What Should We Do When Participants Report Dangerous Drinking? The Impact of Personalized Letters Versus General Pamphlets as a Function of Sex and Controlled Orientation
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ethics and Behavior 22 (1):1 - 15 (2011)
Research in which participants report potentially dangerous health-related behaviors raises ethical and professional questions about what to do with that information. Policies and laws regarding reportable behaviors vary across states and Institutional Review Boards (IRB). In alcohol research, IRBs often require researchers to respond to participants who report dangerous drinking practices. Researchers have little guidance regarding how best to respond in such cases. Personalized feedback or general nonpersonalized information may prove differentially effective as a function of gender and/or level of self-determination. This study evaluated response strategies for reducing peak blood alcohol concentration (BAC) among participants reporting dangerous BACs (≥ .35%) in the context of a two-year longitudinal intervention trial with 818 heavy drinking college students. After each assessment, participants who reported drinking to estimated BACs at or greater than .35% were sent either a personalized letter expressing concern and indicating their reported BAC or a nonpersonalized pamphlet that included general information about alcohol and other substances, referral information, and a BAC handout. Hierarchical linear modeling results revealed that both strategies were associated with reduced peak BAC when controlling for previous BAC. The personalized letter was more effective for women and for students who tend to regulate their behavior based on others' expectations and contingencies in the environment. This research provides some guidance for researchers considering appropriate responses to participants who report dangerous health behavior in the context of a research trial
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Edward L. Deci & Richard M. Ryan (eds.) (2002). Handbook of Self-Determination Research. University of Rochester Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Celia B. Fisher (1994). Reporting and Referring Research Participants: Ethical Challenges for Investigators Studying Children and Youth. Ethics and Behavior 4 (2):87 – 95.
Robert P. Lawry (2000). Heavy Drinking on Campus. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (2):153-156.
Sandra T. Sigmon, Kelly J. Rohan, Diana Dorhofer, Lisa A. Hotovy, Peter C. Trask & Nina Boulard (1997). Effects of Consent Form Information on Self-Disclosure. Ethics and Behavior 7 (4):299 – 310.
Marisha B. Liss (1994). Child Abuse: Is There a Mandate for Researchers to Report? Ethics and Behavior 4 (2):133 – 146.
Elizabeth Soliday & Annette L. Stanton (1995). Deceived Versus Nondeceived Participants' Perceptions of Scientific and Applied Psychology. Ethics and Behavior 5 (1):87 – 104.
Conrad Vincent Fernandez, Shaureen Taweel, Eric D. Kodish & Charles Weijer, Disclosure of Research Result to Research Participants: Needs and Attitudes of Adolescents and Parents.
Annette L. Stanton, Eileen J. Burker & David Kershaw (1991). Effects of Researcher Follow-Up of Distressed Subjects: Tradeoff Between Validity and Ethical Responsibility? Ethics and Behavior 1 (2):105 – 112.
Eric R. Pedersen, Clayton Neighbors, Judy Tidwell & Ty W. Lostutter (2011). Do Undergraduate Student Research Participants Read Psychological Research Consent Forms? Examining Memory Effects, Condition Effects, and Individual Differences. Ethics and Behavior 21 (4):332 - 350.
Leslie Meltzer Henry, Undesirable Implications of Disclosing Individual Genetic Results to Research Participants.
Laura Weiss Roberts, Teddy D. Warner, Laura B. Dunn, Janet L. Brody, Katherine Green Hammond & Brian B. Roberts (2007). Shaping Medical Students' Attitudes Toward Ethically Important Aspects of Clinical Research: Results of a Randomized, Controlled Educational Intervention. Ethics and Behavior 17 (1):19 – 50.
Thomas Tyson (1992). Does Believing That Everyone Else is Less Ethical Have an Impact on Work Behavior? Journal of Business Ethics 11 (9):707 - 717.
Joan E. Sieber (2004). Empirical Research on Research Ethics. Ethics and Behavior 14 (4):397 – 412.
Janet L. Brody, John P. Gluck & Alfredo S. Aragon (2000). Participants' Understanding of the Process of Psychological Research: Debriefing. Ethics and Behavior 10 (1):13 – 25.
Sandra T. Sigmon (1995). Ethical Practices and Beliefs of Psychopathology Researchers. Ethics and Behavior 5 (4):295 – 309.
Karen J. Maschke (2010). Wanted: Human Biospecimens. Hastings Center Report 40 (5):21-23.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-01-15
Total downloads1 ( #438,484 of 1,100,992 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #290,337 of 1,100,992 )
How can I increase my downloads?