Researchers Must Protect Participants And Be Aware Of Approv

Researchers Must Protect Participants And Be Aware Of Appropriate Meth

Researchers must protect participants and be aware of appropriate methods for obtaining information. What ethical considerations are important to research? In about 2 pages, write an analysis of the ethical concerns in the 3 diverse psychological research studies below. Be sure to include a paragraph of overall ethical consideration. This paper should be 2-3 pages in length and use APA formatting (cover page, paper body formatting, citations, and references: see Rasmussen's APA guide in the Resources tab, or by clicking here).

Prior to submitting your paper, be sure you proofread your work to check your spelling and grammar. If you use any outside sources, please cite those sources in APA citation format. Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. D. (2012). Contesting the 'nature' of conformity: What Milgram and Zimbardo's studies really show. PLoS Biology, 10(11). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001416

Larsen, K. S. (1974). Conformity in the Asch experiment. The Journal Of Social Psychology, 94(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1974.9923518

Shoda, Y., Mischel, W., Berman, M. G., Casey, B. J., Gotlib, I. H., Jonides, J., &... (2011). 'Willpower' over the life span: Decomposing self-regulation. Social Cognitive And Affective Neuroscience, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsq081

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

Ethical considerations in psychological research are paramount to safeguard participants and uphold the integrity of scientific inquiry. Ethical principles such as respect for persons, beneficence, and justice, derived from the Belmont Report, serve as foundational guidelines for conducting research responsibly. This paper analyzes three diverse psychological studies—Milgram’s obedience experiment, Asch’s conformity experiment, and the research by Shoda et al. on self-regulation—to identify the main ethical concerns associated with each and discuss overarching ethical principles applicable across these studies. Ensuring participant well-being and integrity in research methodologies remains critical in advancing psychological science ethically.

Ethical Concerns in Milgram’s Obedience Study

Milgram’s obedience experiment (1963) is notorious for its ethical controversies, primarily due to the psychological distress inflicted on participants. Participants believed they were administering painful electric shocks to another person, which caused significant emotional stress, anxiety, and guilt. The primary ethical concern was the issue of informed consent—participants were deceived about the true purpose of the study and the nature of the shocks they administered. According to the American Psychological Association (APA) Ethical Principles, researchers must obtain informed consent, informing participants of the nature and risks of the study unless deception is justified and does not cause harm. Milgram justified the deception by arguing it was necessary to preserve the study's integrity, but modern standards emphasize the importance of thorough debriefing and minimizing adverse effects (Haslam & Reicher, 2012).

Furthermore, the risk of psychological harm was significant, raising questions about beneficence—the obligation to maximize benefits and minimize harms. Although participants were debriefed post-study and reassured, the intense stress experienced during the experiment raised ethical alarms. Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) now rigorously scrutinize such studies to prevent undue harm, emphasizing the importance of balancing scientific value against participant safety.

Ethical Concerns in Asch’s Conformity Study

Solomon Asch’s conformity experiments (1951) involved assessing individuals' tendencies to conform to group pressure. While less physically invasive than Milgram’s study, ethical concerns still arise, particularly related to informed consent and psychological impact. Participants were often unaware that the experiment focused on conformity, which compromised elements of informed consent because their true role was obscured. The deception involved in masking the purpose of the study raises ethical issues but was deemed acceptable at the time due to the minimal physical risk involved.

Nonetheless, psychological risks exist when participants feel embarrassed, anxious, or pressured during the process. For example, individuals may experience feelings of social inadequacy or distress if their responses conflict with perceived group norms. Modern ethical standards dictate that researchers must ensure participants are aware of the general nature of the research and consider potential psychological impacts. The principles of respect for persons and beneficence suggest that researchers should minimize distress and provide thorough debriefings to clarify the deception and alleviate negative feelings post-participation (Larsen, 1974).

Ethical Concerns in Shoda et al.’s Self-Regulation Study

The research by Shoda et al. (2011) examined self-control and self-regulation over the lifespan, involving longitudinal and neuroscientific methods. While less overtly deceptive, this research raises unique ethical issues related to privacy, data security, and informed consent across multiple stages of participation. Participants’ cognitive and emotional data are sensitive, requiring stringent measures to protect confidentiality and prevent misuse.

Longitudinal studies often involve repeated assessments, potentially leading to fatigue or discomfort. Ethical considerations include ensuring ongoing consent, especially for participants who may develop cognitive or emotional vulnerabilities over time. Additionally, neuroscientific data collection, such as brain imaging, involves physical risks and privacy concerns regarding the handling and storage of sensitive information. Researchers must adhere to strict guidelines to protect participants’ rights, including transparent communication about data usage and secure data management practices (Shoda et al., 2011).

Moreover, beneficence extends to the provision of feedback or intervention if findings suggest psychological issues. Ensuring that participants benefit positively from their involvement aligns with ethical standards of justice and respect for persons. The complexity of contemporary research emphasizes the need for ongoing ethical oversight and adherence to institutional protocols.

Overall Ethical Consideration Across Studies

Across these studies, a common ethical principle is the obligation to protect participants from harm while advancing scientific knowledge. Deception, while sometimes justified by the scientific value, must be used judiciously and paired with thorough debriefing to mitigate adverse effects. Respect for autonomy requires fully informing participants about the nature of research and their rights, including the right to withdraw without penalty. Beneficence calls for minimizing risks—whether psychological, physical, or emotional—and ensuring that the potential benefits outweigh the harms.

Informed consent remains a cornerstone, but its application varies depending on study design. Ethical review boards play a critical role in evaluating whether deception or other ethically sensitive procedures are warranted and how risks can be minimized. The evolution from past ethically questionable studies to modern standards reflects a commitment to protecting participants, respecting their dignity, and maintaining public trust in psychological research.

Conclusion

The ethical concerns embedded within Milgram’s, Asch’s, and Shoda et al.’s studies highlight the importance of safeguarding participants’ well-being and upholding ethical standards. While scientific pursuit often necessitates some degree of deception or risk, contemporary ethical guidelines emphasize minimizing harm, ensuring informed consent, and providing thorough debriefings. These principles are essential for maintaining the integrity and credibility of psychological research, fostering an environment where scientific advancements do not come at the expense of participant rights and safety.

References

  • Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. D. (2012). Contesting the 'nature' of conformity: What Milgram and Zimbardo's studies really show. PLoS Biology, 10(11). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001416
  • Larsen, K. S. (1974). Conformity in the Asch experiment. The Journal Of Social Psychology, 94(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1974.9923518
  • Shoda, Y., Mischel, W., Berman, M. G., Casey, B. J., Gotlib, I. H., Jonides, J., &... (2011). 'Willpower' over the life span: Decomposing self-regulation. Social Cognitive And Affective Neuroscience, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsq081
  • American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. https://www.apa.org/ethics/code
  • Blass, T. (2004). The Milgram paradigm after 35 years: Some things we still don’t know. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(7), 465–490.
  • Zimbardo, P. G. (1973). The psychology of evil: The Stanford prison experiment. In J. M. Darley (Ed.), The psychology of evil. Basic Books.
  • Baumrind, D. (1964). Some thoughts on ethics of research: Ongoing controversies. American Psychologist, 19(6), 421–427.
  • Millgram, S. (1959). Some conditions of obedience and disobedience to authority. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59(1), 37–42.
  • Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2013). Social Cognition: From Brains to Culture. Sage Publications.
  • Rosenhan, D. L. (1973). On being sane in insane places. Science, 179(4070), 250–258.

Related Assignments