Deception is an unavoidable part in
Others include 'living a lie'; those cases where someone behaves in a way that misleads the rest of us as to their true nature.
Deception is an unavoidable part in
Lying and ethical theory Lying and ethical theory Different theories of ethics approach lying in different ways. Study personnel tell subjects that they will play a competitive game involving financial rewards based on their performance. What is a lie? A lie has three essential features: A lie communicates some information The liar intends to deceive or mislead The liar believes that what they are 'saying' is not true There are some features that people think are part of lying but aren't actually necessary: A lie does not have to give false information A lies does not have to be told with a bad malicious intention - white lies are an example of lies told with a good intention This definition says that what makes a lie a lie is that the liar intends to deceive or at least to mislead the person they are lying to. In Case 2, the researcher lies to the subjects about the purpose of the experiment; they are told the purpose of the activity is to measure their attitudes when in fact the research activity involves investigating the degree to which they and their attitudes are vulnerable to group pressure. So if telling a particular lie produces a better result than not telling it, then telling it would be a good thing to do. The federal guidelines on the protection of human subjects of research found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 45, Part 46 provide the IRB with criteria for determining whether proposed research that falls under its purview will treat human subjects in an ethical manner. It's certainly not foolproof, but it may be helpful. Deception and Informed Consent When a study uses deception, fully informed consent cannot be obtained from subjects because they are not provided with enough information to make an informed decision.
And if telling a particular lie produces a worse result than not telling it, telling it would be a bad thing to do. In grossly over-simplified terms, those who follow consequentialist theories are concerned with the consequences of lying and if telling a lie would lead to a better result than telling the truth, they will argue that it is good to tell the lie.
What would a public jury of reasonable persons say about this lie?
If in written form, do not call the document a "Consent Form" for participants cannot fully consent since they do not know the full nature of the research. From the APA guide to ethics www.
Situations where lying is acceptable
Lying is giving some information while believing it to be untrue, intending to deceive by doing so. Instead, you may call the document an "Information Sheet. Generally, subjects should be debriefed immediately following their participation. First inspect our own conscience and ask whether the lie is justified Second, ask friends or colleagues, or people with special ethical knowledge what they think about the particular case Thirdly, consult some independent persons about it This sort of test is most useful when considering what we might call 'public' lying - when an institution is considering just how much truth to tell about a project - perhaps a medical experiment, or a proposed war, or an environmental development. This is an example of 'rule-utilitarianism'; considering every single action separately is 'act-Utilitarianism'. In all three cases, the subjects are deceived as to the purpose of the experimental activity. Deception Involving Audio or Video Recordings When the deception involved in a study includes audio or video recording subjects without their knowledge, the IRB will generally require that subjects are given the opportunity to withdraw from the study. Whenever possible, researchers must debrief subjects about the deception. And if telling a particular lie produces a worse result than not telling it, telling it would be a bad thing to do. Consider the case where telling a lie would mean that 10 other lies would not be told. The debriefing document should include the following: a an explanation of how subjects were misinformed; b a correct or complete account of the component about which subjects were misinformed; and c an explanation of the reason the deception was believed to be necessary.
It is possible for the IRB to approve one of these experiments and it still not be ethically justified research. When I later eat that piece of pie I discover that there really is a worm in it the case where nobody is deceived by me because they know that I always tell lies Lying and statements Some philosophers believe that lying requires a statement of some sort; they say that the liar must actually speak or write or gesture.
Goals of Debriefing Debriefing after deception has several goals: 1 to repair the breach of informed consent entailed by the deception, 2 to remove any confusions or defuse any tensions that might have been generated by the deception, 3 to make it clear especially to younger subjects that deception is permissible only in exceptional circumstances, and 4 to repair as much as possible the breach of trust that has occurred not only between the investigator and the subject, but potentially between all researchers and all subjects.
based on 5 review