Ethics in Research
Based out of texts by Neuman and Babbie
NOBODY STARTS OUT INTENDING TO VIOLATE ETHICAL CODES
Ethics of Omission – the parts of science done wrongly
Research as Pressure Cooker
1. Research2. Publish3. Prestige4. ????5. Profit!
Scientific Misconduct• Unintentional
(Misfeasance)– Sloppy work– Careless mistakes– Rushed quality control
• Intentional (Malfeasance)– Falsification– Fabrication– Misrepresentation– Plagiarism
• Don’t ruin it for the rest of us!
• Climate research controversy, England
Trust in you
Power over them
Big Questions
• Are we ever justified in risking harm or injury to participants?
Basic Principles
• No unnecessary harm• No irreversible harm• Consent:– Prior– Informed– Voluntary
• Never release data• Small compensation if any
Kinds of Harm: Physical
• Medical research
• Even some social research!
Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments
• 1929 (pre-penicillin) – 1972
• Advanced cases left untreated
• Presidential apology 1992
US Govt. Experiments
• Late 1940s – radionuclide injections• 1950s - Fallout effects on Kodak film(!)• 1960s - LSD injections
Kinds of Harm: Psychological
• Stress, self-esteem, ethics, coercion
• E.g.: POGO off-trail make out session
• The most subtle: even survey question range effects!– E.g., Salary questions
Zimbardo (Stanford) Prison Experiment• 1970s, 2 week
setup• De-individualized
prisoners vs. guards
• Basement prison• Breakdown within
36 hours• 6 days,
termination
Milgram Experiments• How did the Nazis get so
evil? 1960s
• Rigged randomization/setup– Conspirator in chair– Subject at dial– Conspirator with subject,
commanding
• Extreme emotional duress
Deception
• Never preferred• Used to ensure validity for sensitive tests• Socially acceptable response bias• Washington State shooting tragedy (1973)
• Covert observation– Public vs. private
Kinds of Harm: Legal
• Illegal behaviors
• Subpoena
• DOJ waivers
Tearoom Trade, 1970
• Laud Humphreys• Public restrooms in parks• Homosexual encounters• Watchqueen• License plates• Police & public records• Health survey
Anonymity vs. Confidentiality
• Privacy: any privileged information
• Anonymity: name stripped from data– A myth these days
• Confidentiality: identifying info stripped, data access is privileged– How you protect personal information
Why Confidentiality Matters
• FBI vs. Kinsey sex study
• You may find yourself in [contempt of] court
Who Has What Personal Information
• Facebook– Name– Family– Location– Education– Political stance
How Ethics Review Protects You
Research team Peers Committee HSC IRB OMB, DHHS, NIH
Human Subjects Committee
• Advancing knowledge vs. noninterference
• Burden hours
• Specific contact protocol
Blowing the Whistle
• Applied research is usually sponsored• Forced findings, limits on methods,
suppressed findings, concealed sponsor
• Communicate clearly and early• Be sure you’re right• Understand the cost• Follow through
Getting Help
• Colleagues• Ethics review boards• Professional organization guidelines• Ombudsman
• Not the press
TOUGH DECISIONS YOU MAY FACEEthics of commission – doing science rightly for society
Limits to Your Time
• You have limited time for research
• Answer some questions
• Others go unanswered
• The question selection is on ethical basis
You Will Be Asked to Take Sides
• Your research will be used, beyond your control
• Refusing to take a position is still taking one– Status quo
• Managers often want a “button to push” from you, the expert
Questions Posed to Researchers
• How much dioxin is acceptable in breast milk?
• How much heavy metal ash can be released by this incinerator without raising the cancer risk by more than 1:10,000?
• How much grizzly habitat can be removed without harming the local grizzly population?
O’Brien (1993) BioScience 43(10)
Answering vs. Changing The Question
• Risk assessment– Serum dioxin concentration risk
• Alternatives assessment– Alternatives to dioxin-producing processes
• Tricky: funded for risk assessment, advocating for alternative assessment, data examine risk
O’Brien (1993) BioScience 43(10)
Objectivity =/= Passivity
• Almost no one on the planet is more of an expert than you on your specific research
• Work with a public interest group• Do relevant projects• Serve on task forces and committees
O’Brien (1993) BioScience 43(10)