Risk-Free Because an Experiment Exposes Its Participants

¶ … risk-free because an experiment exposes its participants to a number of variables that can impact psychological or physical well-being. To determine if a given study is worth performing, scientists frequently conduct analyses to determine the risk/benefit ratio of a given area of research. Potential risks of research include exposure of the subjects to harmful substances or dangerous situations. For example, when testing a new drug, pharmaceutical researchers will be subjecting their test subjects to chemicals with potential side effects. In extreme cases, the detrimental effects of the chemical may be fatal, such as when a subject has unknown allergies to a given substance. Such issues will be taken into account when making a risk/benefit assessment. In other cases, the participants may be at risk for psychological harm from being exposed to highly stressful situations. For example, in a study on nightmares or on anger, the participants may experience high levels of stress. Participating in the experiment also exposes the participants to potential sources of shame or embarrassment; an experiment can leave indelible marks on the participants, which is why care should be taken to minimize risk and be completely honest with the participants about potential risks.

When the study closely mimics the experiences of everyday life, the research carries minimal risk. For example, if a study was designed to measure the impact on watching two or more hours of television per day, the research sample might include individuals who already watched two or more hours of television per day: because the parameters of the experiment did not alter the participants' behavior in any way, the risk is minimal.

Scientists should attempt to minimize risk in their experiments through ensuring anonymity, acquiring informed consent, and reducing the chances of physical or mental harm. If the parameters of the experiment inherently entail the participants being at risk, informed consent is necessary. The researcher can also alter the methods of an experiment to minimize risk, such as encoding a subject's responses to ensure confidentiality.

2. Online research carries unique risks and raises unique ethical issues. First, all information transmitted online is at risk for being spied on or stolen. A participant's name, address, phone number, and other personal information may be transmitted over insecure Internet connections. The participant may be compromising his or her anonymity in an online study and in some cases could become open to identity theft or to compromising his or her financial data.

Second, in an online study, the researcher is absent, which could compromise the integrity of the study itself. With the researcher absent, the participant is less likely to understand fully the implications of the study and its inherent risks. The participant might not understand the instructions for the study and may fill out forms incorrectly. The participant cannot ask questions of the researcher in the same way he or she could in person.

Third, the researcher may not be able to acquire adequate informed consent from the participants when conducting online research. The participant might not fully understand what the study entails or what risks it poses. The participants may be lying about key demographic information such as age and under-age children may be participating without the researcher's knowledge. The researcher cannot always provide as thorough of a debriefing when conducting studies online, and deception, either on the part of the researcher or on the part of the participant, is more likely under the anonymous and distant atmosphere of the online study.

3. Deciding what information is public and private can be difficult. Diener and Crandell (1978) identified three major parameters that can be used to determine whether information is public or private: the sensitivity of the information; the setting of the study; and the method of disseminating the information. Certain types of information are more sensitive than others. For example, sexuality is often a sensitive area, as is religion and some political beliefs. Common sense can help determine which information is sensitive and which is not, and the researchers should take care to take into consideration the participants' personal and cultural background when making such a judgment. Second, the setting of the study will also help determine the relative privacy of information. When a participant is in public, he or she willingly surrenders a certain degree of privacy. However, the line between public and private is not completely clear-cut. For example, when a person is in his or her car or in a public washroom, he or she expects a certain degree of privacy even though he or she is in public. Information that can be openly obtained from watching the participant in a public place can be reasonable considered public information, whereas information that was gained by observing the participant in a private setting or through private questionnaires should be considered more private in nature. Finally, the method of disseminating the information also has an impact on its relative public or private nature. For example, when information about an individual is disseminated using a system of encoding, then the participant's information is kept relatively private even if the information was sensitive. If sensitive information is collected anonymously and analyzed as a function of an entire group of people, then the information can also be kept private.

4. Deception is often necessary to conduct scientific research. Because the goal of psychological research is often to measure the participants' behavior under normal circumstances, the researcher cannot always divulge the true intention behind a given study. Because participants are likely to alter their behavior or responses to questions when aware of the intent of a study, researchers often cloak the true research hypothesis in order to obtain reliable results. The deception can be through omitting certain information or through committing, or deliberately misinforming the participants. The type of deception that is used to protect the integrity of an experiment is commonly used and is not considered to be a severe violation of ethical codes. However, when the deception might cause severe distress or harm, the deception is unethical. Also, the use of deception in psychological studies has inured some participants, making them more suspicious of psychological researchers and therefore less likely to behave "normally" under the research conditions. Researchers should not deceive unless the deception is absolutely necessary.

It is also unethical for researchers to deceive potential participants for the purposes of getting them to participate in the study. For example, telling students that they will fail a class if they don't participate in an experiment is unethical deception, as would luring homeless people to participate through promise of money. When any kind of deception is used, the researcher should debrief the participants.

5. Debriefing benefits the participant by disclosing all pertinent information about the study and remedying the effects of deception. Debriefing helps the participants to trust scientists and scientific research. The debriefing is an expression of respect for the subjects. The debriefing can also help the participants learn about the specific area of research that they helped via their participation in the study. Debriefing can help dispel misconceptions about a given area of research and helps the participant learn and grow from their experience.

Debriefing is also immensely beneficial for the researcher. Debriefing can help the researcher determine what impact their study had on the participants, as it provides a means for the subjects to offer feedback. The researcher can make changes and improvements to future studies based on the information acquired in the debriefing. Debriefing therefore opens up possibilities for future research. Through debriefing, the researcher might become more aware of errors in the research design or of their biases. The debriefing also allows the researcher to express their opinions on their area of research.