Ethical Considerations in Research on Genie

Ethical Considerations in Research on Genie When examining the ethical considerations surrounding the research conducted on Genie, it is crucial to reference the ethical principles and standards outlined by the American Psychological Association (APA). These guidelines provide a framework for conducting research that protects the rights, welfare, and dignity of participants. In the case of Genie, who was a severely neglected and abused child, several ethical considerations come into play. Informed Consent: Informed consent is a fundamental ethical principle in research. However, in the case of Genie, it was not possible to obtain informed consent from her due to her severe language and cognitive impairments resulting from deprivation and abuse. Nevertheless, researchers sought consent from legal guardians and carefully considered Genie’s well-being throughout the study. Beneficence and Non-Maleficence: Researchers conducting the study on Genie had to balance the potential benefits of their findings with the potential harm she might experience as a result of their interventions. The team aimed to improve Genie’s quality of life and provide her with a nurturing environment while minimizing any potential harm caused by the research process. Privacy and Confidentiality: Given the sensitive nature of Genie’s case, privacy and confidentiality were of utmost importance. Researchers took great care to protect her identity, ensuring that her personal information was kept confidential and only accessible to those directly involved in the study. This protected Genie’s privacy and respected her dignity. Deception: The use of deception in research is a complex ethical issue. In Genie’s case, researchers had to employ deception to some extent to minimize potential harm and ensure accurate data collection. However, they were mindful of the balance between deception and the need to maintain trust and respect for Genie’s well-being. Now, let’s compare and contrast these ethical considerations with those present in the Stanford Prison simulation and Milgram’s learning experiments: Stanford Prison Simulation Informed Consent: In the Stanford Prison simulation, participants provided informed consent to participate in a study on prison life. However, they were not fully aware of the intensity and potential psychological harm they would experience during the simulation. This lack of complete transparency raises concerns about the validity of informed consent. Beneficence and Non-Maleficence: The Stanford Prison simulation raised ethical concerns due to the psychological harm experienced by participants. The researchers failed to adequately protect the well-being of participants, resulting in distress and potential long-term psychological consequences. Privacy and Confidentiality: Privacy was not adequately protected in the Stanford Prison simulation as participants’ identities were compromised. The study aimed to mimic real prison conditions, leading to blurred boundaries between personal and public lives. Deception: The use of deception played a significant role in the Stanford Prison simulation. Participants were led to believe that they were taking part in a legitimate prison study when, in fact, it was a psychological experiment. This level of deception raises ethical concerns about potential psychological harm and the violation of trust. Milgram’s Learning Experiments Informed Consent: Milgram’s experiments also faced ethical challenges regarding informed consent. Participants were led to believe that they were participating in a study on memory and learning rather than an investigation into obedience to authority figures. This deceptive approach prevented participants from providing fully informed consent. Beneficence and Non-Maleficence: Milgram’s experiments raised concerns about the potential psychological harm experienced by participants due to extreme stress and anxiety induced during the study. Researchers failed to fully protect participants from harm, as evidenced by the emotional distress observed. Privacy and Confidentiality: Privacy was not adequately protected in Milgram’s experiments as participants’ identities were not sufficiently anonymized. This lack of privacy protection could have long-lasting consequences for participants’ personal and professional lives. Deception: Deception was a central component of Milgram’s experiments, as participants were misled about the true nature of the study. The high level of deception employed raises ethical questions about potential psychological harm caused by distress and feelings of betrayal. In conclusion, while the research conducted on Genie faced unique ethical considerations due to her severe neglect and abuse, there were significant efforts made to protect her well-being and dignity. In contrast, both the Stanford Prison simulation and Milgram’s learning experiments raised concerns about informed consent, beneficence, non-maleficence, privacy, confidentiality, and deception. These classic examples of ethically dubious psychological research serve as reminders of the importance of upholding ethical standards in research to protect participants’ rights and well-being.  

Sample Answer