If you have followed this column on research, you are now poised to tackle the ethics of research. At first, this may seem like an odd combination — ethics and research. But research, like counseling, has a set of ethical standards to guide it. We will address the major issues (the overarching values, specific tasks, and, the final product), and limit our discussion to human research. For the finer points, please refer to the references that follow this column.

When humans are used in scientific research, great care must be exercised to assure that the rights of those individuals are protected. Ethics, the study of action, examines the relationship between humans and provides a set of standards regarding how we should treat one another (Ray, 2000). The fundamental effort of all addiction research is to develop a scientific body of knowledge based on valid and reliable methods. This basic statement originated from Ethical Principles of Psychologists (American Psychological Association, 1992). It was originally directed at psychology research, but also fits addictions research. The meaning behind this short but powerful sentence is that research has to be honest and accurate if it is to be useful. Consider how some parts of our field might revert to the dark ages if untested interventions were allowed to proliferate. Moreover, consider what might happen to research subjects if they were not protected by some code of conduct.

Ethical standards exist for counseling and apply to research. There are some similarities between the two at this level. One is beneficence. This concept is tied to the health and welfare of people, or in our case the subjects of research. The idea behind beneficence is the obligation to competently help people. This means that the researcher does the best research that can be done. In this way, the health and welfare of the population that is the focus of the research is well served (Schmit & Meara, 1996; Heppner, Kivlinghan, & Wampold, 1999).

Nonmaleficence means not submitting subjects to intentional harm and avoiding the risk of harm. It also means the researcher needs to be careful to avoid even unintentional harm (Schmit & Meara, 1996; Heppner, Kivlinghan, & Wampold, 1999). When there is a choice between the benefit of research and the possible harm to a subject, dump the research project.

Another broad ethical standard is respect for the person. We will specify this standard in the next section, but for now keep in mind that this is the issue of informed consent. In all forms of research, from the survey to the true experiment, the subjects have to be allowed to decide what shall and shall not happen to them (Schmit & Meara, 1996).

The last broad ethical standard is justice. This refers to fairness in the selection of subjects to equitably distribute the burdens and benefits of research. For example, you do not want to favor certain subjects with only beneficial treatment and burden risky research with less favored subjects (Schmit & Meara, 1996). In addition, you do not want to embarrass subjects, or be the cause of any anger, emotional distress, loss of self-esteem, stress, irritation, negative labeling, criminal or civil liability, or invasion of privacy (Heppner, Kivlinghan, & Wampold, 1999).

To treat clients ethically, research has to be competed in an ethical manner. Before you start your testing or observations have your research proposal reviewed by an Institutional Review Board. If your company or organization receives federal funds you probably have this board somewhere in your structure. If your organization does not receive such monies, it is probably best to have your project reviewed by some external review process that is expert in the functioning of research reviews.

Most review boards have an extensive form to fill out, and examples can be seen in the references below. This review is another step to assure that research will be conducted in an ethical fashion.

Included in this review will be what is called an informed consent, which you will present to all prospective research subjects. If they agree to be in your research, they will sign the form, and you are off and running. This form is critical in all research. Don't do research without one. This form can get somewhat complicated, and the reader is encouraged to look at one of the references for additional information.

The form is generally one page, and it describes the research in language the subject can understand. Moreover, the form needs to let the subject know that their participation is entirely voluntary.

Another item in the informed consent is the risk/benefit analysis. This has to do with the beneficence, respect and justice elements. Most often, the risk to any addiction-oriented subject is minimal. That is, the subject will take a test or will be observed under a set of spelled-out conditions. Sometimes there are risks, and the subject has to know these potential risks ahead of time and decide if they want to continue (Ray, 2000; Schmit & Meara, 1996).

An important point to be made in this form is the assurance of confidentially, and how it will be maintained, even if you decide to publish the results. The consent should tell the subjects how much time will be required of them, what reasonable benefits will result from this research, that participation is voluntary and that they can change their mind at any time.

After subjects read the consent form, they should be able to make an intelligent and informed decision whether to participate or not.

The last ethical element to address is the intellectual work itself.

A central goal of all addictions research is to provide accurate information that will improve the health and condition of those with addictive problems. To get your information out to those who can use it, you need to write and hopefully publish the results. To do that you need to attend to a few important items (Heppner, Kivlinghan, & Wampold, 1999).

• First, be sure that what you did (e.g., an experiment) was completed with valid data and a valid research design. No fudging of information or skipping an important stage in the research process is allowed. Your results should not be based on misleading facts or processes.
• Second, you are responsible for the proper interpretation of your data and the limitations of your research. These elements allow your conclusions to be qualified, so that your results do not say something other than what you found. Fabrication of data or the results is clearly unethical.
• Third, make sure that you give credit to those who contributed to your results. That means citing references and colleagues who assisted you. Essentially, don't plagiarize or take more credit for your research results than you should.

Good research is usually time consuming and can be difficult to organize (Schmit & Meara, 1996). A large part of that time and difficulty will be taken up with making sure your research is ethical. Despite the effort, your project will be all the better for it.

Next time we will give you a simple guide to distinguish good research from bad.

Michael J. Taleff, PhD, CAC, MAC, is assistant professor in the Counselor Education Department and project director of Chemical Dependency Programs at Pennsylvania State University. He is also a member of the NAADAC Research Committee.

References
American Psychological Association (1992). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 47, 390-395.
Heppner, P.P., Kivlinghan, D.M., & Wampold, B.E. (1999). Research design in counseling, (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole . Wadsworth.
Ray, W.J. (2000). Methods toward a science of behavior and experience. (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Schmidt, L.D. & Meara, N.M. (1996). Applying for approval to conduct research with human participants. In R.T.L. Leong & J.T. Austin, (Eds.). The psychology research handbook: A guide for graduate students and research assistants. (pp. 113-126). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

---

Comments

Add New Search RSS

Write comment
Name:
Email:	do not notifynotify
Title:
UBBCode:	-color-aquablackbluefuchsiagraygreenlimemaroonnavyolivepurpleredsilvertealwhiteyellow -size-tinysmallmediumlargehuge
	Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.25

3.25 Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."