The American Psychologists Association (APA)

Participants are critical components of any research project. They serve as the first point of reference since the researcher depends on information collected directly from respondents during the data collection stage. It is important to remember that before the data interviewing procedure can begin, the researcher must first disclose some critical facts to the participants. This is what the concept of informed consent entails. It is meant to assist respondents in understanding the type of information requested and the intended purpose of such information. According to the American Psychologists Association (APA), gaining informed consent from subjects is an essential aspect of study ethics.  Vital information to be disclosed by the researcher includes the purpose and scope of the study, the duration of the study, the methods and procedures to be applied. The participant’s right to privacy must also be respected thus the researcher should define the limits of confidentiality of the information obtained. It should also be clarified that the participants can withdraw from the process at any time of the research. Information on the participation incentives should also be provided.

One of the main problems with informed consent is that the researcher is at the mercy of the participant. The concept of informed consent gives the participants the upper hand because they give whatsoever information they wish as long as it suits them. To this effect, part of the information may be untrue or inconsistent with what they had previously provided. The researcher is the left with a difficult task when sorting out the data so as to remove the inconsistencies. This becomes a subjective research because the sorting process may leave out important details. In the worst case scenario, a respondent can withdraw from the research half-way or at the last minute, thus throwing the whole process in shambles. These are some of the reasons that cause researchers to provide limited informed consent. At times it is important to limit the level of consent so that the participants feel obliged to provide information that is true and consistent. It also discourages individuals that are only interested in receiving the incentive from withdrawing from the process after getting paid. My research aims to determine whether external noise affects people of the opposite genders differently. My hypothesis is that females are less affected by external noise compared to their male counterparts. It will involve reading a comprehension task under noisy conditions, after which I intend to analyze the differences in levels of distraction and understanding between the two groups. I intend to provide limited consent based on previously conducted research studies whereby informed consent was a hindrance to the accuracy of the results obtained.

West, H. (2014). Tuskegee Syphilis Study.

This experiment was intended to study the natural progression of the sexually transmitted disease in human beings. The participants were poor, rural black men. The researchers contacted six hundred individuals, out of which, 201 individuals were without the STD. All of them were living in impoverished conditions in Tuskegee, Alabama. The study lasted from 1932 to 1972, a period that was long enough and sufficient to observe the natural progression in their bodies. The incentives included free medical care, free meals and burial insurance. Interestingly, during this period, scientist had already discovered a cure for the disease. However, the researchers did not inform the participants about the availability of the cure. If they had done so, these individuals would probably have bought the drugs and would have been cured. However, this would have prevented the researchers from achieving their objectives in learning more about the progression of the disease. It was thus logical for them to withhold information regarding the availability of the cure for syphilis.

Manning, R., Levine, M., & Collins, A. (2007). The Kitty Genovese murder and the social psychology of helping: the parable of the 38 witnesses. American Psychologist, 62(6), 555.

Also commonly referred to as the bystander apathy experiment, this research study was aimed at observing people’s behavior and reaction in emergency situations or when they witnessed an accident. During the study, the researchers had organized for models appearing to be apparently drunk to collapse in a subway in New York. The study followed the murder of Kitty Genovese, who had been raped and brutally killed yet no one made the effort to save her or call the police despite her loud wailing and screaming that lasted almost half an hour. The researchers wanted to observe people’s behavior; whether they would volunteer to help the ‘victims’ that had collapsed in the subway trains. This was a social experiment whereby informed consent was minimal because the participants would obviously have reacted differently if they had been previously informed that the ‘victims’ were merely acting. Additionally, the scenarios had been pre-arranged without seeking informed consent from members of the public. Doing so would have adversely affected the nature of the results.

Pavlov, I., Watson, J., Skinner, B. F., Thorndike, E., Bandura, A., Maslow, A., ... & Treisman, A. The Milgram Experiment.

The famous Milgram experiment was aimed at studying how people react to authority when their subjects experienced pain and suffering that they had themselves inflicted. The experiment was conducted to determine if the accused persons at the Nuremberg Trials were merely obeying authority when they tortured their victims during the Nazi regime. The volunteer participants were asked to pose as teachers. They were asked to an electric shock as a way of punishing students who failed to get the correct answers in class. The ‘victim students’ were confederates in the experiment and no actual electric shock was administered. They were merely acting and were also tape-recording the reactions of the participant ‘teachers’ at each shock level. In this experiment, the participants had not been informed that their victims were acting. They also thought that the electric shock was real. They would definitely have acted differently if they knew that the whole exercise was stage managed.

Blue, E. (2009). The Strange Career of Leo Stanley: Remaking Manhood and Medicine at San Quentin State Penitentiary, 1913––1951. Pacific Historical Review, 78(2), 210-241.

Between the year 1913 and 1951, Dr. Leo Stanley who worked as a surgeon at the An Quentin prison conducted several experiments involving surgical testicular implants. In many occasions, he failed to obtain consent from his participants as most of his research studies were deemed controversial. For instance, he would transplant testicles from executed prisoners into the bodies of living prisoners. He informed them that he was merely observing genetic changes with the transplants. He could not reveal the source of the organs since his participants would obviously decline.

Grant, R. W., & Sugarman, J. (2004). Ethics in human subjects research: do incentives matter?. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 29(6), 717-738.

Over the years, scientists have been trying to find out more on the effect of radioactive energy on the human body. Most of these tests involve exposing the body of living human beings to radiation transmission. Such studies have a huge element of risk involved as the likelihood of fatality is quite high. They are usually conducted under the supervision of federal agencies such as the military and energy regulatory authorities. They usually take advantage of participants, most of whom are the poor and the sickly. They have to conceal some information, particularly regarding the inherent risks so that the participants can agree to be used as research subjects.

Guillemin, J. (2003). Medical Risks and the Volunteer Army. In Anthropology and the United States Military (pp. 29-44). Palgrave Macmillan US.

The Shipboard Hazard and Defense project (SHAD) was conducted to test the effect of several warfare chemical agents. Harmful chemical substances were sprayed in several military ships and the military researchers observed the impact on the military personnel on board. Informed consent was not provided and the participants were exposed to high level heath risks as some of the chemicals used could have fatal consequences when inhaled. It would be difficult to obtain consent since everyone would have opted to stay out of such an experiment.

Clarke, A. E. (1990). Controversy and the development of reproductive sciences. Social Problems, 37(1), 18-37.

In the 1940s, medical researchers conducted an experiment at the maternity wing whereby they were testing the effectiveness of a diethylstilbestrol, which acts as artificial estrogen. The tests were carried out on several pregnant women without obtaining providing informed consent regarding the potential effect that the chemical substance would have on their bodies. The effects were quite devastating, with several women experiencing miscarriages and others having severe problems during delivery. Most of the delivered children had low birth weight. The researchers had to conceal some information so as to conduct their high-risk experiment.

Ross, L. F. (2004). Children in Medical Research: balancing protection and access: has the pendulum swung too far?. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 47(4), 519-536.

In the year 1962, researchers at the Laurel Children Center (Maryland) conducted several tests aimed at treating the appearance of rash and acne in children. They were testing several new medication and they had to conceal some information regarding the effectiveness of the medication and the possible effects. The results were quite devastating as close to half the children contracted severe cases of liver damage as a result of the chemical substances in the medications under testing. The scientists were most likely privy to the likely effects but they could not disclose the information from the authorities at the institution.

References

Blue, E. (2009). The Strange Career of Leo Stanley: Remaking Manhood and Medicine at San Quentin State Penitentiary, 1913––1951. Pacific Historical Review, 78(2), 210-241.

Clarke, A. E. (1990). Controversy and the development of reproductive sciences. Social Problems, 37(1), 18-37.

Grant, R. W., & Sugarman, J. (2004). Ethics in human subjects research: do incentives matter?. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 29(6), 717-738.

Guillemin, J. (2003). Medical Risks and the Volunteer Army. In Anthropology and the United States Military (pp. 29-44). Palgrave Macmillan US.

Manning, R., Levine, M., & Collins, A. (2007). The Kitty Genovese murder and the social psychology of helping: the parable of the 38 witnesses. American Psychologist, 62(6), 555.

Pavlov, I., Watson, J., Skinner, B. F., Thorndike, E., Bandura, A., Maslow, A., ... & Treisman, A. The Milgram Experiment.

Ross, L. F. (2004). Children in Medical Research: balancing protection and access: has the pendulum swung too far?. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 47(4), 519-536.

West, H. (2014). Tuskegee Syphilis Study.