Ethics in Research
Tristram Jones, Ph.D.
PS512 Unit II
Behavioral research was not always
the sweet, gentle discipline it is
today!

The Milgram experiment on
obedience to authority
figures was a series of
social psychology
experiments conducted by
psychologist Stanley
Milgram at Yale University
in the early 1960s. which
measured the willingness
of study participants to
obey an authority figure
who instructed them to
perform acts that conflicted
with their personal
conscience.
The very roots of behavioral study
seemed tainted with cruelty!
John B Watson spent a good deal of 1920 scaring the heck
out of a year-old baby named Little Albert at Johns Hopkins!
The secret side of PAVLOV
'History of the Brain‘ aired on
BBC4 showing Pavlov also
did experiments on children.
He had holes and taps drilled
into the side of children’s
mouths to collect saliva and
that he experimented on
children on reflex action.
Footage exists of the children being experimented
on. It shows children with taps in the faces, plus
reflex experiments. A child of maybe 2/3 strapped
down being force fed food as part
of a reflex experiment.
World War II worsened the
scientific image as German
scientists worked avidly for
Hitler’s SS
And behaviorism figured strongly
in the conditioning of NAZI youth!
Soviet Psychiatry
Cold War Soviet psychiatry was in the trusted hands of
Dr Andrei Snezhnevsky for decades. He invented
“creeping schizophrenia” wherein schizophrenia
remains latent and until it blossoms as political
dissidence. Exiled Writer Vladimir Bukovsky, now at
Cambridge University, notes: "This means nobody
knows whether he is schizophrenic or not unless
Professor Snezhnevsky diagnoses it."
SOLUTIONS WERE OFTEN BEHAVIORAL!
Interest in what we today call
ABA heightened during the
Korean and Cold Wars
In the 1970s the “brainwashing” associated with
Stockholm Syndrome was first noted!
Undeniably, ABA is all about
changing people in rather
dramatic ways!





Who decides what is
acceptable as change?
Who decides who can
manage this change?
What methods are ethical?
How can we be sure the
desired outcome is ethical?
What oversight exists?
Walker & Shea’s Guidelines:






Explore alternatives before using aversive
interventions.
Consider possible side effects
See that the subject understands the
experiment
Empirical evidence should indicate the
intervention will work
Informed consent must be obtained
Committee review of all human subjects
research
Ethical Considerations with
Children
What is a child?
 Can children choose?
 Where should the
change take place?
 Who decides what
modifications
will be attempted?
 Who decides who
should be changed?

SINGLE SUBJECT
RESEARCHERS
MUST CONSTANTLY ASK
SUCH QUESTIONS!
Ethical “Musts”






Rule out other possibilities before selecting
aversives!
Consider potential side effects!
Interveners must be trained and familiar
with the intervention.
Empirical evidence should suggest that
outcome will be favorable.
Full disclosure of all possible negatives
Committee review should occur!
Karen’s Code:
Karen Kitchener got to work on the problem!
Six Kitchenerian ethical principles:






Autonomy: Allow self governance
Beneficence: Show kindness
Nonmaleficence: Be free of evil intent.
Justice: Fairness, equality and truthfulness
Fidelity: Honor commitments
Compassion: Authentic caring and concern.
Wolf Wolfensberger had a cool
name, and a cool idea:


In 1972 Wolf, came up with
normalization (Social Role
Valorization, or SRV). The idea
that all individuals no matter
how disabled should
participate in society!
He also came up with “AntiDeathmaking.”
VALORIZATION: a set of approaches
designed to enable devalued people in
society to experience the Good Life.
Strategies were derived from practical
experience and from what research
revealed, to help devalued people achieve
valued social roles.
Some additional terminology:

THE PRINCIPLE OF NORMALIZATION:
Normalization calls for the acceptance of
people with disabilities, offering them the
same conditions as are offered to other
citizens. It involves an awareness of the
normal rhythm of life – including the
normal rhythm of a day, a week, a year,
and the life-cycle itself. It involves the
normal conditions of life – housing,
schooling, employment, exercise,
recreation and freedom of choice. This
includes “the dignity of risk”, rather than
an emphasis on “protection”.
Essentially this is the doctrine of
“the least restrictive environment”
And now for something completely
different—what is PREDICTION?
ALWAYS
PESSIMISTIC?
Prediction assumes that
the stable DV data path
will show no appreciable
change despite phase
changes! (Or you may
predict hypothetically!)

What is verification???

VERIFICATION
is the confirmation that the
dependent variable is defying prediction and changing
when the independent variable is applied! If you
predicted conversely that your hypothesis will be born
out by the experiment, then verification will confirm your
hypothesis!
What is REPLICATION???
Replication is repeated verification and/or
prediction within the same study! 
Social Validity is a trendy term meaning the
conditions of your intervention are acceptable
and the targeted behavior is acceptable to
Ever since
Yes, but
change.
you removed
my brain my
friends avoid
me!
you no
longer
STAMMER!
It can also mean, sadly, that your intervention
meets a current social standard!
In medieval Europe
this radical form of
aversion therapy
displayed great
Levels of SOCIAL
VALIDITY!
And then, of course, there is
“EMPIRICAL VALIDITY!”
Comrades, are
you certain this
behavioral intervention
will positively affect
my loyalty???
Empirical validity (also called
statistical or predictive validity)
occurs when measurements
suggest that an intervention
will improve a participant’s
behavior in some specific way.
Mainly we care about INTERNAL
and EXTERNAL validity.


Internal: Are
you measuring
the effect of
your IV or
something
else?
External: Will
your data
generalize?
And mainly, mainly we care about
INTERNAL VALIDITY
Threats to which include:

history,

maturation,

testing,

instrumentation,

regression,
When an event occurs at the same time as treatment and changes participants’ behavior,
this event becomes an alternative explanation for the changes
Participants naturally change over time; these changes, not
treatment, explain changes in participants during the experiment.
Taking a test generally affects subsequent testing; thus, participants’
performance on a measure at the end of the study may differ from an initial testing
Instruments used to measure participants’ performance
may change over time (e.g., observers may become bored or tired); thus, changes in
performance may not be due to treatment.
Participants sometimes perform very well or very poorly on a measure
because of chance factors (e.g., luck). These chance factors are not likely to repeat.
THERE IS ALSO OBSERVER
EFFECT!
 “Hawthorne
Effect” and
OBSERVER
EFFECT:

Hawthorne effect is a
form of REATIVITY
whereby subjects
improve or modify an
aspect of their
behavior being
experimentally
measured simply in
response to the fact
that they know they
are being studied.
Ahhh…the
IV is
DEFINITELY
working!
Are you
sure it’s the
IV????
How do they apply in our
everyday lives, if at all?