Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Research methods in psychology : their advantages and disadvantages
Ethical and legal issues in clinical psychology
Ethical and legal issues in clinical psychology
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The APA ethical guidelines help to ensure that all psychological research maintains the integrity that it does not do harm or conflicts with the majority of the human populations moral ethical codes. However, in some situations the APA ethical guidelines must be viewed as just that: guidelines. If a study has the potential to benefit humanity as a whole and does not result in the permanent or irreparable harm to a human being then some guidelines must be permitted to be stretched or even broken in the interest of human advancement and scientific progression. After all the goal and responsibility of a psychologist is to enhance our understanding of human behavior as well as to find ways to use this information to better society and humanity as a whole. In a circumstance that has the potential to achieve this goal, violation of the APA ethical guidelines is acceptable on the condition that the research maintains the integrity of not inflicting irreparable damage or harm to the subjects being used. This includes psychological harm, physical harm, or social humiliation to any human being regardless of age, size, race, gender, disability or other determining characteristic.
The APA ethical guidelines consist of informed consent, deception, debriefing, withdrawal, confidentiality, and protection from harm. Informed consent means, to inform the subjects of the purpose of the study in advance in order for the subject to be able to give their consent with knowledge of what they are consenting to. This reduces the potential of stress or any damages. However, there are cases where the experimenter does not reveal the entirety of the experiment nor the aim. For example, in Milgram’s study on obedience, the participants were informed that th...
... middle of paper ...
...asic of the ethic, in which the guidelines demand that no participant can be harmed in any way as result of or during an experiment or study of any kind. This guideline, when manipulated, causes a huge controversial uproar. For example in Milgram’s obedience experiment when the participants were asked to give electric shocks to the helpless victims they suffered from loss of self-esteem.
Conclusively the APA ethical guidelines may, at times be exhorted to comply with benefiting human kind or scientific advancement; however they should never be manipulated lightly, the APA Ethical guidelines are in place for a very specific and concise reason: in order to maintain the moral integrity of psychological research as well as insure the rights and safety of all those who participate in the process of bringing more knowledge into the vast fields of psychological science.
Those who were affected by the testing in hospitals, prisons, and mental health institutions were the patients/inmates as well as their families, Henrietta Lacks, the doctors performing the research and procedures, the actual institutions in which research was being held, and the human/health sciences field as a whole. Many ethical principles can be applied to these dilemmas: Reliance on Scientific Knowledge (1.01), Boundaries of Competence (1.02), Integrity (1.04), Professional and Scientific Relationships (1.05), Exploitative Relationships (1.07, a), Responsibility (2.02), Rights and Prerogatives of Clients (2.05), Maintaining Confidentiality (2.06), Maintaining Records (2.07), Disclosures (2.08), Treatment/Intervention Efficacy (2.09), Involving Clients in Planning and Consent (4.02), Promoting an Ethical Culture (7.01), Ethical Violations by Others and Risk of Harm (7.02), Avoiding False or Deceptive Statements (8.01), Conforming with Laws and Regulations (9.01), Characteristics of Responsible Research (9.02), Informed Consent (9.03), and Using Confidential Information for Didactic or Instructive Purposes (9.04), and Debriefing (9.05). These particular dilemmas were not really handled until much later when laws were passed that regulated the way human subjects could be used for research. Patients
The Asch and Milgram’s experiment were not unethical in their methods of not informing the participant of the details surrounding the experiment and the unwarranted stress; their experiment portrayed the circumstances of real life situation surrounding the issues of obedience to authority and social influence. In life, we are not given the courtesy of knowledge when we are being manipulated or influenced to act or think a certain way, let us be honest here because if we did know people were watching and judging us most of us would do exactly as society sees moral, while that may sound good in ensuring that we always do the right thing that would not be true to the ways of our reality. Therefore, by not telling the participants the detail of the experiment and inflicting unwarranted stress Asch and Milgram’s were
Upon analyzing his experiment, Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist, concludes that people will drive to great lengths to obey orders given by a higher authority. The experiment, which included ordinary people delivering “shocks” to an unknown subject, has raised many questions in the psychological world. Diana Baumrind, a psychologist at the University of California and one of Milgram’s colleagues, attacks Milgram’s ethics after he completes his experiment in her review. She deems Milgram as being unethical towards the subjects he uses for testing and claims that his experiment is irrelevant to obedience. In contrast, Ian Parker, a writer for New Yorker and Human Sciences, asserts Milgram’s experiments hold validity in the psychological world. While Baumrind focuses on Milgram’s ethics, Parker concentrates more on the reactions, both immediate and long-term, to his experiments.
During the process of research, professionals collect data or identifiable private information through intervention or interaction. While this is a vital part of the scientific and medical fields, every precaution must be taken by researchers to protect the participants' rights. Ethics, outlined by the Belmont report; requirements, described by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS); and regulations, laid out by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are verified by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). This procedure assures that all human rights are safeguarded during the entire research process.
American Psychological Association (APA). (2002). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060-1073.
According to APA’s guidelines, John Watson’s “Little Albert” study would not be allowed today because of ethical violations. One ethical violation is the lack of consent from the subject. Little Albert could never give consent because he was an infant. Watson took advantage of the fact that Albert could not tell people that he wanted to withdraw from the study. Participants should always know what the study will involve and what risks might develop.
Having a positive approach helps psychologists clarify what they value, contemplate how they must behave, and decide what institutes suitable professional demeanor. The significance of positive ethics supports psychologists and allows them to reach their utmost ethical principles instead of violating the rules. The American Psychological Association are the top procedures to monitor to help stay within the ethical guidelines which has recently had revisions in the year two thousand two. There are a number of ethical codes to consider as a forensic psychologist cannot have the unawareness of particular psychological information, absence of specific preparation in forensic, presumptuous the lawyer will offer the expert with the essential legal ethical and professional evidence, assuming diverse jurisdictions are comparable in laws, how the laws are applied and failure to recognize the sole matters related with privacy and privileged communications for the work in the forensic
This balance is quite important as the well being of participants is at risk. Over the last twentieth century, there have been numerous examples in which ethical principles have not been considered in research leading to ethical breaches that have negative implications on study participants.1 One US human experimentation study which breached ethical conduct was the US Public Health Service Syphilis Study, more commonly known as the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, which was conducted from 1932 through 1972.2 The study recruited 399 African-American male subjects diagnosed with syphilis. The recruited men came from poor, rural counties around Tuskegee, Alabama. The stated purpose of the study was to obtain information about the course of untreated syphilis. The study was initially meant to be for 6 months, however the study was modified into a “death as end-point study”.
Looking beyond the Nuremberg Code and applying it to modern medical research ethics, there are many challenges that it poses. Many have argued that the Code tries to provide for all unforeseen events, which restricts the researcher by requiring him to anticipate every situation, demanding the impossible. The most important contribution of the Code is the first principle, which says that voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. The subject involved should have legal capacity to give consent, should have free power of choice, as well as sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the experiment. This restricts that populations upon which some experiment may be conducted, since many do not have “legal capacity”. For instance, studies of mental illness and children’s diseases have been curtailed because neither of these populations has the legal capacity to give consent. Another group of people, prisoners, are never really able to give voluntary consent since they might be enticed by financial rewards, special treatment, and the hope of early release in exchange for participating in the human experimentation projects. British biostatitcian Sir Austin Bradford Hill also questioned whether it was important to inform a research subject who was receiving a placebo since it does...
The primary weakness of the APA is that it only applies to professional conduct and not private life. According to Pipes, Holstein, and Aguirre (2005), "APA codes apply within their role as psychologists...they may, with impunity from the Code, demean individuals of a particular gender or a particular religion with whom they interact only on a personal basis" (p. 326). While the APA has enforceable standards, the preamble and general principles are aspirational and seek to create individuals whose professional character will successfully integrate into their personal lives. For example, Jenny 's consultation with Rhonda went from a professional consultation to a gossip session on other issues within organization; when they failed "to guard against personal, financial, social, organizational or political factors" (APA, 2010) that might influence their ability to objectively resolve the present ethical dilemma. While the APA provide ethical principles and a professional code of conduct provide a foundation for resolving ethical dilemmas, it is not exhaustive and individuals should seek and use other models to help them resolve their ethical dilemmas, such as the eight-step decision
First, the participants should be given the chance to decide if they want to partake in the experiment. The participants could be under age or concerned for their safety which are valid reasons for them not to participate in the study. It does not matter if the study was single blinded, it was vital to tell the participants that they are being studied (Cicarelli and White, 2015, p. 33). Second, participants are not allowed to withdraw from the study. Due to the participants not being informed of the study they are unable to withdraw. Third, investigators do not inform the participants of any risks. While the researchers do not use equipment that could cause bodily harm the participants can suffer a greater risk that involves their privacy. Privacy helps people maintain who they are as an induvial and when that is violated they lose the ability to trust not only others, but themselves in certain situations. Lastly, the investigators do not debrief participants. Debriefing is a critical part of any experience because it not only allows the experimenter to share their findings, but it gives participants the opportunity to ask questions. Due to the importance of ethics in an experiment I would correct the four violations that were discussed
Following the ethical codes and getting approval from the Institutional Review Board (if the study has human subjects) can really decrease the possibility of any harm being done to the participants. A perfect example of a research study that had lots of things unethical practices was the Tuskegee Syphilis study:
This paper will look at some of the ethical standards from the Standard 9: Assessment section of the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, which is written to assist and guide psychologists in multiple forms of professional conduct (American Psychological Association [APA], 2010). An analysis of four ethical standards that pertain to testing and assessment will be undertaken, and attempts will be made to incorporate real-life examples. Additionally, possible suggestions for improvement or clarification of the standards will be given, along with information about psychological measurement and assessment in various settings. Other information may be included as it pertains to the topics being discussed in an effort to fully
American Psychiatric Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychological Association (APA), Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx
I will take note of the five recommendations APA's Science Directorate gives to help researchers uphold ethical research standards which include: