Let's Get Ethical

Most individuals are confident in their ability to tell right from wrong. This leads to some sense of security that others will make similar moral judgements. However, is some form of consensus bias at work here? Does everyone really make the same behavioral or judgemental decisions regarding research ethics? More importantly, are we, ourselves, even making truly ethical research decisions? Let’s begin by outlining some of the most infamous breaches in research ethics in history.

You have likely heard about the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. The U.S. Public Health Service began the study in 1932. The research subjects were African American men in the state of Alabama. 400 of the men had advanced syphilis and 201 of the men did not have syphilis. It is important to note that the men with syphilis acquired syphilis naturally outside of the study. The study originally aimed to observe the men as their condition progressed. However, in the 1940’s, antibiotics that could cure syphilis were developed. The researchers in the study did not treat the infected men, nor did they tell the men that they had syphilis. Rather, researchers told the men that they simply had “bad blood”. The researchers also prevented the men from being drafted into the U.S. military, World War II was occurring at the time, because the U.S. military would have diagnosed the men with syphilis leading to their possible treatment. The researchers also made arrangements so that local physicians would not treat the men. According to The New York Times, at least 28 of the men in the study died as a direct result of refused treatment. This study manipulated a vulnerable population and caused the needless pain and suffering of multiple men. This goes against the ethical principle of beneficence in human subjects research. The principle of beneficence suggests that researchers should attempt to maximize the benefits and minimize the risks for research participants. The study also goes against the ethical principle of justice by burdening a specific population, African American men, with more of the burdens of research while other populations may receive the benefits. It may also be argued that this study violated the ethical principle of respect for persons. The study targeted and manipulated mostly illiterate African Americans of a lower socioeconomic status without offering extra protections to make sure that the men were not coerced or deceived by any means, including financial means.

A separate study conducted by Philip Zimbardo in 1971 aimed to study prison dynamics utilizing the participation of 24 male undergraduates at Stanford University. The 24 students were split into two groups, prisoners and guards, and placed in an artificial prison in a basement at Stanford University. Police took the prisoners from their homes in handcuffs and brought them to the prison. Meanwhile, the guards were simply given uniforms and had no specific direction on how to run the prison. Unfortunately, the guards quickly began partaking in cruel behaviors towards the prisoners. Before the end of the study, five prisoners had to be released early as they began developing emotional problems such as depression and humiliation. The experiment ended before completion due to these issues. Although the participants did sign a consent form recognizing that they would be signing away some of their civil rights if they were selected to become prisoners, the study still caused the subjects significant emotional harm. In human subjects research, emotional harm is just as significant as causing physical harm. Researchers must take care in preserving the participants’ emotional, social, and physical wellbeing. Later, the study was also accused of data manipulation. Some researchers believe that Zimbardo encouraged the guards to act cruelly. Either way, researchers should not only protect all aspects of their subjects but also the objectivity of the study.

Another study conducted by Laud Humphrey in 1970 looked into homosexual behaviors in public spaces. Humphrey investigated these encounters by taking on the role of a “watchqueen”. The “watchqueen” was in charge of looking out for the police while two individuals, in this case, gay men, engaged in sexual acts in public spaces known as “tea rooms”. These encounters often took place in places like public restrooms. Although this phenomenon may seem strange today, it is important to note that homosexual men were not openly accepted at the time. In fact, these men could be arrested for ‘sodomy’. Although the men knew they were being watched by Humphrey, they did not know that they were being studied. However, the invasion of privacy goes further. Humphrey wrote the mens’ license plate numbers down and later tried to convince police officers to tell him the names and addresses of these men under the guise of being a ‘friendly salesman’. Surprisingly, the officers often obliged. Humphrey would then find these men, and conduct in depth interviews. However, Humphrey did not tell the men what he was really researching. Instead, he told them that they were participating in a public health survey. Later, Humphrey published his research in the book, “Tearoom Trade: A Study of Homosexual Encounters in Public Places”. The large ethical concern with this study is Humphrey’s use of deception and invasion of privacy. In human subjects research, deception is a tool that is to be avoided unless absolutely necessary. Researchers are also required to debrief subjects by explaining the deception and the true purpose of the study after employing deception.

These research studies represent extreme cases of ethical violations in research. It is important to note that research can be and often is done in an ethical manner. Increased review and other mechanisms of accountability try to ensure this. As a potential researcher, you are responsible for employing research ethics. You can take free courses on topics like research ethics and lab safety through Indiana University using the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative. Once you are logged in, you can add courses such as Social/Behavioral Researchers and Biomedical Responsible Conduct of Research. To learn more and to access these courses go through the following link: https://research.iu.edu/training/citi/index.html.





Citations
Carr, D. S. (2021). The art and science of social research. W.W. Norton & Company.
The New York Times. (1972, September 12). At least 28 died in syphilis study. The New York Times. Retrieved April 2, 2022, from https://www.nytimes.com/1972/09/12/archives/at-least-28-died-in-syphilis-study-reports-on-tuskegee-tests.html