1. Ethical considerations in research Dr Emile van der Zee University of Lincoln

2. Overview Why bother with Research Ethics? Tension between Research and Ethics Where do we get our Ethical Guidance from? Ethical Theories Ethical Principles Ethical Codes Implementing the codes Procedures for your programme? What about you / me?

3. Why bother with Research Ethics? Why should we be interested in ethics?

4. Tension between research and ethics Get results quickly Fabricate / PlagiariseDisregard (original) evidence (at any costs) Get interesting results Coerce / -ConsentDisregard participants / researchers (at any costs) Diederik Stapel Marc Hauser Joseph Mengele Twin experiments

5. Tension between research and ethics Publish quickly information pollutionDisregard Science & Society (at any costs) http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/

6. Where do we get our Ethical Guidance from? Our own intuitions (!) Ethical Theories / Principles Professional Codes; BPS, APA, NHS, etc. University Department Environmental factors

7. Ethical Theories Aristotelian Ethics: lead a virtuous life / do good. Deontology (Kant): acts are right if they could be a universal law. Do as you would be done by; never lie.

8. Ethical Theories Utilitarianism (Bentham): maximise benefits and reduce harm. The greatest good for the greatest number. Theory of Justice (Rawls): each person has equal rights to basic liberties, such as free speech. Fairness.

9. Ethical Principles Beauchamp and Childress (2008) four ‘prima facie’ moral principles when doing (biomedical) research: Autonomy: capacity to self-govern / personal wishes Beneficence: maximise benefits for those involved Non-maleficence: minimise potential harm Justice: distribute benefits, risks and costs fairly, treat everyone the same, and be aware of power differential

10. Ethical Codes The relevant parties in a research project? Autonomy: -Participant information (give / take) -Consent -Data withdrawal (limits specified) -Protecting those with diminished autonomy (children, those mentally / physically incapacitated) Beneficence: -Does participant / science / society benefit?

11. Ethical Codes Non-maleficance: -Care (deception, stress, etc.) -After-care -Confidentiality (≠ anonymity) -Legal issues (who is liable, who has intellectual property rights, etc.) Justice: -Data storage (7 years) -Debrief -Rewards for participation

12. Implementing the codes A Case Imagine that you aim to investigate the relation between psychopathic traits and violent behaviour in sex offenders. For that purpose you carry out a qualitative study which involves interviewing offenders in a secure setting who receive therapy, as well as their therapists. What issues should be addressed in judging the ethical soundness of this research project?

13. Implementing the codes clarity of research design, method and responsibility scientific context, including appropriate referencing issues relating to writing (spelling, sentence structure, etc) ethical issues identified mechanisms used to address the issues necessary accompanying documents (letters, consent, debrief, etc)

14. Procedures for your programme? University Ethical Guidelines Professional Guidelines IRAS approval See http://www.lincoln.ac.uk/psychology/Ethics.htm for exampleshttp://www.lincoln.ac.uk/psychology/Ethics.htm

15. What about you / me? Survey of graduate students from 40 training programs in clinical psychology (Mearns & Allen, 1991): 49% were aware of unethical behaviors by peers only 42% confronted peers behaving unethically Question; where do you go to report ethical violations?

16. What about you / me? Survey of counseling and clinical psychology training directors from 75 APA-accredited programmes (Fly, et al 1997): 89 ethical transgressions by students confidentiality (25%), professional boundaries (20%), plagiarism (15%) 54% of students committing ethical violations had taken an ethics course Changing attitude ≠ changing behaviour

17. Questions?

18. References Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 4, 814-834. http://www.mc.edu/campus/users/sbaldwin/emotional%20dog%20rational%20tail.pdf http://www.mc.edu/campus/users/sbaldwin/emotional%20dog%20rational%20tail.pdf Hauser, M. (2006). Moral Minds: How Nature Designed Our Universal Sense of Right and Wrong. New York: Harper Collins Publishers. Hauser, M., Young, L. & Cushman, F. (2008). Reviving Rawls’ Linguistic Analogy; Operative principles and the causal structure of moral actions. In Walter Sinnott-Armstrong (Ed), Moral Psychology; The Cognitive Science of Morality: Intuition and Diversity (pp 107-143). Cambridge, US: The MIT Press. http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~mnkylab/publications/recent/ReviveRawslChpt.pdf http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~mnkylab/publications/recent/ReviveRawslChpt.pdf Kohlberg, L. (1984). Essays on Moral Development. Volume II; The Psychology of Moral Development. San Francisco: Harper and Row, Publishers. Lee, S. W. S. & Schwartz, N. (2011). Wiping the Slate Clean: Psychological Consequences of Physical Cleansing. Current Directions in Psychological Science 20(5) 307–311. Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgment of the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd. http://www.lincoln.ac.uk/psychology/Ethics.htm