,Ethics
- psychologists do not have the right to cause other people to experience psychological distress
- they’re governed by a professional group in the Uk the BPS , to help by giving guidelines to follow
- eg, conducting research they must ensure and then ao1 code of ethics ( must ensure pp leave
study the same physical and psychological state at the start of the study
- animals aswell as they experience distress and pain
i
- also the public face of psychology as if investigations become distressing etc, people could lose
faith in it
- less willing to consider therapies and psychological theories
- during the 1950's and 1960's, social psychologists conducted experiments that would be
considered ethically and morally wrong eg Milgram..
- Obedience research carries the risk of causing psychological harm eg Milgrams study believed
they had harmed another, also removal of withdrawal and deception
- well being ignored ( later improved with burger)
- however many of these issues with ethics were essential to gain the results they needed as its
difficult to observe obedience without deceiving
- cost benefit analysis as it helped us understand behaviour
- case studies such as HM raises ethical issues such as confedentiality, gaining informed consent,
usually had to be presumptive or tacit consent and no right to withdraw
- no attempt made to contact close relatives for presumptive consent
- always had research done on him throughout his life no protection
- however attempt to protect identity was made
- generally dealing with people and cases who have abnormalities in memory or their brain so unable
to give consent and some cases presumptive consent may not always be given
- eg schmolks pp forgot the experiment being explained to him
- however these case studies rare and unique and beneficial to society as increased knowledge of
memory eg schmolk now understanding of risks in surgery in preventing accidents such as the case
of HM
- other than brain damaged pp, research in cognitive rarely goes against BPS as informed consent
usually given eg Baddeley
- only time is when needed to ensure demand characteristics does not influence research
- lab exp involves people being taken out of natural env and being put in a strange situation which can
be distressing
Animal studies
- non humans but similar CNS so better to observe whats happening
- possible to control their environment eg avoid the effects of socialisation by isolation
- also possible to conduct invasive procedures such as in vivo stimulation which we cant do on
humans
- as technology improves the way we can model and access the brain the need for animal studies
decreases
, Humans
- PET scans require injection of radioactive substances and most recent scans require person to stay
still eg MRI , may be distressful also cant use repeated amount of time
eg, Raine , did gain informed consent however it was also for criminals to gather evidence to help their
case so issues of being forced to consent
Normalising unhelpful behaviours in biological, for example men are supposed to be aggressive due to
evolution and testostrone
Goes against social resp of ethical research
Socially sensitive as some studies suggest aggression may be down to factors that are not in control
of the person
- animal studies, eg skinner electrifies floor of a cage and restricts food for rats for his study, goes against
ethical guildlines
- argument that animals have less of a right that human and that we are the dominant species
- Watson and Rayner study caused emotional harm and distress, possibly leaving him with long term
phobias goes against protection and pp needs to leave study same state they entered
- bandura exposes children to aggressive role models and causing stress by fustrating them
- allows and normalises them to be aggressive , may be aggressive individuals in the future causing more
harm than good
- need to ensure SZ patient who are already vurable are being taken care of and no unnecessary harm is
done
- clinical trials needed to test therapies and treatments but participants often subjected to side effects
and feel vunerable
- HCPC is the body that governs psychologists and competence levels
- use of placebos decieving and unethical as not being given the treatment which could have improved
their quality of life eg Williams study WLC group
- if a person is detained under section 3 of the mental health act then treatments can be given without
their consent if deemed necessary, for the better of themselves and others
- psychologists do not have the right to cause other people to experience psychological distress
- they’re governed by a professional group in the Uk the BPS , to help by giving guidelines to follow
- eg, conducting research they must ensure and then ao1 code of ethics ( must ensure pp leave
study the same physical and psychological state at the start of the study
- animals aswell as they experience distress and pain
i
- also the public face of psychology as if investigations become distressing etc, people could lose
faith in it
- less willing to consider therapies and psychological theories
- during the 1950's and 1960's, social psychologists conducted experiments that would be
considered ethically and morally wrong eg Milgram..
- Obedience research carries the risk of causing psychological harm eg Milgrams study believed
they had harmed another, also removal of withdrawal and deception
- well being ignored ( later improved with burger)
- however many of these issues with ethics were essential to gain the results they needed as its
difficult to observe obedience without deceiving
- cost benefit analysis as it helped us understand behaviour
- case studies such as HM raises ethical issues such as confedentiality, gaining informed consent,
usually had to be presumptive or tacit consent and no right to withdraw
- no attempt made to contact close relatives for presumptive consent
- always had research done on him throughout his life no protection
- however attempt to protect identity was made
- generally dealing with people and cases who have abnormalities in memory or their brain so unable
to give consent and some cases presumptive consent may not always be given
- eg schmolks pp forgot the experiment being explained to him
- however these case studies rare and unique and beneficial to society as increased knowledge of
memory eg schmolk now understanding of risks in surgery in preventing accidents such as the case
of HM
- other than brain damaged pp, research in cognitive rarely goes against BPS as informed consent
usually given eg Baddeley
- only time is when needed to ensure demand characteristics does not influence research
- lab exp involves people being taken out of natural env and being put in a strange situation which can
be distressing
Animal studies
- non humans but similar CNS so better to observe whats happening
- possible to control their environment eg avoid the effects of socialisation by isolation
- also possible to conduct invasive procedures such as in vivo stimulation which we cant do on
humans
- as technology improves the way we can model and access the brain the need for animal studies
decreases
, Humans
- PET scans require injection of radioactive substances and most recent scans require person to stay
still eg MRI , may be distressful also cant use repeated amount of time
eg, Raine , did gain informed consent however it was also for criminals to gather evidence to help their
case so issues of being forced to consent
Normalising unhelpful behaviours in biological, for example men are supposed to be aggressive due to
evolution and testostrone
Goes against social resp of ethical research
Socially sensitive as some studies suggest aggression may be down to factors that are not in control
of the person
- animal studies, eg skinner electrifies floor of a cage and restricts food for rats for his study, goes against
ethical guildlines
- argument that animals have less of a right that human and that we are the dominant species
- Watson and Rayner study caused emotional harm and distress, possibly leaving him with long term
phobias goes against protection and pp needs to leave study same state they entered
- bandura exposes children to aggressive role models and causing stress by fustrating them
- allows and normalises them to be aggressive , may be aggressive individuals in the future causing more
harm than good
- need to ensure SZ patient who are already vurable are being taken care of and no unnecessary harm is
done
- clinical trials needed to test therapies and treatments but participants often subjected to side effects
and feel vunerable
- HCPC is the body that governs psychologists and competence levels
- use of placebos decieving and unethical as not being given the treatment which could have improved
their quality of life eg Williams study WLC group
- if a person is detained under section 3 of the mental health act then treatments can be given without
their consent if deemed necessary, for the better of themselves and others
