional context
- interpretation and application of findings
expand (1) - the research q
may be damaginng to members of a particular group
eg. ‘The Bell Curve’ Hernstein and Murray, 1994 - waste of resources to improve the edu opp. for disadvantaged groups as they’re generically low achieving groups
expand (2) - the methodology used
researcher must consider the treatment of the ptps. and their right to confidentiality
expand (3) - the institutional context
researcher should be mindful of how the data is going to be used and who is funding their research
expand (4) - interpretation and application of findings
some may interperet as socially sensitive when its not, or other way around
what researcher supports the idea of socially sensitive research
Aronson 1999
states that psychologists have a ‘social responsability’ to conduct socially sensitive research
–> just because research is socially sensitive, it does not mean it shouldnt be conducted
what are x2 strengths of socially sensitive research?
confronts taboo topics
eg. menopause, age, race, sexuality
attracts attention from the media and general public on large scale
AO3: ethical implications: limitation: discrimination
socially sensitive research can lead to issues of discrimination and therefore some psychologists would argue against conducting this form of research
eg. research examining racial diff in IQ has been used to justify new forms of social control
eg. 1907-1963 over 64,000 forcibly sterilized under eugenic legislation in US
AO3: strength: ethical implications: some socially sensitive research is beneficial and desirable to society
eg. research examining EWT, especially w/ child witnesses (Flin et al.) found that young children canv be reliable witnessees if questioned in a timely and appropriate manner
resulted in a good working r-ship between psychologists and the legal profession
helped improve the accuracy and validity of child EWT
eg. role of father research is sensitive towards same sex parents or single parents and has led to positive real world implications such as extended paternity leave
= often necessary
AO3: ethical implications: limitation: inadequacy of current ethical guidelines
research may still inflict harm on a group of people in society
psychologists have developed strict ethical guidelines that aim to protect the immediate needs of research patients
BUT they may still inflict harm on some in society
eg. at present, ethical guidelines dont ask researchers to consider how their research may be used by others, as recommended by Seiber and Stanley
tf, the considerations outlined some time ago havent yet permeated into professional practice
ethical issues in socially sensitive research
x10
privacy
confidentiality
valid methodology
deception
informed consent
equitable treatment
scientific freedom
ownership of data
values
risk/benefit ratio