Loading...

Messages

Proposals

Stuck in your homework and missing deadline? Get urgent help in $10/Page with 24 hours deadline

Get Urgent Writing Help In Your Essays, Assignments, Homeworks, Dissertation, Thesis Or Coursework & Achieve A+ Grades.

Privacy Guaranteed - 100% Plagiarism Free Writing - Free Turnitin Report - Professional And Experienced Writers - 24/7 Online Support

Cost benefit analysis of milgram study

31/12/2020 Client: saad24vbs Deadline: 10 Days

ETHICS IN BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH CHP. 3


LEARNING OBJECTIVES


· Summarize Milgram's obedience experiment.


· Discuss the three ethical principles outlined in the Belmont Report: beneficence, autonomy, and justice.


· Define deception and discuss the ethical issues surrounding its use in research.


· List the information contained in an informed consent form.


· Discuss potential problems in obtaining informed consent.


· Describe the purpose of debriefing research participants.


· Describe the function of an Institutional Review Board.


· Contrast the categories of risk involved in research activities: exempt, minimal risk, and greater than minimal risk.


· Summarize the ethical principles in the APA Ethics Code concerning research with human participants.


· Summarize the ethical issues concerning research with nonhuman animals.


· Discuss how potential risks and benefits of research are evaluated.


· Discuss the ethical issue surrounding misrepresentation of research findings.


· Define plagiarism and describe how to avoid plagiarism.


Page 44ETHICAL PRACTICE IS FUNDAMENTAL TO THE CONCEPTUALIZATION, PLANNING, EXECUTION, AND EVALUATION OF RESEARCH. Researchers who do not consider the ethical implications of their projects risk harming individuals, communities, and behavioral science. This chapter provides an historical overview of ethics in behavioral research, reviews core ethical principles for researchers, describes relevant institutional structures that protect research participants, and concludes with a discussion of what it means to be an ethical researcher.


MILGRAM'S OBEDIENCE EXPERIMENT


Stanley Milgram conducted a series of studies (1963, 1964, 1965) to study obedience to authority. He placed an ad in the local newspaper in New Haven, Connecticut, offering a small stipend to men to participate in a “scientific study of memory and learning” being conducted at Yale University. The volunteers reported to Milgram's laboratory at Yale, where they met a scientist dressed in a white lab coat and another volunteer in the study, a middle-aged man named “Mr. Wallace.” Mr. Wallace was actually a confederate (i.e., accomplice) of the experimenter, but the participants did not know this. The scientist explained that the study would examine the effects of punishment on learning. One person would be a “teacher” who would administer the punishment, and the other would be the “learner.” Mr. Wallace and the volunteer participant then drew slips of paper to determine who would be the teacher and who would be the learner. The drawing was rigged, however—Mr. Wallace was always the learner and the volunteer was always the teacher.


The scientist attached electrodes to Mr. Wallace and placed the teacher in front of an impressive-looking shock machine. The shock machine had a series of levers that, the individual was told, when pressed would deliver shocks to Mr. Wallace. The first lever was labeled 15 volts, the second 30 volts, the third 45 volts, and so on up to 450 volts. The levers were also labeled “Slight Shock,” “Moderate Shock,” and so on up to “Danger: Severe Shock,” followed by red X's above 400 volts.


Mr. Wallace was instructed to learn a series of word pairs. Then he was given a test to see if he could identify which words went together. Every time Mr. Wallace made a mistake, the teacher was to deliver a shock as punishment. The first mistake was supposed to be answered by a 15-volt shock, the second by a 30-volt shock, and so on. Each time a mistake was made, the learner received a greater shock. The learner, Mr. Wallace, never actually received any shocks, but the participants in the study did not know that. In the experiment, Mr. Wallace made mistake after mistake. When the teacher “shocked” him with about 120 volts, Mr. Wallace began screaming in pain and eventually yelled that he wanted out. What if the teacher wanted to quit? This happened—the volunteer participants became visibly upset by the pain that Mr. Wallace seemed to be experiencing. The experimenter told the teacher that he could Page 45quit but urged him to continue, using a series of verbal prods that stressed the importance of continuing the experiment.


The study purportedly was to be an experiment on memory and learning, but Milgram really was interested in learning whether participants would continue to obey the experimenter by administering ever higher levels of shock to the learner. What happened? Approximately 65% of the participants continued to deliver shocks all the way to 450 volts.


Milgram went on to conduct several variations on this basic procedure with 856 subjects. The study received a great deal of publicity, and the results challenged many of our beliefs about our ability to resist authority. The Milgram study is important, and the results have implications for understanding obedience in real-life situations, such as the Holocaust in Nazi Germany and the Jonestown mass suicide (see Miller, 1986).


But the Milgram study is also an important example of ethics in behavioral research. How should we make decisions about whether the Milgram study or any other study is ethical? The Milgram study was one of many that played an important role in the development of ethical standards that guide our ethical decision making.


What do you think? Should the obedience study have been allowed? Were the potential risks to Milgram's participants worth the knowledge gained by the outcomes? If you were a participant in the study, would you feel okay with having been deceived into thinking that you had harmed someone? What if it was a younger sibling? Or an elderly grandparent? Would that make a difference? Why or why not?


In this chapter, we work through some of these issues, and more. First, let us turn to an overview of the history of our current standards to help frame your understanding of ethics in research.


HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF CURRENT ETHICAL STANDARDS


Before we can delve into current ethical standards, it is useful to briefly talk about the origin of ethics codes related to behavioral research. Generally speaking, modern codes of ethics in behavioral and medical research have their origins in three important documents.


The Nuremberg Code and Declaration of Helsinki


Following World War II, the Nuremberg Trials were held to hear evidence against the Nazi doctors and scientists who had committed atrocities while forcing concentration camp inmates to be research subjects. The legal document that resulted from the trials contained what became known as the Nuremberg Code: a set of 10 rules of research conduct that would help prevent future research atrocities (see http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/archive/nurcode.html).


Page 46The Nuremberg Code was a set of principles without any enforcement structure or endorsement by professional organizations. Moreover, it was rooted in the context of the Nazi experience and not generally seen as applicable to general research settings. Consequently, the World Medical Association developed a code that is known as the Declaration of Helsinki. This 1964 document is a broader application of the Nuremberg that was produced by the medical community and included a requirement that journal editors ensure that published research conform to the principles of the Declaration.


The Nuremberg Code and the Helsinki Declaration did not explicitly address behavioral research and were generally seen as applicable to medicine. In addition, by the early 1970s, news about numerous ethically questionable studies forced the scientific community to search for a better approach to protect human research subjects. Behavioral scientists were debating the ethics of the Milgram studies and the world was learning about the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, in which 399 African American men in Alabama were not treated for syphilis in order to track the long-term effects of this disease (Reverby, 2000). This study, supported by the U.S. Public Health Service, took place from 1932 to 1972, when the details of the study were made public by journalists investigating the study. The outrage over the fact that this study was done at all and that the subjects were African Americans spurred scientists to overhaul ethical regulations in both medical and behavioral research. The fact that the Tuskegee study was not an isolated incident was brought to light in 2010 when documentation of another syphilis study done from 1946 to 1948 in Guatemala was discovered (Reverby, 2011). Men and women in this study were infected with syphilis and then treated with penicillin. Reverby describes the study in detail and focuses on one doctor who was involved in both the Guatemala and Tuskegee studies.


As a result of new public demand for action, a committee was formed that eventually produced the Belmont Report . Current ethical guidelines for both behavioral and medical researchers have their origins in The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research (National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, 1979). This report defined the principles and applications that have guided more detailed regulations developed by the American Psychological Association and other professional societies and U.S. federal regulations that apply to both medical and behavioral research investigations.


The three basic ethical principles of the Belmont Report are:


· Beneficence—research should confer benefits and risks must be minimal. The associated application is the necessity to conduct a risk-benefit analysis.


· Respect for persons (autonomy)—participants are treated as autonomous; they are capable of making deliberate decisions about whether to participate in research. The associated application is informed Page 47consent—potential participants in a research project should be provided with all information that might influence their decision on whether to participate.


· Justice—there must be fairness in receiving the benefits of research as well as bearing the burdens of accepting risks. This principle is applied in the selection of subjects for research.


APA ETHICS CODE


The American Psychological Association (APA) has provided leadership in formulating ethical principles and standards. The Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct—known as the APA Ethics Code —is amended periodically with the current version always available online at http://apa.org/ethics/code. The Ethics Code applies to psychologists in their many roles including teachers, researchers, and practitioners. We have included the sections relevant to research in Appendix B.


APA Ethics Code: Five Principles


The APA Ethics Code includes five general ethical principles: beneficence and nonmaleficence, fidelity and responsibility, integrity, justice, and respect for rights and responsibilities. Next, we will discuss the ways that these principles relate to research practice.


Principle A: Beneficence and Nonmaleficence As in the Belmont Report, the principle of Beneficence refers to the need for research to maximize benefits and minimize any possible harmful effects of participation. The Ethics Code specifically states: “Psychologists strive to benefit those with whom they work and take care to do no harm. In their professional actions, psychologists seek to safeguard the welfare and rights of those with whom they interact professionally and other affected persons and the welfare of animal subjects of research.”


Principle B: Fidelity and Responsibility The principle of Fidelity and Responsibility states: “Psychologists establish relationships of trust with those with whom they work. They are aware of their professional and scientific responsibilities to society and to the specific communities in which they work.” For researchers, such trust is primarily applicable to relationships with research participants.


Researchers make several implicit contracts with participants during the course of a study. For example, if participants agree to be present for a study at a specific time, the researcher should also be there. If researchers promise to send a summary of the results to participants, they should do so. If participants are to receive course credit for participation, the researcher must immediately let the instructor know that the person took part in the study. These may seem Page 48to be little details, but they are very important in maintaining trust between participants and researchers.


Principle C: Integrity The principle of Integrity states: “Psychologists seek to promote accuracy, honesty and truthfulness in the science, teaching and practice of psychology. In these activities psychologists do not steal, cheat or engage in fraud, subterfuge or intentional misrepresentation of fact.” Later in this chapter, we will cover the topic of integrity in the context of being an ethical researcher.


Principle D: Justice As in the Belmont Report, the principle of Justice refers to fairness and equity. Principle D states: “Psychologists recognize that fairness and justice entitle all persons to access to and benefit from the contributions of psychology and to equal quality in the processes, procedures and services being conducted by psychologists.”


Consider the Tuskegee Syphilis study, or the similar study conducted in Guatemala. In both cases there was a cure for syphilis (i.e., penicillin) that was withheld from participants. This is a violation of principle D of the APA Ethics Code and a violation of the Belmont Report's principle of Justice.


Principle E: Respect for People's Rights and Dignity The last of the five APA ethical principles builds upon the Belmont Report principle of Respect for Persons. It states: “Psychologists respect the dignity and worth of all people, and the rights of individuals to privacy, confidentiality, and self-determination. Psychologists are aware that special safeguards may be necessary to protect the rights and welfare of persons or communities whose vulnerabilities impair autonomous decision making. Psychologists are aware of and respect cultural, individual, and role differences, including those based on age, gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, and socioeconomic status, and consider these factors when working with members of such groups. Psychologists try to eliminate the effect on their work of biases based on those factors, and they do not knowingly participate in or condone activities of others based upon such prejudices.”


One of the ethical dilemmas in the Milgram obedience study was the fact that participants did not know that they were participating in a study of obedience. This limited participants’ rights to self-determination. Later, we will explore this issue in depth.


Protecting Research Subjects


The preamble to the APA Ethics Code states: “Psychologists are committed to increasing scientific and professional knowledge of behavior and people's understanding of themselves and others and to the use of such knowledge to improve the condition of individuals, organizations and society.” By internalizing and adhering to ethical principles we support and nurture a healthy science. Page 49With this in mind, we will consider the ways in which research subjects—humans and animals—are protected in behavioral research.


ASSESSMENT OF RISKS AND BENEFITS


The principle of beneficence leads us to examine potential risks and benefits that are likely to result from the research; this is called a risk-benefit analysis. Ethical principles require asking whether the research procedures have minimized risk to participants.


The potential risks to the participants include such factors as psychological or physical harm and loss of confidentiality; we will discuss these in detail. In addition, the cost of notconducting the study if in fact the proposed procedure is the only way to collect potentially valuable data can be considered (cf. Christensen, 1988). The benefits include direct benefits to the participants, such as an educational benefit, acquisition of a new skill, or treatment for a psychological or medical problem. There may also be material benefits such as a monetary payment, some sort of gift, or even the possibility of winning a prize in a raffle. Other less tangible benefits include the satisfaction gained through being part of a scientific investigation and the potential beneficial applications of the research findings (e.g., the knowledge gained through the research might improve future educational practices, psychotherapy, or social policy). As we will see, current regulations concerning the conduct of research with human participants require a risk-benefit analysis before research can be approved.


Risks in Behavioral Research


Let's return to a consideration of Milgram's research. The risk of experiencing stress and psychological harm is obvious. It is not difficult to imagine the effect of delivering intense shocks to an obviously unwilling learner. A film that Milgram made shows participants protesting, sweating, and even laughing nervously while delivering the shocks. You might ask whether subjecting people to such a stressful experiment is justified, and you might wonder whether the experience had any long-range consequences for the volunteers. For example, did participants who obeyed the experimenter feel continuing remorse or begin to see themselves as cruel, inhumane people? Let's consider some common risks in behavioral research.


Physical harm Procedures that could conceivably cause some physical harm to participants are rare but possible. Many medical procedures fall into this category, for example, administering a drug such as alcohol or caffeine. Other studies might expose subjects to physical stressors such as loud noise, extreme hot or cold temperatures, or deprivation of sleep for an extended period of. The risks in such procedures require that great care be taken to make them ethically acceptable. Moreover, there would need to be clear benefits of the research that would outweigh the potential risks.


Page 50Stress More common than physical stress is psychological stress. The participants in the Milgram study were exposed to a high level of stress; they believed that they were delivering fatal doses of electricity to another person. Milgram described one of his participants:


While continuing to read the word pairs with a show of outward strength, she mutters in a tone of helplessness to the experimenter, “Must I go on? Oh, I'm worried about him. Are we going all the way up there (pointing to the higher end of the generator)? Can't we stop? I'm shaking. I'm shaking. Do I have to go up there?”


She regains her composure temporarily but then cannot prevent periodic outbursts of distress (Milgram, 1974, p. 80).


There are other examples. For instance, participants might be told that they will receive some extremely intense electric shocks. They never actually receive the shocks; it is the fear or anxiety during the waiting period that is the variable of interest. Research by Schachter (1959) employing a procedure like this showed that the anxiety produced a desire to affiliate with others during the waiting period.

Homework is Completed By:

Writer Writer Name Amount Client Comments & Rating
Instant Homework Helper

ONLINE

Instant Homework Helper

$36

She helped me in last minute in a very reasonable price. She is a lifesaver, I got A+ grade in my homework, I will surely hire her again for my next assignments, Thumbs Up!

Order & Get This Solution Within 3 Hours in $25/Page

Custom Original Solution And Get A+ Grades

  • 100% Plagiarism Free
  • Proper APA/MLA/Harvard Referencing
  • Delivery in 3 Hours After Placing Order
  • Free Turnitin Report
  • Unlimited Revisions
  • Privacy Guaranteed

Order & Get This Solution Within 6 Hours in $20/Page

Custom Original Solution And Get A+ Grades

  • 100% Plagiarism Free
  • Proper APA/MLA/Harvard Referencing
  • Delivery in 6 Hours After Placing Order
  • Free Turnitin Report
  • Unlimited Revisions
  • Privacy Guaranteed

Order & Get This Solution Within 12 Hours in $15/Page

Custom Original Solution And Get A+ Grades

  • 100% Plagiarism Free
  • Proper APA/MLA/Harvard Referencing
  • Delivery in 12 Hours After Placing Order
  • Free Turnitin Report
  • Unlimited Revisions
  • Privacy Guaranteed

6 writers have sent their proposals to do this homework:

University Coursework Help
Helping Hand
Top Essay Tutor
Writer Writer Name Offer Chat
University Coursework Help

ONLINE

University Coursework Help

Hi dear, I am ready to do your homework in a reasonable price.

$112 Chat With Writer
Helping Hand

ONLINE

Helping Hand

I am an Academic writer with 10 years of experience. As an Academic writer, my aim is to generate unique content without Plagiarism as per the client’s requirements.

$110 Chat With Writer
Top Essay Tutor

ONLINE

Top Essay Tutor

I have more than 12 years of experience in managing online classes, exams, and quizzes on different websites like; Connect, McGraw-Hill, and Blackboard. I always provide a guarantee to my clients for their grades.

$115 Chat With Writer

Let our expert academic writers to help you in achieving a+ grades in your homework, assignment, quiz or exam.

Similar Homework Questions

Mje350 transistor datasheet pdf - What type of company would use a process costing system - Express complex number in exponential form - Thursford christmas spectacular seating plan - Cp 1 cp tester course manual - Discussion 1 - Great expectations chapter summary - Math - HR_STR (U4_4) - Medway messenger youth league - Wade davis ted talk endangered cultures - Case Study / 3 pages for word part / need it within 20 hours - Out of the easy quotes - Information deficiency problems in business - Words with vowel diphthongs - Lab computer science - The total standard cost to produce one unit of product is shown - Monster streamline 100 thx subwoofer - Nutrition case study assignment - Www chiefeducationalofficer in ariyalur - Electric field due to non conducting sheet - Models for writers twelfth edition pdf - 56 redbanks road willaston - Use link to answer questions - Resolving disputes and managing risk - Post hole borer hire travis perkins - Gf - Advocate role in social work - What is span rating for plywood - Crosswind component rule of thumb - Hp rack system e - Dwight grabs jim's junk bloopers - Flames and dangling wire date - Harry potter lesson plan pdf - Gottfredson's theory of circumscription compromise and self creation - Benefits as well as the challenges associated with Big Data Analytics for Manufacturing Internet of Things. - My thought whose murder yet is but fantastical meaning - Product stewardship televisions and computers regulations 2011 - Basic coordinates and seasons student guide answer key - Sixteen year old brenda questions her parents values - Due Sunday by 1 pm - Marketing communications a european perspective 6th edition pdf - Using superposition find vo in the circuit - Data modelling and analysis - ISBN-13: 978-0-13-413042-2 ISBN-10: 0-13-413042-1 9 780134 130422 9 0 0 0 0 OPER ATIONS MANAGEMENT Sustainability and Supply Chain Management TWELFTH EDITION O PER A T IO N S M A N A G E M E N T Su stain ability an d Su p ply C h ain M an agem en t TWELFTH EDITION JAY HEIZER | BARRY RENDER | CHUCK MUNSON HEIZER RENDER MUNSON www.pearsonhighered.com IMPROVING RESULTS A proven way to help individual students achieve the goals that educators set for their course. ENGAGING EXPERIENCES Dynamic, engaging experiences that personalize and activate learning for each student. AN EXPERIENCED PARTNER From Pearson, a long-term partner with a true grasp of the subject, excellent content, and an eye on the future of education. Pearson’s MyLab™ O P E R A T I O N S MANAGEMENT Sustainability and Supply Chain Management A01_HEIZ0422_12_SE_FM.indd iA01_HEIZ0422_12_SE_FM.indd i 29/12/15 4:08 pm29/12/15 4:08 pm 561590_MILL_MICRO_FM_ppi-xxvi.indd 2 24/11/14 5:26 PM This page - Spine stretch pilates exercise - Which of the following denotes a short catchy melodic gesture - Week 4 discussion - Shoe size and height correlation chart - David wecker heating and air conditioning - Dq - Red red red resistor value - Discussion - Skepticism most closely falls under which branch of ethical theory? - Bosch hot water 10p - Drs hotels pty ltd adelaide - Properties and reactions of acids and bases lab report - Research utilization - Hadley inc makes a line of bathroom accessories - 5 types of imagery - Kristen's cookie company case answers - Evaporation and intermolecular forces - Www.police clearance online fiji - Healthcare reimbursement - Oracle edi 850 inbound - Meg and mog age range - Force and motion unit - Economic - American dental association symbol - The adjusting entry required to record accrued expenses includes - Talbot enterprises recently reported an ebitda - Excel 2016 capstone project ex 3 working with sales data - Myitlab answers excel chapter 2 - 15 5 mastery problem accounting answers - How cultures affect team management ppt - (ROK) WEEK 7 HOMEWORK FIN100 - Describe the importance of effective communication in the correctional setting - International Letter - Types of pulse modulation - C++ I programming - Demonstrates outstanding ability to compare and develop highly functional and valuable performance tools/measures/practices and overall performance management system for the organisational case. - Accounting discussion question - Hotkey net au email settings - Watts to db formula - Polling exercise psy 225 - Angthong universal co ltd - Is epsom salt a hydrated crystal - What are gregor's future plans - Review of Article - Woodley surgery crockhamwell road - Functionalism in psychology ppt - Humn 8660 - Igniting creativity to transform corporate culture - PHd Isaac Newton - First time seven lions piano sheet music - Institute of medicine report on advanced practice nursing - Common ions in water - Course of Study Impact - Three internal governance mechanisms - Benchmark – English Language Arts Unit Plan