The ultimate goal of using deception in research is to ensure that the behaviors or reactions observed in a controlled laboratory setting are as close as possible to those behaviors and reactions that occur outside of the laboratory setting.
For this reason, deception can only be used in certain circumstances. The conditions for those circumstances are that a no other nondeceptive method exists to study the phenomenon of interest, 2 the study possesses significant contributions, and 3 the deception is not expected to cause significant harm or severe emotional distress. Whenever deception is used, it is the responsibility of the experimenter to fully debrief the participants at the end of the study by explaining the deception, including the reasons it was necessary and ensuring that participants are not emotionally harmed.
In certain cases, debriefing participants can actually increase the harm of deception by making participants feel tricked by pointing out perceived flaws. However, a thorough debriefing that alleviates distress and explains the deception is usually sufficient. Although this was an important concept in social psychology, the distress it may have caused participants would make it untenable today. The Asch experiment is a good example of the use of deception where the harm experienced by the participants was minimal.
Solomon Asch wanted to study how group social pressure affected conformity. He asked people to match the length of line segments with others of a similar size. Subjects were almost percent accurate when matching the length of the line alone. He found that approximately one-third of subjects then said they agreed with confederates even though the confederates were wrong, thus exhibiting the impact of social pressure.
Although deception was used in this experiment, the value of the conclusions appears to outweigh the level of harm experienced by participants. Speaking of harm, what is the impact of deception?
As we have already discussed, it may dissuade people from participating in psychological research and suspicion may invalidate results. But, does it actually hurt people? Experiments such as the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, where subjects were withheld treatment that could have saved their lives, are a remnant of the early 20th century and do not apply to current studies.
Like almost any issue, there is more than one opinion. There is some evidence that points to deception causing resentment and other negative emotions. Michael Cheng-TekTai argues that deception in research is never ethical and should not be permitted. Other researchers conclude that minimal types of deception, such as false feedback or masking the hypothesis of a study, cause little psychological harm to participants. Deceptive research in psychology has decreased since the 20th century but it has not entirely disappeared.
The ethical guidelines surrounding its use are relatively strict and have been effective in reducing risk to participants. It has been noted that a basic debriefing procedure is likely effective in counteracting the consequences of deception as currently used. Because of its advantages and minimal risk, deception will continue to be used for scientific gain. How Psychologists Use Deception. Find Your Degree! AD online-psychology-degrees.
Featured or trusted partner programs and all school search, finder, or match results are for schools that compensate us. This compensation does not influence our school rankings, resource guides, or other editorially-independent information published on this site.
Got it! The Ethics of Deception Psychologists operate under rules that ensure they are taking into account ethical considerations. What is Deception? Feelings may be hurt, but no one is being asked to donate blood or sacrifice a limb under false pretenses. The most frequent argument is that much research would be impossible without deception. Just as physicians check respiratory rates without calling attention to a patient's breathing, psychologists need to observe behavior when subjects are unaware.
Deception is rationalized as the only way to reproduce natural behavior in the laboratory setting. Over the first two-thirds of the 20th century, deception became a staple of psychological research. According to a recent history of deception in social psychology , before only about 10 percent of articles in social psychology journals involved deceptive methods. By the s, the use of deception had reached over 50 percent, and in some journals the figure reached two-thirds of studies.
This means that subjects in social psychology experiments -- at least those that survived the peer-review process and made it to publication -- had a better than chance of having the truth withheld from them, being told things that were not true, or being manipulated in covert ways. Proponents of deception argue that they are using little lies in order to uncover large truths. Many subjects voice no objection, and sophisticated ethical defenses of the practice are readily provided. In a perfect world, perhaps, deception would be scrupulously avoided, but ours is not perfect, so proponents argue that compromises must be made.
Of course, they admit, researchers should do their best to avoid deception wherever possible, employing it only as a last resort. In some cases, it may be possible to develop alternative methodologies that do not require it.
In the end, however, deception is an indispensable tool in the pursuit of knowledge. The American Psychological Association gives explicit support to the argument that dishonesty is necessary for scientific progress.
The view that the ends justify the means in apparent in the APA's Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, which reads as follows: "Psychologists do not conduct a study involving deception unless they have determined that the use of deceptive techniques is justified by the study's significant prospective scientific, educational or applied value and that effective non-deceptive alternatives are not feasible.
Psychology is the nation's second most common undergraduate major, numbering around 90, students since the mids. Permissive attitudes toward deception permeate many introductory psychology courses. To receive a passing grade, students are often required to serve as subjects in several psychological studies, like the one described above. In the beginning, many students have no idea that they may be deceived by researchers, teachers, and fellow students.
As the course progresses, they learn that many of the best-known psychological experiments of the 20th century were founded on deceptions of one kind or another. By the end of the semester, students may be convinced that deception is a legitimate technique. Suppose an undergraduate psychology student goes home to visit her family during a school break. During the visit a friend poses a question that the student would prefer, for one reason or another, not to answer truthfully.
Having been told by textbook authors and professors that deception is often justified for the sake of higher ends, might such a student be more likely to withhold information, provide false information, or distort the truth?
After all, if deception is permitted in scientific experiments in the pursuit of knowledge, why should it be impermissible in the context of everyday relationships?
0コメント