David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ethics and Behavior 5 (1):87 – 104 (1995)
Research examining the possible effects of deceptive research participation on participants' perceptions of psychology has yielded equivocal results. The present study's goal was to clarify the possible effects of participation in mildly deceptive research on participants' impressions of scientific and applied psychology. Participants (N = 112) were randomly assigned to one of six experimental conditions: active groups receiving negative, positive, or no feedback, or passive groups receiving negative, positive, or no feedback. Following participation, participants completed measures of impressions of psychotherapy and psychotherapists, researchers, and instructors. The manipulation did not affect attitudes toward psychology on any of the dependent measures, although gender effects resulted on one measure. Participants in general reported very positive attitudes toward the science and practice of psychology. Recommendations are offered for future research on the effects of more extensive deceptions.
|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
Joan E. Sieber (forthcoming). Planning Ethically Responsible Research: A Guide for Students and Internal Review Boards. Ethics.
Citations of this work BETA
Bryan Benham (2008). The Ubiquity of Deception and the Ethics of Deceptive Research. Bioethics 22 (3):147–156.
Similar books and articles
Gerald P. Koocher (2002). Using the Cables Model to Assess and Minimize Risk in Research: Control Group Hazards. Ethics and Behavior 12 (1):75 – 86.
John Appiah-Poku, Sam Newton & Nancy Kass (2011). Participants' Perceptions of Research Benefits in an African Genetic Epidemiology Study. Developing World Bioethics 11 (3):128-135.
David Wendler & Christine Grady (2008). What Should Research Participants Understand to Understand They Are Participants in Research? Bioethics 22 (4):203–208.
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.
James R. P. Ogloff & Randy K. Otto (1991). Are Research Participants Truly Informed? Readability of Informed Consent Forms Used in Research. Ethics and Behavior 1 (4):239 – 252.
Keith D. Markman, Ronald A. Elizaga, Jennifer J. Ratcliff & Matthew N. McMullen (2007). The Interplay Between Counterfactual Reasoning and Feedback Dynamics in Producing Inferences About the Self. Thinking and Reasoning 13 (2):188 – 206.
Conrad Vincent Fernandez, Shaureen Taweel, Eric D. Kodish & Charles Weijer, Disclosure of Research Result to Research Participants: Needs and Attitudes of Adolescents and Parents.
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.
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.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #424,619 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #369,877 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?