Showing concern for the welfare of human subjects

Tuskegee syphilis study of 1932 Stanley Milgram’s conformity

research of 1963 commercially funded, “for profit”

research (2001): conflicts of interest and the “file drawer” problem

Pharmaceutical manufacturers “outsourcing” drug trials to poor countries (2004)

U.S. energy Dept. and radiation tests on civilians (1970’s)

LSD and the CIA’s MK Ultra program (1973)

Why is my colon Why is my colon glowing?glowing?

More than 100 boys living in an orphanage were fed Quaker Oats with radioactive iron and calcium in the 1950's.

The diet was part of an experiment to prove that the nutrients in Quaker oatmeal travel throughout the body.

A class action settlement for $1.85 million was reached in 1998

The Brush OffThe Brush Off During and after

WWII, American soldiers were forced to observe nuclear blasts within 50 miles of ground zero.

Thousands of these soldiers later died of leukemia and other rare forms of cancer.

Their families were barred from suing the federal government

The Monster StudyThe Monster Study In 1938, Wendell Johnson and

Mary Tudor trained orphans to be more conscious of small speech errors.

Johnson’s theory was that punishing fluency errors made them worse.

All five stutterers in the test group showed increased stuttering; five out of six of the normal children exhibited worse fluency.

The experiment, referred to by some as the “Monster Experiment” turned some of the children into lifelong stutterers despite later efforts to reverse the damage.

My Bad…My Bad… 2005: South Korean

researcher, Woo Suk Hwang, fabricated evidence that he had successfully cloned human embryos.

The journal Science, retracted two studies he had published.

Hard to swallowHard to swallow The price of bringing a

new drug to market is about $1 million per day

Much of that cost is devoted to human clinical trials

western drug makers are outsourcing safety and efficacy studies to developing countries, a large proportion of them to India and Russia.

There are currently some 400 clinical trials underway in India

Good ends Bad ends

Good means Ethical research

Subjective ethic (backfires)

Bad means Machiavellian research

Unethical research

Autonomy:Autonomy: Free-choice, no pressure to participate, consideration of “at risk” groups or individuals

persons with diminished autonomy Beneficence:Beneficence:

“do no harm,” ensure the well-being of participants

Justice:Justice: fair distribution of risks and benefits of

research subject recruitment, selection subject compensation

“More than 1 percent of scientists report direct knowledge of an instance of misconduct.” Elliot (2000). How prevalent is fraud? That’s a multi-million dollar question. Science, 290, pp. 1662-1663

Motivations include tenure and promotion pressure to “publish or perish” lucrative grants, patents fame, notoriety, prestige

Intentional fraud Cyril Burt’s research

on monozygotic twins—fudging the results of IQ tests

William Summerlin’s cancer research—faked results of tumor shrinkage

Unintentional fraud Weitzman’s research

on women's and men's incomes following divorce—blamed “computer error” for erroneous results

Pons and Fleischmann's research on “cold” fusion—couldn’t be replicated by other researchers

minimizing minimizing psychological riskspsychological risks Example: simulations

that accentuate racist, sexist, or homophobic attitudes

minimizing physical minimizing physical risksrisks Example: behavioral

psychologists’ penchant for shocking subjects in the 60’s and 70’s

showing concern for showing concern for the welfare of the welfare of participantsparticipants Example: Stanley

Milgram’s conformity research

VoluntaryVoluntary: : the subject willingly agrees to participate in the study, and is free to withdraw at any time without penalty

Usually requires written consent

Age: Age: 18 or older, with parent or 18 or older, with parent or legal guardian’s permissionlegal guardian’s permission

Capacity: Capacity: participants must participants must have the mental ability to make a have the mental ability to make a reasoned choicereasoned choice

Special Populations: Special Populations: children, children, elderly, at risk groups, etc.elderly, at risk groups, etc.

Before conducting any research using human participants, a participant’s informed consent must first be obtained: Informed:Informed: the subject is aware of any risks

(physical or psychological) associated with participating

ConsentConsent: the subject’s consent is unambiguous, e.g., a signed permission form

no such things as “implied consent” opting out must be easy

Low-risk anonymous surveys Observations gathered in public

places Information in the public domain

Kinch’s study on the “Pygmalion effect” Problems associated with using freshman

in experimental research Can students under 18 legally give their

consent? Should participation in experiments be a

course requirement? Ethics of participant-observation

Going “under cover” to study groups may violate their rate to privacy

Elms (1982) recommends the following strictures for the use of deception in experimental research: As a last resort: When there is no other feasible way

to obtain the desired information example: studies on student cheating

When the benefits substantially outweigh the risks example: controlled double-blind studies on drug

efficacy When subjects are given the option to withdraw at

any time, without penalty When any physical or psychological harm is

temporary When subjects are debriefed and the research

procedures are made available for public review

Humphrey’s (1970) “tea room” trade research

Personnel action—failure to ensure anonymity

Incest case—failure to remove identifying information

Anonymity: Anonymity: no one including the experimenter can match the data to specific individuals

Confidentiality: Confidentiality: the experimenter knows participants’ identities but takes steps to protect participant’s privacy.

at the department level Human Subjects Committees

at the university level: Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

professional associations American Psychological

Association’s “Ethical Guidelines” Code of Ethics” of the American

Speech Hearing and Language Association

Dehoaxing:Dehoaxing: undoing the cover story and revealing the true

purpose of the investigation Desensitizing:Desensitizing:

addressing any lingering psychological or emotional concerns associated with participating in the investigation

Explaining the benefits Explaining the benefits of participation to subjects

Thanking subjects Thanking subjects and providing for future contact or referral if necessary

the “subjects” versus “participants” controversy

avoiding “isms” in research; sexism, racism, ethnocentrism, ageism, etc.

ethics of withholding treatment from control groups