Approaches to Social Research 5th Edition / Chapter 3 / Research Ethics

Chapter 3 / Research Ethics

Answers to Textbook Exercises

1. (a) The researcher has violated the informant’s right to privacy by revealing information after promising that the information would be confidential.

(b) By posing as a volunteer in order to enter an otherwise inaccessible social situation and obtain the names of AIDS patients, this researcher has deliberately misrepresented herself and her intentions. Thus, she has violated the privacy of the patients by gaining contact with and information about them (i.e., their names) without their permission.

(c) This study poses problems with regard to informed consent, deception, and potential harm. The nature of the manipulations makes it impossible to obtain informed consent. The deception is strong, involving entrapment—that is, subjects are covertly encouraged to perform illegal acts. Most problematic, however, is that subjects may suffer a loss of self-esteem when the incriminating nature of their participation is revealed to them. Thus they may feel embarrassed, guilty, or anxious. Debriefing, under these circumstances, must be immediate and thorough. According to West, Gunn, and Chernicky (1975:63), their debriefing involved

the gradual revelation of the true purpose of the experiment and a discussion with the subject of the necessity for, and the experimenter’s regret in having to use, deception in studying problems of this nature. The subject was encouraged to express his (her) feelings, whether positive or negative, about both the importance of the study and the deceptions employed. Finally, the discussion was conducted in a manner that facilitated the restoration of equality to the experimenter-subject relationship.

In a comment on the ethical issues involved in this study, Stuart Cook (1975) also argued that this study calls for the detection and removal of possible long-term aftereffects.

References:

Cook, S. W. 1975. A comment on the ethical issues involved in West, Gunn, and Chernicky’s “ubiquitous Watergate: An attributional analysis.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 32:66-68.

West, S. G., S. P. Gunn, and P. Chernicky. 1975. Ubiquitous Watergate: An attributional analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 32:55-65.