Ethics in Experimental Research

1. Ethics in Experimental Research Showing concern for the welfare of human subjects

2. Horror Stories • 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 with lax standards (2004) • U.S. energy Dept. and radiation tests on civilians (1970’s) • LSD and the CIA’s MK Ultra program (1973)

3. Radioactive oatmeal! • 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

4. The atomic veterans • 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

5. Wendell Johnson’s diagnosogenic theory of stuttering • “The 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.

6. Cloning Fraud • 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.

7. Outsourcing clinical trials • 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

8. Ethical matrix for social science research

9. Belmont report • Autonomy: • Free-choice, no pressure to participate, • consideration of “at risk” groups or individuals persons with diminished autonomy • Beneficence: • “do no harm,” ensure the well-being of participants • Justice: • fair distribution of risks and benefits of research • subject recruitment, selection • subject compensation

10. How common is research misconduct? • “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

11. Fraud in scientific research • 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

12. No harm to the participants • minimizing psychological risks • Example: simulations that accentuate racist, sexist, or homophobic attitudes • minimizing physical risks • Example: behavioral psychologists’ penchant for shocking subjects in the 60’s and 70’s • showing concern for the welfare of participants • Example: Stanley Milgram’s conformity research

13. Voluntary informed consent • Before conducting any research using human participants, a participant’s voluntary informed consent must first be obtained: • Voluntary: the subject willingly agrees to participate in the study, and is free to withdraw at any time without penalty • Informed: the subject is aware of any risks (physical or psychological) associated with participating • Consent: the subject’s consent is unambiguous, e.g., a signed permission form (no such things as “implied consent”)

14. Exceptions to the consent requirement Low-risk anonymous surve Observations gathered in public places Information in the public domain

15. Failure to obtain informed consent • 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

16. Deception and the use of cover stories • 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

17. Privacy concerns • Humphrey’s (1970) “tea room” trade research • Personnel action—failure to ensure anonymity • Incest case—failure to remove identifying information

18. Privacy concerns • Anonymity: no one including the experimenter can match the data to specific individuals • Confidentiality: the experimenter knows participants’ identities but takes steps to protect participant’s privacy.

19. Standards governing social science research • 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

20. Debriefing participants • Dehoaxing: • undoing the cover story and revealing the true purpose of the investigation • Desensitizing: • addressing any lingering psychological or emotional concerns associated with participating in the investigation • Explaining the benefits of participation to subjects • Thanking subjects and providing for future contact if necessary

21. Treating participants with respect and dignity • the “subjects” versus “participants” controversy • avoiding “isms” in research; sexism, racism, ethnocentrism, ageism, etc. • ethics of withholding treatment from control groups