Ethical Experimental Design in Cognitive Psychology: Principles and Challenges

Hello and welcome to the course basics of experimental design for cognitive psychology. I am Dr. Akwarma from the

department of cognitive science at ID Kpur. We are in the fourth week of the course and I have been talking about

different elements of an experiment as proposed by Cunningham and Wal Raven. Now uh so far we've talked about uh

various aspects. We've talked about stimul participants. We've talked about task. And one of the things that was

missing here uh is basically we'll talk about analysis also but probably in a uh you know at a different section. But the

last thing that I think was missing here is how to conduct ethical research. So uh in in this and the next lecture I am

basically going to talk to you about how to be sure that the research design is ethical and can be sort of implemented

in that manner. All right. So an important consideration while uh putting together an experiment that is often uh

likely to be missed in most research enterprises uh experimental or even otherwise is that the research needs to

be conducted within ethical bounds. All right. So there is obviously the experimentter the experimentter has so

many things on their minds. They want to uh they have a research question. they have hypothesis to be tested and in the

process of this basically participants tend to be turn uh tend to be you know treated just as means to an end. So

typically you will see a lot of students and a lot of researchers looking for participants hunting for them while they

need to collect data. But during the process and after the process the participants are sort of not really or

even when you're envisaging the entire research design we don't really think about the the rights and the well-being

of the participant. uh not that say for example most behavioral experiments that we do not that they carry any risk for

the uh you know uh participant as such but it's interesting that a lot of times the participant or whatever the

participant is going to feel uh as a result of participating in your research is not the central question. Yes, most

of these uh research designs go through uh ethical committee approval and so on and so forth. But that's the only time

we actually think about uh you know uh what are the dos and don'ts when you're designing a research experiment. What

can be done, what cannot be done with the participants and so on. So uh it's basically a good idea therefore uh to

pay some attention to uh these issues and in the you know two lectures that are remaining in this week uh I will

discuss them in some detail. Okay. Now, uh, Sanger opines that behavioral scientists must develop research designs

that measure important everyday phenomena and that allow the participants the freedom and the

motivation to openly and honestly express their thoughts, feelings, and behavior, albeit without the

participants guessing the true nature and the purpose of the research being conducted. Now there is there's always a

trade-off in how much you tell the participants and say for example how much it is going to affect your overall

research question and overall research enterprise because uh there are two things you want obviously the

participant to have the choice uh to voluntarily participate and in some cases if not then uh maybe opt out of

the research enterprise sometimes even during the middle of the research that is perfectly accepted. uh but you also

sort of want that you know the participant knows less and less about the purpose of your research the goals

and the questions that you're asking and this is basically because a lot of times researchers believe that if the

participants would come to know about the true nature of the research or the true purpose of the research the

questions being asked then it might affect their natural behavior and if it will affect their natural behavior the

behavior that they say for example display during the experimental study will be affected and you'll not get your

correct true findings that you're looking for. So this uh need for hiding the true nature and the purpose of

research sometimes creates an ethical problem because it involves deceiving the uh participants such that their

behavior is not influenced by other considerations and does not correct the findings of the experiment. All right.

So this is this is a interesting sort of a thing that we want to sort of be aware of.

Now ethical research practices are not really unique just to the behavioral sciences but several others as well and

are shared by uh other fields say for example physics biology medicine etc but they occupy a very central position when

psychologists are trying to design the behavioral investigations. So uh they must I I'm sure they do uh but in cases

they uh you know in case one feels that they are secondary uh not really they they are absolutely primary and they uh

basically require a lot of attention uh you know uh when you're designing your research because the research the way it

is designed the way it has to be implemented has to be ethical. All right. And the first point that ethical

research practice are not only bound to behavioral sciences. For example, uh physics people would be uh you know

worried and there is probably a lot of discussions about the discoveries and the inventions through physics. Say for

example you know uh this discovery of these bombs and uh you know etc. Uh were they needed? Were they not needed? They

did they take uh you know uh science in the civilization forward? Certainly they did. Uh were they developed uh keeping

the ethical considerations in mind? probably yes but they are also concerns which basically you know uh I am sure uh

you know people who practice physics the researchers must be talking about similarly biology there are several

developments in biology for example genetics uh for that matter becomes a cornerstone of a lot of developments in

biology how much of development in uh you know genetics is uh ethically warranted uh some of which is is it not

is it there in medicine say for example you know the way uh the med medicine trials are conducted. So there are

obviously several disciplines in which ethical issues basically play a very important role and they are at least at

the back of the mind of people and they in some cases do uh probably affect the policies and so on. But in psychology

also uh ethical research practices are an important uh cornerstone. And when uh behavioral scientists uh psychologists

uh you know are deciding their research uh uh program uh they do pay attention to the fact or at least should pay

attention to the fact that whatever research programs they are designing uh the way they are planning to address

their research questions and test their hypothesis should be conducted in an ethical uh you know ethical manner. All

right. So these issues uh and as I said the these issues are not limited to just experimental research but basically they

cover both uh you know qualitative and quantitative research methodologies starting from naturalistic observations,

case studies, surveys, interviews, questionnaires uh to even sometimes experimental research. Okay. So it's not

that experimental research does not pose any ethical questions. It does you know the way you put participants into

artificial laboratory settings and and measure their behavior in particular ways. There are ethical issues there as

well and which must be you know paid attention to in naturalistic observations. Remember we were talking

about naturalistic observations and the need uh for uh you know the researcher to be a non-participant observer

sometimes even concealing that a research study is conducted. Now in those issues certainly there are issues

of privacy there are issues of data being septiciously recorded and it becomes you know genuine concern also

the way uh you know people code their data is the data being code coded in an anonymized fashion

is the data being encoded in a manner that can be you know that carries identifiers and people can actually

judge who the participants of the study were. So all of these issues are actually extremely important. Even

interviews uh there has to be a certain degree of uh you know sensitivity and empathy in the way interviews and

questionnaires are uh administered. Uh basically taking care of the fact that uh you know the way you put the cross

questions is uh you know very sensitive uh to the interviewees to the people who are filling out the questionnaires. All

right. So the concerns basically and across all of these methodologies that we've sort of discussed and some of

which we are going to discuss later uh extends from the design of these studies the stimula that are used the situations

where the participants are put into protecting uh put in uh to protecting the identity of the participants uh you

know the data that is obtained from them how confidentiality how confidentially uh the data is stored and also in the

reporting and the dissemination of experimental findings. you know you should not be uh and I'm sure

researchers take a lot of care that the findings uh you know of from their respective studies are reported in such

a manner that they carry no identifiers and nobody none of the participants can be identified from their reports uh you

know of their experiments and their studies also treating the uh research

participants is ethically important not only for the welfare of the individuals themselves but also for the continued

effectiveness of the behavioral science for example If uh you know behavioral scientists,

psychologists for example primarily if they start conducting their research in ethically questionable ways, it is no uh

you know it's it's not going to be a surprise that very soon people will start questioning them. What kind of

research are you conducting? What kind of questions are you asking? Are these questions within ethical boundaries or

not? And it's very quickly that it you know snowballs into institutions and governments starting to ask questions.

And in that sense it does not only harm uh specific individuals but it harms the entire field because certain kinds of

research questions cannot be asked at that point in time. All right. If everybody sort of uh you know uh

conducts their research within the ethical boundaries within the manner approved by the institutional ethics

board and we'll talk about that uh probably in tomorrow's lecture is the idea that you know research has to be

conducted keeping these concerns in mind. uh Diner andRandle uh basically you know

they proposed the four basic goals of ethical research and we will discuss them in detail in uh in the lectures uh

going forward. Now first is protecting participants from physical and psychological harm. Uh providing freedom

of choice about participating in the research. Maintaining awareness of the power differentials is very important

power differentials between the researcher and the participant. uh honestly describing nature and the use

of research to the participant. So all four of these things let us go uh ahead and we'll discuss in some detail. Now

the first thing protecting research participants from both physical and psychological harm. Now this is

something that is absolutely necessary that uh researchers I'm sure they take care of while planning and uh designing

their research. But it must be something that is always at the back of their mind while the research is being implemented

as well. So that you're aware of the fact say for example somebody comes to uh you know your research lab um if it's

a laboratory study and uh you know is is uncomfortable uh by uh the research being proposed by the task being

administered and so on uh you have to take care of the fact that you know the person comes to no physical or

psychological harm. If a person uh you know does not feel comfortable, it's probably uh only right that the

participant be allowed uh to leave uh you know from the uh research lab. Now one of the most direct ethical

concerns for the behavioral scientist is the possibility that their research may cause physical psychological harm to the

research participant. This is something that obviously you know concerns uh a lot of uh you know psychologists when

they are designing their studies. However, sometimes when psychologists are studying uh you know specific

phenomena such as emotional processing, it does require because they want to test the reactions of the participants.

They want to take uh test how they react psychologically, physiologically, how do they sort of cognitively evaluate the

situation. So when they are studying phenomena such as emotional processing, it might involve inducing negative

emotions or extreme emotional reactions uh which may have this potential of leading to some kind of psychological

distress, some kind of uh you know long-term negative outcomes. But we let's let's go uh you know uh look at

this in some more detail. Now historically some not many but few research uh you know enterprises have

actually uh you know posed uh threats to the psychological welfare of participants. For example, a well-known

example is uh the research of Stanley Mgram 1994 who investigated obedience to authority. Now in this research as I'm

sure everybody would know uh participants were induced by an experimental uh to administer electric

shocks to the other person to the other co-articipant so that migram could study mgram could study the extent to which

they would obey the demands of a scientist. Okay it's like authority and how does how do people react to

authority? Do they keep on obeying the demands of the scientist and keep on delivering electric shocks to the other

person who uh is obviously as a result of these electric shocks is uh you know uh facing f uh pain and psych and

physical discomfort. Now what happened in this experiment was interesting because most participants experienced

very high levels of stress from the psychological conflict they experienced between engaging in aggressive behavior

and following the instructions of the experimental. See here you can see that the experimental is in some sort of an

authority position. The experimental has called the uh you know called this participating person to the lab or to

whatever setting that is. Uh they are probably going to compensate them by paying them monetarily or maybe by

course credits or something. Uh the idea is that the exper the participant enters the research lab assuming a role that oh

I have to obey whatever the experimenttor tells me. Now between this and when the experimenttor starts

telling the oh you have to deliver electric shocks to the person next in in the next room that these both of these

situations are actually conflicting situations and this is why a lot of participants in this study experience

high levels of psychological stress uh due to this kind of conflict. Now uh so this is obviously uh something that is

uh you know an example of how research um you know must not be conducted or sometimes uh why or how research uh

researchers and scientists may uh become slightly uh you know um unaware I would I would probably not use the term blind

but slightly insensitive to the overall process that is involved here and how that process is going to affect the

participant in that process. You are creating a situation and you are basically as uh neutrally as possible uh

studying the effects of that situation on this participant but you're not taking into account what the participant

is going through. So for example, if you are asking people to let's say you know in a lot of emotional processing

research, if you're asking participant to uh you know view a lot of these unpleasant images sometimes, you know, I

I see if I'm sure if you've seen the AAPS images, some of them are extremely uh you know brutal and and cruel and and

so on. So if you're seeing those images, if you're you know exposing your participant to those kinds of images, uh

sometimes it might be a good idea to just check on them and see okay are you feeling fine and so on. This is one

example. There are other examples as well. Uh for example, uh Brimel uh you know 1962 had male college students told

based on you know fabricated false data just to sort of uh you know uh play with them or measure how they would react

that they had homosexual tendencies. Although it was later revealed to them that this feedback was not true and the

part this feedback was not true. several participants experienced severe psychological stress during the course

of the experiment and even after it was over. So when you reveal certain information about the participant from a

place of authority because you are the experimentter and you know uh you know you seem to know stuff about uh

psychology and stuff about how people are uh and this is something interesting because a lot of times you see when

people come to these psychology labs uh they seem to have a sense of that oh I'm entering a place where people would be

able to figure me out would be able to know things about me and if I'm participating in an experiment or a

research survey or an interview or uh you know they will be able to uh reveal things about me. There's you know some

parts of my personality uh etc will become revealed to them and they can then choose to you know tell me or not

tell me about these things. So uh you can imagine in that uh from that perspective that Braill's study would

have put some of these uh you know uh participants in uh absolute uh psychological stress and discomfort uh

being told uh that you know they had homosexual tendencies if they were not and remember 1960s was probably the time

where being a homosexual was uh you know stigmatized and was probably not considered something that the society

would easily accept and in that sense people would have had stress is assuming that oh if that is true then uh you know

what about my identity what about my sexual identity what about uh how the society is going to receive me and so on

and so forth. So even though they were told that this is false data but say for example a lot of times what happens is

when you are uh you know debriefing the deception you basically told them the false thing and then you later debrief

that oh I've told you the false information sometimes what would what could happen I believe is that the part

is that the participant would think oh uh are you saying truth now or you or the earlier one was true because see the

uh the relationship between the experimenttor and the participant is based on mutual trust. Now once you

break it once you say oh earlier I used false data and false conclusions they are sort of on a very uh you know uh

slippery ground because they'll not know whether you saying the correct thing now or you were saying the correct thing

then and you know how things are now uh although these studies you know the ones by uh Mgram and Brill can now

no longer be conducted because the scientific community is much more sensitized and uh the you know much more

sensitized to potential of such uh procedures in creating emotional discomfort or harm. Other studies that

present less severe but potentially real threats are still conducted to some degree. We still carry out uh you know

similar experiments not so much in degree but to a certain extent. So let's let's look at them. Say

for example to study the effects of failure on self-esteem or alcohol consumption experimenters may convince

research participants that they have failed on an important uh self-relevant task uh such as a test of social skills

or a test of intelligence uh or say for example to better understand the effects of depression on learning researchers

may place individuals in negative moods. You know you make people sad and you basically are trying to hope that okay

when people are in this negative sad depressed mood uh how would they perform let's say a maths uh puzzle or you know

how would they say for example if you make them fail on a particular test and you sort of confront them with their

failure you want to look at how will the person react will they burst out will they resort to alcoholism will they you

know basically resolve to something else it it is all right to be interested in a particular phenomenon

But to test the logical uh feasibility of that particular experimental exercise or to be sort of sensitive about that

okay this process seems to be successful in inducing a negative mood but is it ethical for me to use this process. Is

it going to leave my participant with uh you know a baggage a scar that would probably take times to heal. So you

would want to be as a researcher be extremely careful of these kinds of procedures. Uh also in some cases even

though the research does not uh directly create stressful situations it could have the unfortunate uh you know outcome

of leading the participants to discover something unpleasant about themselves. All right. So this uh homosexual

experiment uh you know the the bra's experiment that we were talking about sometimes what happens is you let

participants in your into your survey into your uh questionnaire maybe an experimental study for example and you

figure out something about them you actually do that oh you know you have a highly narcissistic personality

something like that now the thing is you don't know uh how that revelation is going to affect your participant if you

uh are not sensitive about that it becomes extremely uh you know uh it can become extremely potentially

dangerous uh in the sense that you don't know how the participant is going to react to that revelation. All right. uh

say for example if participants discover something unpleasant about themselves say such as their tendency to stereotype

others or to make unwise decisions such information uh obviously uh you know the supporters might argue that okay if I

tell a person that oh you have a very according to the personality test that I have developed you seem to have a very

narcissistic personality now the thing is you're telling the person oh you're too full of yourself and you should

probably take care uh there are two things might happen you know one is that the person might learn something from it

and might want to change their behavior taking it positively. But the other thing could be that the person sort of

takes it in a very uh wrong way in a negative way and it becomes uh very stressful. It becomes difficult uh you

know creates uh mental health issues for the participant in the research study. So uh as psychologists as people who uh

let's say have some handle on how people would behave in different situations it becomes part of our responsibility to be

extremely sensitive to whatever data we are collecting and to be even more sensitive uh in terms of uh sharing that

data with not only the participants but also anybody else. Uh all right. Uh so again just extending this it is also

possible that in some cases participants are uh you know led to perform behaviors that they may later be embarrassed about

or be ashamed of. So if you're creating a task where your participant has to get in and do something and whatever action

you are asking your participant to do that basically becomes uh you know uh something that the participant is going

to be later embarrassed about. Oh, why did I do that? Or ashamed of that, oh, I did not want to uh do that, but the

experimentter asked me to. There's also something to be wary of and something uh that as researchers, one has to be

extremely careful about. For instance, in an experiment investigating the factors that lead college students to

cheat, a test would administered to students for grading. So, this is an example uh this is a study, you know,

from Stanganger's book, KHL 1980. In their experiment, there was a test administered to the students for grading

and it was made rather easy for the students to change their answers to improve uh you know their score. Now

several students given this opportunity presented with this opportunity did that. They changed their answers and

improved their scores. But interestingly their original responses were also recorded and the experimenters could

know uh that how many of their students actually cheated uh by changing their answers. Now this is extremely

embarrassing uh information which if shared with the participants you're basically going to make them feel bad

about themselves. Now how do you deal with this? Uh you know do you present it in a way that oh this is just an

experimental manipulation. We just saw this and probably this is not how you are but again being as sensitive as you

can about these procedures is something that I think uh all of us as researchers should aspire for. Now there's also

something uh like potential for lasting impact. Now an important concern uh about these psychological studies you

know the one we talked about milligram study or bamemer study. Sometimes what happens is that uh you know these

procedures or these uh you know tasks that we have our participants do actually have the potential to create

negative mood, stress, self-doubts and anxiety in research participants sometimes and potentially for a slightly

longer time. uh and hence they may leave uh you know a lasting impact on their psyche.

More often than not however uh you know the psychological states created in these studies are assumed to be only

temporary and but there is no guarantee that they are actually temporary. All right there's no guarantee that they

will not have longerlasting effects longerlasting uh consequences. So for say for example you what you do is you

induce individuals uh you know uh to shock the other person or to cheat on an examination and you think that it's

permanently you know it's it's something that is just temporary and the person when they come out of the task will

forget it but it might actually permanently change them. It might change their view of themselves. It might

change their view of what all they are capable of doing. And in that sense it can create potentially harmful psy

psychological outcomes that may stay with these participants for a longer period of time. And that is something

that psychologists you know us we have to be extremely careful about. Also while researchers treat should

always treat this possibility that their research will produce psychological harm seriously and choose alternative methods

of testing their research hypothesis whenever possible. Most evidence suggests that participation in

psychological research does not really damage or does not really have potential for long-term psychological damage.

Okay. So, uh it could be some rare cases where the participants involved are slightly psychologically fragile and

they have that kind of personality type that gets affected. But the point is uh even if there is a 0.00001%

chance of somebody being uh you know adversely affected for a particular period of time as psychologists and as

researchers it becomes our duty to be extremely sensitive and careful about that.

For example, the men in Mgrim study, you know, obviously they must have felt stressed during the experiment itself,

but they did not report any long-term negative outcomes, nor did a team of psychiatrists uh find any evidence for

harmful effects later on. In fact, the participants in behavioral research usually report that they experienced

only minor disturbances and that they learned much about themselves and about the conduct of social science from their

participation. So broadly speaking it's it's not that dangerous and it's it's typically does not lead to uh extremely

harmful circumstances for longer times but it does not mean that it does not have the potential to do that. So as

researchers we have to be extremely careful about that. All right. Now uh the other thing that diner and had said

was this idea of providing freedom of choice. Now providing freedom of choice is something that is considered

extremely important because you have to tell your participant and you have to assure your participant that their

performance in the task is extremely voluntary and they can at any point in time during uh the beginning or the

ending or the middle of the research. They are free to leave the research at any point of time. It becomes

uncomfortable them for whatever reason. All right. So in an ideal situation basically you know everyone can learn

about the research and they can choose to participate or not participate without considering any other factors.

However uh you know this whole idea of freedom of choice sometimes is difficult to attain because say for example you

are uh you know a teacher in in in a college and you are basically you know conducting a course. So sometimes what

happens is uh you know if there is a participant who uh is need in need of course credits in exchange for

participation or sometimes you see uh you know that we composite our participants with money or some kind of

coupons or gifts and so on. It is also possible that there is a participant who actually needs the money that we are

offering in compensation for uh the uh you know for participating in the experiment and if that is the case then

uh you know these participants will have less choice about participating in that experiment

and that basically creates a very uh interesting thing where the participant might be going through the entire

experiment even though they don't want to. So it might always be a good idea to check with them to check how they are

and to ensure that this is completely uh voluntary. something that I mean I've seen people do is that uh sometimes uh

you know there are performance criterion uh in experiments and the person comes and the person basically says oh I need

this whatever x amount of rupees that you're going to be offering me for so much uh time and the participant

performs and they probably are not up to the mark and they have to be let you know they have to be sort of their data

has to be discarded they have to be let go uh it's always a nice idea to sort of give them the conversation anyway

because you know they spare time for you they put in that effort to come to the lab and so on. Now within the labs it is

still all right. I mean there is obviously uh the thing about uh voluntary participation and so on but it

becomes even more of an issue when the research is conduct conducted outside the laboratory. So for example uh you

know when you're recording uh some kind of in in cases of naturalistic study when you're observing the behavior of

individuals outside of the laboratory then a lot of times it might happen is a you've not taken permission you've not

informed the person that you know your behavior is being recorded in that sense there is obviously you know uh lack of

freedom of choice uh about participating in that experiment. A lot of times you'll see that uh in the name of uh

conducting naturalistic research people record behavior without informing people uh you know in advance and in that sense

you've stripped them of their choice and you've stripped the participant of their choice and they did not want to be

recorded they did not want to be observed but you've done that any which way. Now in the lab studies obviously

there there are individual volunteers who participate and they know that an experimental is occurring but this is

this does not happen in observational research. the participant sometimes does not even know that the research is being

conducted and their behavior is being recorded. So obviously it can be asked whether it

is ethical to create situations that infringe on say for example passing by when you're uh you know conducting a

research designed to see who helps in a situation created by researchers particularly because the individuals who

were the participants in this experiment were never informed. So again this is these are ethical questions that uh you

know behavioral scientists are almost always struggling with. Also concerns with free choice occur you know in

institutional settings such as schools, psychiatric hospitals uh corporations and prisons. There are a lot of studies

conducted on prisons. There are a lot of studies conducted on psychiatric hospitals on neurosych hospitals on um

even in schools for example. Sometimes it is not you know they're not the participants are not given any choice at

all. they just had to say oh you have to participate in that experiment for example uh you know uh if you're a

typical psych 101 uh you know instructor I'm not sure how many people actually give choice to their particip to their

class that you have to participate in this or you can choose not to a lot of times it is just part of the class

assessment that you tell that oh everybody has to participate in this research the teacher is conducting this

research and therefore you have absolutely no choice on whether you want to take part in this research or you not

university scient Scientists for example like myself and instructors do argue that uh yeah so this is something that

comes up a lot participation in psychological research teaches uh the students about the conduct of research

and that if there were no research participants there would be no psychology to study uh which is probably

true probably not but the thing is there is there is always going to be a trade-off in how you conduct this

research. Say for example, making it a compulsory component of your uh coursework becomes slightly overboard

I would say and in personal uh experience it does not always give you the best data also for example. All

right. So uh also it is argued by scientists and researchers psychologists that it is more scientifically valid to

require students to participate rather than to have a volunteer system because volunteer participants react differently

from nonvolunteers. So this is also a very interesting sort of a you know question that people uh you know

sometimes think about is that uh do I make uh participation mandatory or do I make it voluntary and uh there has to be

a difference between how voluntary participants and how mandatory participants participate. If your

research question is sensitive to being affected by this, then also it it basically makes a lot of not only

ethical but also scientific sense you know internal validity sense to uh basically be aware of these uh details.

Students for example on the other hand may argue that the time that they spend going to these research sessions might

be better used studying that the specific experiments are sometime uh you know not related to the subject matter

of their course uh or are not well explained to them. So while instructors argue that oh it will teach them this

and this and so on a lot of times uh what they are actually learning in their course and the experiments that they are

participating uh in are not really related to each other. So it does not sort of you know absolutely fit that

criteria all the time. It does probably a lot of times but it does not fit it all the time.

Now obviously there are no clear answers to these ethical dilemmas. There are at least to a certain extent in potential

gains for the participants in the form of knowledge and behavior and so on. But that benefit that we're talking about as

researchers and scientists only occurs if the researchers fully debrief them fully explain the purposes and the

expected results of the research to the participants when the research has ended. So that has to be something uh

you know that is extremely important part of this overall enterprise. Now this the idea of you know uh providing

this secure you know informed consent is basically that sort of can uh you know uh restore this freedom of choice to

people all right in that sense it is it is common practice these days uh you know for from a long time till I since

even I was a student uh and I'm sure even earlier than that is that when you get participants to your research I mean

whether it is an interview or a questionnaire or an experimental study obtaining informed formed consent from

the participant is absolutely necessary and it's obtaining particip informed consent basically uh gives that choice

to the uh individual uh that whether they want to be part of that research or they don't. All right. So typically uh

you know the US department uh of uh you know health studies basically has said that there should be these four five

very important uh items in the informed consent form. I'll just very quickly uh mention them

and move on. So for example, a statement that involves the uh the you know uh a statement that the study involves

research uh and expected duration of participation a description of the procedures that are going to be followed

and identifications uh of any procedures which are experimental. You're doing it for the first time and you you're

getting data out of it. A description of any foreseeable risks or discomfort to the participant. a description of any

benefits to the participants or to others which may reasonably be expected from the research. So both risks,

benefit, costs, everything has to be uh you know uh described beforehand. A disclosure of appropriate alternative

procedures or courses of treatment if any that might be advantageous to the participant. So anything else that the

participant might need to do or you know if he opts out of this thing a statement describing the extent to which the

confidential confidentiality of the records will be maintained. So uh you can basically say oh your data will be

stored in an anomaly fashion and nobody will know about it or it'll just be known to the experimentter or it will

just be known to the uh you know the journal or something which I will submit to. So the detail of uh the detail up to

which this confidentiality will be maintained is also supposed to be uh kept in mind uh for research that

involves more than minimal risk. an explanation as to whether any compensation is to be made and

explanations as to whether any medical treatments are available if you know any injury occurs here. Also an explanation

of whom to contact for answers to pertinent questions such as let's say the the research assistant or the

experimentter themselves and whom to contact in the event of a research related injury and so on. And finally,

this is the most important part, a statement that the participation is voluntary. The refusal to participate

will involve no penalty or loss of benefits to which the participant is otherwise entitled. Uh and that the

participant may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits to which the

participant is entitled. So all of these things must be an important part of the informed consent form.

Also uh there are three things I mean we just said these are the components of the informed consent form but there are

three things that this informed consent form actually uh ensures. What does it do? Firstly the potential participant is

presented with this sheet of paper on which to record demographic information including age and maybe other uh

relevant details and this assures the experimental that the research participant is old enough to make his or

her own decisions. This is especially uh important when you are you know conducting research with children in

which case the decision is made by their parents. Second the potential participant is given an informed consent

form explaining the procedure procedure of the research who is conducting it how the results of the research will be used

and what is going to happen during this research session. So the entire disclosure is presented beforehand.

Finally, the participant is also informed of his or her potential rights during the research which includes the

rights of uh you know the freedom to leave the research uh at any point in time and basically the knowledge that

the data will be kept confidential. So these are basically the goals which are achieved by the informed consent form.

All right. Now uh people have sort of worried about this to a certain degree. They have basically asked that you know

there is obviously some advantages to having this informed consent but there can be potential disadvantages to

informed consent also. For example uh people say uh that if Mgram had told his research participants that his

experiments was about obedience to authority and not just about learning as he had originally told then the

participant would have behaved very differently. All right. And in that sense that reduces this benefit of uh

you know basically reduces the potential of getting correct data and in that sense corrupts the overall enterprise.

Okay. So that is obviously something that you know have to be careful about. But the preferred strategy in such a

case would be to tell the participants as much as possible about the true nature of the study. Uh particularly

everything that might be expected to influence their willingness to participate. So you have to give them

complete choice. uh while uh you can still withhold the actual pieces of information that are revealing about the

goal of the research and the purpose of the experimental study. All right. So that's uh you know the first section

about uh you know how to conduct ethical research. There are two more points which I'll uh cover in the next lecture.

Thank you.