Research Methedology

Deception in Research

ETHICS in RESEARCH

Ethical issues in research are particularly important when considered in the light of academic directions such as the medical and psychological professions. The importance of ethics is connected with test subjects, who are generally human, particularly in psychology research. There are various actions that are considered necessary and ethical when involving human beings in research.

One of these is full disclosure of the nature of the study, as well as the risks involved in taking part in the research. The sensitivity of data gathered regarding individuals is also important. Information such as the health status of the individual is sometimes of such a nature that participants would prefer to remain anonymous. Researchers should therefore maintain sensitivity to these issues and towards the wishes of participants. It should also be kept in mind that the integrity of the study should be maintained as far as possible, even while complying with the ethical requirements of the participants involved.

II. RISK/BENEFIT RATIO

In the past, researchers have at times found it more beneficial in terms of data integrity to employ unethical practices in terms of disclosure to test subjects. To encourage human beings to take part in research for example, some information regarding the potential risks of the research would not be disclosed.

Currently, however, atrocities such as syphilis research among black population groups during the early part of the 20th century has incurred such outrage that deceptive practices are almost universally condemned. This condemnation is regardless of the potential benefits of research for the greater good of humanity. Indeed, even animal testing has been largely condemned and eliminated as a result.

Ethical concepts have seen a large amount of evolution over the past century, and researchers are now required to follow strict rules. The full risk/benefit ratio is required to be revealed to all participants in a study. It is also required that their full understanding of this ratio be ensured before allowing them to participate in the study. In some cases with significant risks to the test subject, participants may even need to sign a release form that would protect the establishments from law suits and the like.

Today, the social ideals of equality and respect for all members of society has infiltrate research ethics to such a degree that a researcher can no longer consider the risk/benefit ratio only in terms of the research itself. The humanity of the participants, as well as their concomitant rights, need to play a significant role before research can be conducted.

According to Purdue University (2009), deception in psychological research is only acceptable in the rarest of cases, where the study's scientific, educational or applied value clearly stipulate the need for such deception. If any form of deception is considered to be necessary, such deception should be disclosed as early as possible within the study. If participants then feel that they need to withdraw data so acquired, such requirements should be honored.

The APA code of ethics further states that research participants are never to be deceived even if the study benefits outweigh the risks, should there be a likelihood that disclosure would affect their willingness to participated. Physical or emotional risks are for example always to be disclosed fully so that participants can make their own decisions of whether to take part in the study or not.

The risk/benefit ratio has therefore shifted from the researcher to the participant. It is now the responsibility of the researcher to fully disclose all the risks of the study, while participants must take the responsibility of deciding whether the personal risks do or do not outweigh the benefits of their participation in the study. Benefits could for example include the participants' perception of the benefits of the study result to humanity as a whole. Benefits could also be perceived on a more individual level, in that participants receive financial compensation for their involvement in the study.

III. DECEPTION in RESEARCH

Laura Stark (2005, p. 2) recognizes that there has been tension in psychology research between the moral abhorrence associated with deception in research, and the perception of its necessity. According to Stark (p. 3), the federal government realized the necessity of regulation in terms of deception in psychological research. This realization brought about the National Research Act of 1973, according to which certain guidelines and regulations were established to take into account the rights of human subjects in research. In the same year, researchers were also provided with the right to not fully disclose the details of research if this were considered to be necessary.

Stark (p. 10) notes that the main reasons for deception in psychological research during the 1950s and 1960s related to the validity of research in terms of human subjects in a "natural" setting. The setting was considered to be more natural if subjects did not receive full disclosure related to the nature of the study. In such cases, a degree of deception was therefore considered to be acceptable.

A further complication that Stark (p. 15) notes is the fact that there are divergent ideas on what the term deception in fact refers to, and to which degree such practices can be considered acceptable. The Purdue University (2009) for example makes a distinction between deception and concealment. Concealment is defined as non-disclosure of all the details of the research for the purpose of preserving the validity of the results, whereas deception is taken to mean that participants receive information that is deliberately untrue. According to Stark, however, the two terms are merely deception in different degrees.

Stark (2005, p. 19) concludes that the ethics and deception concepts in psychological research are still very much in contention. However, the extreme focus on human rights and autonomy today has evolved greatly since the 1970s, which is the focus of Stark's paper. Indeed, the moral abhorrence connected with the practice has largely grown to outweigh any perceptions to its necessity. Indeed, Stark also notes that not all psychological professionals feel that deception has significantly contributed to the body of psychological research to the degree that it could be justified.