Ethics for European Psychologists (eBook)

Geoff Lindsay, Haldor Øvreeide, Casper Koene (Autoren)

eBook Download: EPUB

2024 | 2. Auflage
254 Seiten
Hogrefe Publishing (Verlag)
978-1-61334-637-2 (ISBN)

Infos

The understanding of and adherence to professional ethics is fundamental in navigating the moral encounters and dilemmas that all psychologists face in their daily work, whether in research or professional practice. Core values and principles remain stable. However, as more complex and conflicting societal contexts come into play, the individual psychologist and the professional community need support in upholding a solid moral integrity. The volume is a welcome resource for any psychologist or student wanting to foresee, prevent, and professionally manage, in an ethically responsible way, the moral challenges that arise. The framework for this timely, second edition remains the Meta-code of Ethics of the European Federation of Psychologists' Associations (EFPA), which is an important asset in addressing the challenges faced by the profession now and in the coming years. The discussions of the principles on the meta-code are further developed and the authors have extended the number and types of practical examples to vividly illustrate ethical challenges and dilemmas faced. Read, discuss, and evaluate your practice.

Textauszug

|1|Chapter 1
Professional Ethics and Psychology

Geoff Lindsay

The practice of psychology, whether as a scientific discipline or as a service to the public, is based upon two main foundations. The first comprises a body of knowledge and skills that have been built up from research, theory, and from the practice of psychology. The second comprises the ethics of developing that knowledge and the skills and actions taken when applying it to meet demands for services to the public. All respectable professions have these elements in common. Psychology is firmly grounded in scientific enquiry, with a strong basis in certain approaches such as experimentation, and in attempts to enhance objectivity and replicability of findings. Also, meticulous observation, description, and reflection of unique and naturally occurring events are important for scientific development in psychology.

This book focuses on the ethical basis for gaining and practising psychological knowledge. The basis or the organising principle is the Meta-Code of Ethics developed for the European Federation of Psychologists’ Associations (EFPA). The development of the Meta-Code was undertaken by the EFPA Standing Committee on Ethics (SCE) and its predecessor, the EFPA Task Force on Ethics (Lindsay, 2011). We intend this to be a practical book that will help individual psychologists, at different stages of their careers, ranging from the undergraduate starting out on a scientific subject at university, to the trainee professional psychologist or new researcher, to the experienced psychologist confronted by complicated ethical decision making. In short, we consider that ethical practice is not something that is only learned at the start of a professional career. Rather, it develops as experience grows, new research is produced, and new challenges arise.

In this chapter we set the scene through four topics: (1) psychology as a science, (2) psychology as a profession, (3) why have an ethical code? and (4) the development of the EFPA Meta-Code of Ethics for psychologists.

|2|Psychology as a Science

Psychology has much in common with other sciences. Research in psychology may include either human or other living species as objects for study. This raises questions about the generalisability of models of species and their location in an ethical hierarchy. Put simply, should our ethical concerns for researching humans differ from those when researching earthworms or rats? If so, on what basis will this be justified? Is there a scale from lower to higher animals (including humans)?

This issue has led to differing positions, which highlight two aspects. First, ethics, and hence the determination of appropriate ethical behaviour by psychologist researchers, is grounded in values. Second, values are themselves linked to and determined by factors including religion, beliefs, and culturally influenced expectations. This being so, it is necessary to undertake research within a framework that has acceptability within the host society. Such acceptability may change over time and differ between cultures.

As a scientific discipline, psychology cannot be viewed as “value free” (Lindsay, 1995). While some research may raise relatively few and minor ethical issues, other research may concern substantial and contentious ethical questions. An example of the former might be studying reading abilities of 11-year-old students, while the latter might comprise the investigation of religious beliefs, sexual behaviours, or patterns of voting in elections: These are all essentially personal and private matters. With respect to research, the ethical issues concern the topic, the arrangements for conducting the research, publication and dissemination of results, and interaction effects. In addition, there are important ethical issues regarding the outcomes and impact of the research on individuals or society. Again, these may vary in importance, from limited or minimal concern through to highly contested or negative and harmful outcomes, even if the research has also produced valuable positive outcomes.

The Topic

Psychology as the study of behaviour and the mind covers a vast range. Consequently, the context of each particular research study will raise different ethical questions. It is not easy to categorise which topics are likely to pose fewer or more ethical problems, and these judgements might change over time. For example, research has been conducted that has examined basic cognitive processes, how these relate to each other, and how they are |3|applied in natural settings. While laboratory studies of reasoning may pose little ethical concern, the results of studies collectively may pose serious challenges. This is exemplified by findings that indicate mean differences between racial or ethnic groups in cognitive abilities. The scientific issues concern the rigour of the studies, and validity and usefulness of the findings (Phinney, 1996; Richeson & Sommers, 2016). In this example, the concept of race is now seen as contentious, affecting the scientific validity of findings. This in turn raises ethical questions regarding dissemination of findings from such studies. But there is a further ethical concern: Should such research be undertaken at all? The work of Jensen and Eysenck, for example, was attacked not so much for the pure science but for the implications that might be drawn and consequent impact on, in this case, relations between different groups (e.g., Eysenck, 1971). This raises the sensitive issue: Are certain topics for research to be avoided not on scientific grounds but because they are socially sensitive? At this time, particularly sensitive topics might continue to include race, but also the broad field of equity, diversity, and inclusion.

Conducting the Research

Research methods in psychology cover a very broad field. At one end of the continuum there are invasive surgical procedures; at the other end of the continuum may be placed interpersonal experimental techniques. One with a low degree of invasiveness is the completion of questionnaires, particularly in a large group. Compare this with a study by individual interview where the researcher asks probing and challenging questions about the participant’s personal behaviour and views.

These examples imply at least two dimensions: physical–interpersonal and low–high intrusiveness. Hence, intrusion may be conceptualised as either physical, for example, surgery, or by, for example, questioning. Each of these has implications for the well-being of the participant, which may also be considered with respect to physical and psychological health. That is, not only does physical intrusion pose potential ethical questions, so also does questioning.

An example, which also suggests how attitudes to what is permissible in experiments change, concerns an experiment by Landis in 1924 in the US (described in Crafts et al., 1938). Twenty-five “subjects” (a term which has been replaced by research “participants”), mainly adults but including a 13-year-old boy, and a hospital patient with high blood pressure, were exposed to various conditions to produce emotional responses, the purpose |4|being to assess facial expression of emotions. The 17 situations included the playing of jazz and reading from the Bible – probably regarded as benign depending on one’s views of jazz or the Bible in a predominantly Christian country. However, other conditions included deception by the researcher, for example, asking the participant to sniff ammonia rather than the “syrup of lemons” as indicated by the experimenter. Other tasks involved asking the person to cut off a rat’s head; and requesting the participant to put their hand into a covered bucket, without looking, and feel around. The bucket contained several inches of water and live frogs, and a strong electric shock was delivered.

A third dimension implicit here is the vulnerability of the participant, with respect to their developmental status, both age and intellectual ability, and their physical and psychological health and resilience – in this case a boy and a hospital patient. Other examples from the past, include the research by Milgram on obedience (see Interaction, below) and the studies on children and adults who were substantially disadvantaged. For example, research...

Produkt-Details

• Erscheint lt. Verlag: 12.8.2024
• Sprache: englisch
• Themenwelt: Geisteswissenschaften ► Psychologie
• Schlagworte: core values in psychology • ethical dilemmas • ethics in psychology • Meta-code of Ethics of EFPA
• ISBN-10: 1-61334-637-9 / 1613346379
• ISBN-13: 978-1-61334-637-2 / 9781613346372