Issues and Debates - Ethical Issues
- Created by: Hopeful.Progress
- Created on: 10-02-23 14:22
View mindmap
- Ethical Issues
- Sherif
- Consent
- The children could not consent but the parents could to which they did when accepting the $25
- Right to withdraw
- The parents of the ppts were payed to stay away ($25) so children could not withdraw. Thus breaking their right to withdraw
- Some, however, did leave to to home sickness
- The parents of the ppts were payed to stay away ($25) so children could not withdraw. Thus breaking their right to withdraw
- Protection of ppts
- Made the boys hostile towards each other nearly causing a fight but the worst done was name calling
- Debrief
- There was no debrief
- Deception
- The ppts had no knowledge that they were being observed or participating in an experiment thinking they were at a regular summer camp
- Overall
- Unethical
- Consent
- Baddeley
- Deception
- Surprise recall test could be considered breaking this guideline as it was not expected
- Overall
- Ethical
- Deception
- Watson and Reyner
- Consent
- Albert could not give consent himself but his mother did
- Right to withdraw
- Albert was a child of 11 months thus could not voice hid withdrawal despite him crying and showing his distress but he was eventually withdrawn by his mother
- Protection of ppts
- Albert had no protection as he showed clear signs of distress during the experiment but was ignored. He was also never deconditioned which meant that Albert could have a lifetime phobia of rats and other white objects
- Deception
- They used a curtain to cover the ppole, hammer, and the researcher so that Albert would not associate the bang with them, only the rat
- Debrief
- Mother withdrew Albert before he or she could be debriefed, but again Albert was only a child
- Overall
- Unethical
- Consent
- Raine
- Consent
- Ppts pleaded NGRI so could not really consent to experiment while some as they wanted to have proof to help them during the trial
- Regardless they agreed to participate
- Ppts pleaded NGRI so could not really consent to experiment while some as they wanted to have proof to help them during the trial
- Right to withdraw
- They may not have known they could withdraw as a PET scan would have been taken anyway
- Protection of ppts
- There was potential harm to ppts as PET scans consist of radioactive tracer and thy had to go 2 weeks without taking there medicine possibly worsening their condition
- Overall
- Unethical
- Consent
- Rosenhan
- Consent
- The doctors and staff could not consent as they did not know about the experiment
- Right to withdraw
- The staff could not exercise this as they did not know they were participating in teh experiment
- Protection of ppts
- Some staff were fired due to the discovery of abuse to admitted patients
- Some of the real patients also felt paranoid about being observed possibly worsening their MH
- Some staff were fired due to the discovery of abuse to admitted patients
- Debrief
- None
- Deception
- The staff were decieved asbout the pseudo patients MH and of themselves being the ppts in this experiment
- Overall
- Unethical
- Consent
- Sherif
Comments
No comments have yet been made