ETHICS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL

RESEARCH: Human and Animal

RESEARCH WITH HUMAN PARTICIPANTS
• We examine both the ethical principles and the problems associated
with putting them into practice in psychology.

• Psychologists are concerned with the ethics of research involving

both human participants and animals.

• An experimenter cannot be completely impartial and objective in

judging the ethical issues concerning his or her own research, so
most universities and research institutions have peer committees that
judge the ethicality of proposed research.
• The APA (2002) provides ethical guidelines for researchers.

• The association outlined the general principles governing the conduct

of research and publication practices

• Let us examine the principles relating primarily to human

participants. To consider how the welfare of the participants was
protected in the research, let us consider the eight principles that
guide research involving human participants as presented below:
Institutional Approval
When institutional approval is required, psychologists provide accurate
information about their research proposals and obtain approval prior to
conducting the research. They conduct the research in accordance with
the approved research protocol.
Informed Consent to Research:
(a) According to standard, when obtaining informed consent psychologist
informed participants about:
• the purpose of the research, expected duration, and procedures;
• their right to decline to participate and to withdraw from the research
once participation has begun;
• the foreseeable consequences of declining or withdrawing;
• Reasonably foreseeable factors that may be expected to influence their
willingness to participate such as potential risks, discomfort, or
adverse effects;
• any prospective research benefits;
• limits of confidentiality; incentives for participation; and
• whom to contact for questions about the research and research
participants’ rights. They provide opportunity for the prospective
participants to ask questions and receive answers.
(b) Psychologists conducting intervention research involving the use of
experimental treatments clarify to participants at the outset of the
research:
• the experimental nature of the treatment
• the services that will or will not be available to the control group(s)
if appropriate;
• the means by which assignment to treatment and control groups
will be made;
• available treatment alternatives if an individual does not wish to
participate in the research or wishes to withdraw once a study has
begun; and
• compensation for or monetary costs of participating including, if
appropriate, whether reimbursement from the participant or a third-
party pay or will be sought.
Informed Consent for Recording Voices and Images in Research:
Psychologists obtain informed consent from research participants prior
to recording their voices or images for data collection unless
• the research consists solely of naturalistic observations in public
places, and it is not anticipated that the recording will be used in a
manner that could cause personal identification or harm, or
• the research design includes deception, and consent for the use of
the recording is obtained during debriefing.
Client/Patient, Student, and Subordinate Research Participants
• When psychologists conduct research with clients/patients, students,
or subordinates as participants, psychologists take steps to protect
the prospective participants from adverse consequences of declining
or withdrawing from participation.
• When research participation is a course requirement or an
opportunity for extra credit, the prospective participant is given the
choice of equitable alternative activities.
Dispensing With Informed Consent for Research
Psychologists may dispense with informed consent only:
1. where research would not reasonably be assumed to create distress
or harm and involves
• the study of normal educational practices, curricula, or classroom
management methods conducted in educational settings;
• only anonymous questionnaires, naturalistic observations, or
archival
research for which disclosure of responses would not place participants
at risk of criminal or civil liability or damage their financial standing,
employability, or reputation, and confidentiality is protected; or
• the study of factors related to job or organization effectiveness
conducted in organizational settings for which there is no risk to
participants’ employability, and confidentiality is protected or

2. where otherwise permitted by law or federal or institutional

regulations.
Offering Inducements for Research Participation
• Psychologists make reasonable efforts to avoid offering excessive or
inappropriate financial or other inducements for research
participation when such inducements are likely to coerce
participation.
• When offering professional services as an inducement for research
participation, psychologists clarify the nature of the services, as well
as the risks, obligations, and limitations.
Deception in Research
• Psychologists do not conduct a study involving deception unless
they have determined that the use of deceptive techniques is justified
by the study’s significant prospective scientific, educational, or
applied value and that effective non-deceptive alternative procedures
are not feasible.
• Psychologists do not deceive prospective participants about research
that is reasonably expected to cause physical pain or severe
emotional distress.
• Psychologists explain any deception that is an integral feature of the
design and conduct of an experiment to participants as early as is
feasible, preferably at the conclusion of their participation, but no
later than at the conclusion of the data collection, and permit
participants to withdraw their data.
Debriefing
• Psychologists provide a prompt opportunity for participants to
obtain appropriate information about the nature, results, and
conclusions of the research, and they take reasonable steps to correct
any misconceptions that participants may have of which the
psychologists are aware.
• If scientific or humane values justify delaying or withholding this
information, psychologists take reasonable measures to reduce the
risk of harm.
• When psychologists become aware that research procedures have
harmed a participant, they take reasonable steps to minimize the
harm.
 INFORMED CONSENT AND DECEPTION
The ethical researcher informs participants, prior to participation, of all
aspects of the research that might reasonably be expected to influence
willingness to participate and explains all other aspects of the research
about which participants inquire. This means that the participants must
be forewarned about those aspects of the research that may have
detrimental effects. In most psychological research, participants receive
complete information about what they will be asked to do during the
research project so that they can give informed consent about their
understanding of the possible problems associated with participation.
Participants are rarely misled as to the nature of the experiences they
will have during the experiment. Furthermore, an experimenter usually
states the purpose of the experimental procedure truthfully.
Nonetheless, experimenters sometimes mislead participants about the
true purpose of an experiment. This false description is often referred to
as a “cover story.” This kind of deception is usually done to control
subject reactivity.
The researcher was concerned that participants’ behavior might change
if they knew the real purpose of the experiment. In this case,
information regarding the hypothesis under test probably will not
change anyone’s decision to participate, but this information might
change performance on the task. Deception of this sort, although
usually harmless, must be considered carefully because the participant’s
consent is not fully informed.
Even more rare than deception concerning the purpose of an
experiment is deception concerning the experiences that the participant
will have during the experiment. Such deception is, unfortunately,
necessary to answer some research questions.

Whenever a research question requires deception, the ethical researcher

faces a dilemma. People must be warned if the procedure will place
them in serious danger of physical or psychological harm. Deception in
such cases is clearly unethical.
In all cases, the potential benefits of the research must be weighed
against the actual and potential costs to the participant. However,
participants should always receive as much information as possible,
and they should know that they can end their participation at any time
without negative consequences.

The issues surrounding informed consent and deception often require

considerable thought and deliberation to arrive at ethical solutions.
In sum, fully informed consent is the norm in most areas of psychology.
Occasionally, some information is withheld or participants are misled
so as to prevent subject reactivity. In such cases, experimenters, as well
as members of institutional review boards, take great care in deciding
whether the benefits of the procedure outweigh the risks to the
participants.
FREEDOM TO WITHDRAW
As mentioned earlier, participants should be allowed to decline to
participate or to withdraw at any time.

Generally, when the pool of potential participants is a captive audience,

such as students, prisoners, military recruits, and employees of the
experimenter, the ethical researcher considers the individual’s freedom
to withdraw or to participate.
PROTECTION FROM HARM AND DEBRIEFING
The APA suggests an additional safeguard to provide research
participants with protection from harm.

The participant should be able to receive help or advice from the

researcher if problems should arise. We have had participants cry (out
of frustration and embarrassment) during what was supposed to be a
standard experiment.
Those participants may have carried away from the experiment a
negative self-image or strong feelings of resentment toward the
experimenter in particular or research in general.

Because of such unintended effects, the prudent researcher provides a

detailed debriefing, which means that the investigator explains the
general purposes of the research.
REMOVING HARMFUL CONSEQUENCES
Debriefing participants and giving them phone numbers may not be
sufficient in a risky project. If a participant could suffer long-term
consequences as a result of serving in a research project, the
investigator has the responsibility for removing harmful consequences.

The ethical investigator must take steps to minimize known risks.

CONFIDENTIALITY
What a person does in an experiment should be confidential unless
otherwise agreed. An ethical researcher does not run around saying
things like “Johnson Tobiloba is stupid; he did more poorly than
anyone else in my experiment.” Also, personal information about
particular participants, such as their attitudes toward premarital sex or
their family income, should not be revealed without their permission.
ETHICS IN RESEARCH WITH ANIMALS
Although the majority of research in contemporary psychology focuses
on humans, an appreciable number of studies focus on animals (Miller,
1985). Animals are often used to answer questions that would be
impossible or impractical to answer by using human beings. Some
people believe, however, that animals should not be used in various
kinds of research.
For example, Rollin (1985) has argued that if the concept of legal and
moral rights can be applied to human research, it can also be applied in
the same way to animal research. He suggested that the status of
research with animals needs to be elevated to that of human subjects,
with many of the same rules that govern human research applied to
animals.
Reports in the media have discussed the purported mistreatment of
laboratory animals and the attempts of animal-rights advocates to limit
the use of animals in research.
Therefore, a consideration of why animals are used in research is
important, and an understanding of the ethical safeguards for animals is
necessary.

Animals are also the subjects of research because they are interesting
and because they form an important part of the natural world.

The APA (2003b) provides additional information regarding the use of

animals in psychological research.
ARGUMENTS AGAINST RESEARCH WITH ANIMALS
Ethics prohibit experimentally induced brain damage in human beings,
preclude deliberate separation of a human infant from its parents, forbid
testing of unknown drugs on human beings, and generally exclude
dangerous and irreversible manipulations on human beings. Animal-
rights advocates believe that research on animals should have the same
prohibitions.
According to the animal-rights advocates, researchers need to uphold
the rights of both human beings and animals because, for example, they
believe that experimental destruction of a monkey’s brain is as ethically
reprehensible as the destruction of the brain of a human being.
Three points summarize the animal-rights
• Animals feel pain and their lives can be destroyed, as is true of
humans (Roberts, 1971);
• destroying or harming any living thing is dehumanizing to the
human scientist (Roberts, 1971); and
• claims about scientific progress being helped by animal research are
a form of racism and, like interracial bigotry, are completely
unwarranted and unethical. Neglecting the rights and interests of
other species has been called speciesism by Singer (1995).
Most psychologists have reservations about these points, and this will
leads to the next point.
ARGUMENTS FOR RESEARCH WITH ANIMALS
The first point is that animals feel pain and suffering. Certainly, this is
true, but ethical standards exist in all scientific disciplines that use
animals as research subjects. A major portion of these principles
concerns the proscription of undue pain and inhumane treatment.
No ethical psychologist would deliberately inflict undue harm on an
animal. When pain and suffering are inflicted on an animal, it is only
after considerable deliberation by the scientist and the appropriate
ethics review boards. Such deliberations weigh the suffering of the
animal against the potential benefits of the experiment. Only when the
benefits far exceed the harm is the experiment approved and conducted.
No ethical psychologist would deliberately inflict undue harm on an
animal. When pain and suffering are inflicted on an animal, it is only
after considerable deliberation by the scientist and the appropriate
ethics review boards. Such deliberations weigh the suffering of the
animal against the potential benefits of the experiment. Only when the
benefits far exceed the harm is the experiment approved and conducted.
An important point to make about behavioral research on animals is
that much of it does not involve pain or physical harm to them.
GUIDELINES FOR USE OF ANIMALS IN RESEARCH
Psychologists have focused on the humane and ethical treatment of
animals used in research for a long time (Greenough, 1992). For
example, one early statement of humane treatment (Young, 1928)
asserted that animals used as research subjects “. . . shall be kindly
treated, properly fed, and their surroundings kept in the best possible
sanitary condition”. This concern is echoed in the modern guidelines of
the APA (2003a) governing research with animals, which state as a
general principle the following:
ethical concerns mandate that psychologists should consider the costs
and benefits of procedures involving animals before proceeding with
the research.

As in virtually any human enterprise, abuses of humane treatment

sometimes occur in the use of animals in research. However, these
abuses go against the standard practice of animal researchers. Ethical
researchers treat animals humanely. When unethical treatment of
animals is uncovered, the researchers in question will be punished.
Guidelines for Ethical Conduct in the Care and Use of Animals.
 Psychologists acquire, care for, use, and dispose of animals in
compliance with current federal, state, and local laws and
regulations, and with professional standards.
 Psychologists trained in research methods and experienced in the
care of laboratory animals supervise all procedures involving
animals and are responsible for ensuring appropriate consideration
of their comfort, health, and humane treatment.
 Psychologists ensure that all individuals under their supervision who
are using animals have received instruction in research methods and
in the care, maintenance, and handling of the species being used, to
the extent appropriate to their role.
 Psychologists make reasonable efforts to minimize the discomfort,
infection, illness, and pain of animal subjects.
 Psychologists use a procedure subjecting animals to pain, stress, or
privation only when an alternative procedure is unavailable and the
goal is justified by its prospective scientific, educational, or applied
value.
 Psychologists perform surgical procedures under appropriate
anesthesia and follow techniques to avoid infection and minimize
pain during and after surgery.
 When it is appropriate that an animal’s life be terminated,
psychologists proceed rapidly, with an effort to minimize pain and in
accordance with accepted procedures.
Thanks for Listening