JoVE Educazione Scientific
Experimental Psychology
È necessario avere un abbonamento a JoVE per visualizzare questo.  Accedi o inizia la tua prova gratuita.
JoVE Educazione Scientific Experimental Psychology
Ethics in Psychology Research
  • 00:00Panoramica
  • 00:59Experimental Design
  • 02:43Running the Experiment
  • 05:01Representative Results
  • 05:33Applications
  • 06:55Summary

在心理学研究中的伦理

English

Condividere

Panoramica

资料来源: 实验室的加里 · 斯基、 戴夫 Strohmetz 和娜塔莉 Ciarocco — — 蒙茅斯大学

当一位研究者发现一个有趣的话题,例如侵略研究时,目标往往是要研究它是真实生活尽可能的方式。然而,研究人员必须以道德的方式行事。 要做到这一点,他们必须平衡他们的研究目标与参与者的最佳利益。道德常常进入规划过程时研究人员查明所有他们可以操纵或测量的变量,但然后作出最后决定基于他们应该如何操作或测量变量的方法。

收到后可怜的等级测试或纸上,一个大学生可能出现用它去 (,以激进的方式向法) 他们被平均或急了,尖叫着,乱扔东西,或甚至成为身体暴力的室友。侵略是一种重要的人类行为,学习和理解由于它对人际暴力的影响。然而,出于安全方面的考虑,研究不能公开参加严重类型的暴力行为提出了风险。因此,研究人员必须找出类似但良性的行为,可以帮助我们理解更具侵略性的行为不损害参与者。

这个视频使用两组实验看到是否人们真的采取发泄在别人即使别人不是原始的问题负责。具体而言,它检查是否导致侵略时考虑到对与会者,成本与效益,知情同意,危害关键伦理问题和述职的负面反馈。

心理研究经常在其他科学中使用高比研究的样本量。大量的参与者,有助于更好地确保人口正在研究更好地为代表,,伴随着研究人类行为的误差范围是充分地说明。在本视频中,我们演示使用只是两个参与者,其中之一是,计算器这个实验。然而,所代表的结果,我们可以使用共 245 人参加得出的实验结论的情况。

Procedura

1.在研究界定道德行为。 道德是一个集合的道德标准和原则,指导我们做出的决定。他们基本上是告诉我们我们应该做什么。研究者可以做有别于他们应该做什么。 成本-收益分析: 要知道是否应该进行研究,研究人员需要确保的益处的成本或风险的危害。 这可以通过提高参与者的利益和/或降低成本。 2.定义关键变量。 创建业务定义 (即</…

Risultati

The data were collected from 245 participants. Recall that the aggression scale was calculated on the number assigned to each of the drinks, which varied in levels of distasteful flavor. A t-test for independent means was run to compare the negative and neutral feedback conditions to determine how they influenced aggression. The results indicated that participants who received the negative feedback generally chose more noxious drinks for the innocent person in the other room (the friend of the evaluator), which is an indication of aggression (Figure 1).

Figure 1
Figure 1. Amount of aggression by feedback condition.

Applications and Summary

This two-group experiment shows how researchers can study sensitive topics in an ethical way that minimizes harm to participants, while still allowing participants to engage in an aggressive behavior.

As they study human behavior, psychologists often seek to analyze undesirable and troubling behavior. For example a recent study in Psychology of Popular Media Culture found that when video-game players lost a game, they were more likely to act aggressively by trash-talking.1 Though aggressive, this behavior is less risky than physical aggression and is common, which shows the researchers considered the ethical implications of their research.

Ethics apply beyond research. When considering ethical dilemmas in everyday life, there often is not a clear right or wrong answer. Should we test cosmetics on animals? Should Facebook be allowed to change how information appears on a user’s page to see if it changes the user’s behavior? The issues are complicated, but it is imperative that researchers consider these issues and seek out ways to answer their research questions in ways that protect participants.

Riferimenti

  1. Harmon-Jones, E., & Sigelman, J. State anger and prefrontal brain activity: Evidence that insult-related relative left-prefrontal activation is associated with experienced anger and aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 80 797-803 (2001).
  2. Breuer, J., Scharkow, M., & Quandt, T. Sore losers? A reexamination of the frustration–aggression hypothesis for collocated video game play. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. (2013).

Trascrizione

Sensitive topics in research require careful planning to uphold ethical behavior- the moral standards that guide decision-making.

Designing studies in an ethical manner requires a balancing act between the benefits of the research and the costs or risk of harm to participants.

This decision process is referred to as a cost-benefit analysis, in which the study’s intent outweighs the high costs or risks of harm for those involved.

By applying ethical principles, this video demonstrates how to design, perform, analyze, and interpret an experiment about interpersonal aggression. Importantly, researchers study anger towards others without resorting to physical harm by incorporating more benign forms of aggressive behavior.

For this experiment, consider two sensitive topics, negative feedback and aggression, that require cost-benefit analyses to demonstrate ethical compliance.

Negative feedback towards participants might entail a number of different forms, including: medical results that indicate disease, a diagnostic test that indicates low IQ, harsh commentary on physical appearance, or severe criticism on written work.

Aggression could involve a number of behaviors, such as being verbally abusive to the participant, physically pushing the participant, administering an electrical shock to the participant, or giving the participant a foul-tasting drink.

Here, the experiment will focus on providing severe criticism on participant’s written work.

Using a two-group design, all participants write a paragraph about a day at the beach. One group receives negative feedback in the form of negative comments, whereas the second group receives neutral feedback, or no comments.

After receiving criticism, participants are asked to choose a beverage for their paragraph evaluator’s friend. The beverage choice correlates to the level of aggression displayed by the participant.

The hypothesis of the experiment is negative feedback induces aggression that would be taken out on another individual.

Thus, those who receive negative comments are expected to retaliate and choose more distasteful drink choices than those who receive no comments.

To conduct the experiment, gather the informed consent and final debriefing papers, a black pen, and a blank piece of paper. In a different room, you will need: dice, a red pen, index cards, 5 cups of water, a tray or platter, and portions of sugar, lemon juice, vinegar, and hot sauce.

To begin the experiment, meet the participant in the lab. Guide all participants through the consent process and discuss the overall plan for the session.

With the participant sitting at a desk, ask them to write a brief paragraph that describes a day at the beach. After the participant finishes, inform them that another researcher will evaluate the paragraph over the next 5 min.

Once in another room, roll dice to randomly determine the kind of feedback the participant receives. Assign negative feedback for an even number, and write comments on the paragraph with a red pen. If the dice roll results in an odd number, assign neutral feedback, and do not make any marks on the page.

After providing feedback, return the paragraph to the participant. Suggest that they read over the comments when you leave the room to set-up the next phase of the experiment.

While the participant waits, prepare five different beverages that range from pleasant to unpleasant tastes: highly sugared water, lemon water, plain water, vinegar in water, and hot sauce in water.

Then, label five different index cards with a number on one side and description on the other. Arrange each pair on a platter.

After arranging the platter, carry it into the room with the participant. Explain what each beverage contains. Instruct them to choose one beverage for the evaluator’s friend to drink in the other room. Record the number associated with the chosen beverage.

At the conclusion of the experiment, debrief participants and explain why deception was necessary for the experiment.

To analyze how aggressive behavior is expressed after feedback, average the numbers recorded for the chosen beverages in each condition.

The data are then graphed by plotting the mean number in each condition. In this experiment, participants who received negative feedback retaliated and chose a more distasteful beverage for the evaluator’s friend than those in the neutral group who did not receive any feedback.

Now that you are familiar with how psychologists study sensitive topics in an ethical way, let’s take a look at how other researchers are mindful of moral standards that promote safe alternatives for studying troubling and undesirable behaviors.

A recent study found that when video game players lost a game, they were more likely to act aggressively by “trash-talking.” The researcher considered the ethical implications of the design because trash-talking is less risky than physical aggression.

This study uses a social test that reliably induces a stress response in participants.

Physiological measures, such as skin conductance, heart rate and stress hormone levels, are obtained non-invasively through simple monitoring equipment and saliva samples.

Thus, this experiment provides an ethical alternative to painful physical stressors like treadmill running or cold pressor test.

Facing numerous ethical concerns, animal researchers use: within-group designs to reduce the number of unnecessary subjects, behavioral tasks to obtain ethological responses, and administer pharmaceutical agents to minimize pain and suffering.

You’ve just watched JoVE’s introduction to Ethics in Psychological Research. Now you should have a good understanding of how to design and perform the experiment, as well as analyze results and apply the phenomenon.

Thanks for watching! 

Tags

Cite This
JoVE Science Education Database. Education. Ethics in Psychology Research. JoVE, Cambridge, MA, (2023).