A researcher studying conformity tells participants they are taking part in a 'perception study' without revealing the true hypothesis. Participants are fully informed about the procedures and potential discomfort, and are thoroughly debriefed afterward. Is this ethical under APA guidelines?
ANo — any deception violates informed consent, regardless of debriefing
BYes — deception is permitted when participants understand procedures and risks, no lasting harm results, and debriefing occurs
CYes — researchers never need to disclose the purpose of a study
DNo — the IRB must approve deception before the hypothesis is even formed
Informed consent does not require revealing every hypothesis — that would invalidate many behavioral studies through demand characteristics. APA guidelines permit deception when (1) the study cannot be conducted otherwise, (2) participants genuinely understand the procedures and risks, (3) no lasting harm is expected, and (4) thorough debriefing occurs afterward. Option A reflects the common misconception that any deception is a blanket ethics violation.
Question 2 Multiple Choice
Milgram's obedience studies are considered ethically problematic primarily because:
AParticipants were physically harmed during the shock delivery procedure
BParticipants believed they were delivering potentially lethal shocks and many experienced lasting psychological distress
CThe study was conducted without any institutional oversight
DParticipants were never told the study involved obedience to authority
No participant was physically harmed — the shocks were fake. The ethical problem was psychological: participants genuinely believed they were harming someone, and many experienced severe distress, anxiety, and lasting guilt. This is what shaped modern ethics standards around psychological harm, not just physical harm. Option C is false — Milgram had departmental approval; it was the *absence of IRB-style review* that the field later corrected.
Question 3 True / False
Deception in psychological research is generally unethical and can seldom be approved by an IRB, regardless of the research question or debriefing procedures.
TTrue
FFalse
Answer: False
Deception occupies a contested but explicitly permitted space in research ethics. The APA ethical code allows deception when the study cannot be conducted otherwise, when participants are thoroughly debriefed afterward, and when no lasting harm is expected. The bar is higher for studies involving significant psychological threat (like Milgram) than for minor misdirection (like priming studies). The key safeguard is debriefing — a restorative process that corrects false beliefs and checks for distress.
Question 4 True / False
Informed consent requires that participants understand the general procedures and risks of a study, but does not require that the researcher reveal every hypothesis being tested.
TTrue
FFalse
Answer: True
This is a critical distinction. Revealing hypotheses would often change participant behavior (demand characteristics), undermining the study. What informed consent genuinely requires is that participants understand what will happen to them, what risks they face, that participation is voluntary, and that they can withdraw at any time. A social psychology study can legitimately withhold that it is measuring conformity while still obtaining valid informed consent about the procedures involved.
Question 5 Short Answer
Why is debriefing considered a required ethical obligation after research involving deception, rather than just a courtesy or optional courtesy to participants?
Think about your answer, then reveal below.
Model answer: Debriefing is required because deception creates false beliefs that participants carry away from the study. It is a restorative process: it corrects those false beliefs, explains the actual purpose of the research, and assesses whether the participant experienced any distress. Without debriefing, participants may leave with lasting psychological harm (e.g., believing they are capable of harming others), which is what makes the deception an ethics violation rather than a permissible research tool.
The distinction between debriefing-as-courtesy and debriefing-as-obligation is central to why deception is permitted at all. The ethical bargain is: the researcher temporarily deceives participants because the science requires it, but then immediately restores participants to accurate understanding and ensures no lasting harm results. If debriefing were optional, researchers could exploit deception without accountability. The Milgram studies are often cited because his debriefing, while conducted, was not fully restorative — participants still left believing something troubling about themselves.