Discuss ethical considerations related to research studies at the biological level of analysis.

Introduction

• State what you are doing in the essay 
  
• This essay will attempt to offer a balanced review of ethical considerations related to research at the biological level of analysis (BLA). 
• Define the biological level of analysis 
  
• The biological level of analysis (BLA) states that all cognitions, emotions and behaviours have a physiological basis. 
• Describe ethical considerations 
  
• In psychology, ethics must be considered to ensure participants (humans and animals) are not harmed and that research conducted is ethically valid
• Researchers should always conduct research in an ethical manner and studies should always be critically evaluated for ethical issues. 
• Ethical standards made by the American Psychology Association (APA) that all research done in psychology must abide by.
• These ethics are: 
• Protection of participants
• Participants should be protected from physical and mental harm and distress 
• This includes humiliation, stress, injury, etc.
• Participants should not be forced to reveal personal information. 
• Consent 
• Participants must be informed of the true aims and nature of research before giving consent 
• Sometimes it is not possible to give full information about research. 
• Participant bias: knowing the true aims of a study may affect participants' behaviour and thus the results of a study 
• It is considered acceptable not to give full informed consent if no harm is expected 
• A guardian or family member should also give consent to the study if the participants are 
• Children under 18 years of age 
• Adults incompetent of understanding the true nature and aims of the study 
• Right to withdraw
• Participants should be informed of their right to withdraw their participation and data at any time in the study (even at the end) without penalty. 
• Confidentiality 
• Data collected in a study should remain confidential and anonymous to protect participants from possible consequences that may result from their data 
• Deception
• Deception should be avoided
• But slight deception is considered acceptable if: 
• Participant bias would result from participants knowing the true aims of the study 
• The research has potential significant contribution 
• It is unavoidable 
• The deception does not cause any distress to the participant, including upon being informed of the deception
• If deception is involved, informed consent is not obtained 
• Any deception must be revealed at the earliest opportunity 
• Debriefing 
• Participants should leave the study without undue stress 
• Findings of the research should be made available to participants as soon as possible 
• Any deception must be revealed and justified 

Body

Study 1: Money - "David Reimer" (1974)

• One identical twin boy had his penis burnt off by accident during circumcision 
  
• Money advised the boy's parents to castrate him and raise him as a female. 
  
• Money interviewed the twins once a year and used the findings to support his theory of gender neutrality - all people are born gender neutral and the environment determines gender-specific behaviour. 
  
• At the age of 14, Brenda was told she was born a boy, and decided to turn into a boy named David. 

There were a set of ethical issues in this study, which include: 

Informed consent 

• Money published scientific articles using this case study as evidence to support his theory. 
  
• Neither the twins nor their parents gave informed consent to the twins being in a study. 

• Lack of knowledge of the study means they were not informed of their right to withdrawal 

• Family was not debriefed 
  

• In the publications, Money revealed the case and identity of the twins, which violates the family's right to confidentiality. 
  

Participant protection

• Money caused physical harm by castrating Bruce. 
  
• Bruce was forced to live as a girl 
  
• Mental harm was inflicted as Brenda experienced confusion, bullying and trauma due to gender issues. 
  
• The mental trauma that David experienced from the study lead to the suicide of both twins 
  

• The family was not informed of the true nature and aims of Money's study or that the twins were in a study. 
  
• David was deceived into believing he was a female for most of his childhood and adolescence. 

Study 2: Schacter and Singer (1962) 

Ethical issues of this study:
There were a set of ethical issues in this study, which include: 

Deception 

• Participants were deceived about the aims and nature of the study 
  
• Participants were told the study aimed to test the effects of Suproxin on vision
• But it was actually testing the two factor theory of emotion - emotion arises from a combination of cognition and arousal - using adrenaline 
• All participants were deceived about the injection they were receiving 
  
• Participants were told they were receiving an injection of Suproxin (a drug that does not exist) 
• But they were actually receiving adrenaline or a placebo (saline solution) 
• Furthermore, some participants were given false side effects of the adrenaline injection that they were given 
  
• Headache, numbness, itchiness in the feet 
• But deception was used because: 
  
• Participant bias would result from participants knowing the true nature of the study
• The research has potential significant contribution to understanding the causes of emotion 

Consent 

• Participants were not informed of the true nature and aims of the study before giving consent. 
  
• They did not know that the study aimed to investigate the two factor theory of emotion 
• They did not know that they would be receiving adrenaline or placebo injections
• Some participants did not know the true effects of the adrenaline injection they were given 
• They were either given false effects or no effects
• But being fully informed of the true nature and aims of the study may result in participant bias 
  
• Participant protection 
  
• Researchers did not protect participants 
• Participants may have had a harmful reaction to the adrenaline 
• Researchers did not ensure that participants would not experience harm from the injection 

Debriefing 

• Participants were adequately debriefed 
  
• Deception was revealed and justified
  

APA Guidelines for Animal Research

• Tries to avoid harm to animals 
  
• But harm may still be inflicted on animals, 
• The research may potentially provide significant benefit to the health or welfare of humans or other animals 
• If it is unavoidable 
• If the procedure would cause pain to humans, it should be assumed that it will cause pain to animals 
  
• Animal welfare should be monitored 
  
• Animals should be euthanized as soon as possible if research 
• causes long term/serious harm 
• Affects their ability to live  
• normally 
• Pain-free 

Study 3: Berthold (1849) 

Ethical issues of this study
There were a set of ethical issues in this study, which include: 

Participant protection 

• Berthold castrated roosters to study the effects of testosterone (secreted by the testes) on behaviour 
  
• May have caused distress to the roosters after testicles were surgically removed 
  
• But the research provided significant benefit to the understanding of the effects of the hormone testosterone 
  
• This knowledge could benefit the health of humans and other animals 

Consent 

• Roosters could not be fully informed about the study 
  
• Roosters could not give consent 
  
• But roosters would not be able to understand if they were being studied 
  
• Therefore, it would not be possible to gain informed consent 

Withdrawal 

• Roosters could not express any desires to withdraw from the study 
  

• Roosters were not debriefed 
  
• But since they are animals and they did not know they were in a study, they would not desire a debriefing 
  

Animal ethics 

• The welfare of the roosters was not monitored 
  
• It was found that when testes were replaced, they did not re-establish a neural connection 
  
• Berthold had done permanent damage to the roosters that may have affected their ability to live a normal, pain-free live
• But he did not euthanize them 

Study 4: Rosenzweig and Bennett (1972) 

Ethical issues of this study
There were a set of ethical issues in this study, which include:

Participant protection

• Researchers placed rats in enriched and deprived environments to study the effects of the environment on brain plasticity 
  
• May have caused distress to the rats living in the deprived environment 
  
• Rats were euthanized to study their brains 
  
• But the research provided significant benefit to the understanding of the effects of the environment on brain plasticity 
  
• This knowledge could benefit humans and other animals 

Consent 

• Rats could not be fully informed about the study 
  
• Rats could not give consent 
  
• But rats would not be able to understand if they were being studied 
  
• Therefore, it would not be possible to gain informed consent 

Withdrawal 

• Rats could not express any desires to withdraw from the study 
  

• Rats were not debriefed 
  
• But since they are animals and they did not know they were in a study, they would not desire a debriefing 
  

Animal ethics 

• The welfare of the rats was not monitored 

Conclusion 

• Ethical considerations in all research in psychology includes, 
  
• Protection of participants from harm Consent
• Withdrawal
• Confidentiality 
• Deception 
• Debriefing 
• But there are slight exceptions for consent and deception 
  
• Animal research has slightly different ethical considerations 
  
• Differences regard harming participants and ethical euthanasia