Related Concept Videos
01:56Ethics in Research
Today, scientists agree that good research is ethical in nature and is guided by a basic respect for human dignity and safety. However, this has not always been the case. Modern researchers must demonstrate that the research they perform is ethically sound.
01:52Persuasion Strategies
Researchers have tested many persuasion strategies, including the foot-in-the door and the door-in-the-face techniques, in a variety of contexts. Ultimately, the principles are effective in selling products and changing people’s attitude, ideas, and behaviors (Cialdini & Goldstein, 2004).
02:20Milgram's Obedience to Authority
Obedience to authority is classically demonstrated in a more famous series of social psychology experiments performed by Stanley Milgram. He was a social psychology professor at Yale who was influenced by the trial of Adolf Eichmann, a Nazi war criminal. Eichmann’s defense for the atrocities he committed was that he was “just following orders.”
03:20The Stanford Prison Experiment
The famous and controversial Stanford Prison Experiment, conducted by social psychologist Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues at Stanford University, demonstrated the power of social roles, social norms, and scripts.
01:08Obedience
According to obedience research, we may harm others under the forceful pressures of an authority figure (Milgram, 1974). How about if the inappropriate orders were delivered with less force? The increasing interdependence between nurses and physicians compelled Hofling and his colleagues to explore nurses’ reactions to a potentially harmful medical request made by the perceived authority figure, the doctor (Hofling, Brotzman, Dalrymple, Graves, & Pierce, 1966). In this situation, obedience...
01:11Blinding
Blinding is a commonly used method of not telling participants which treatment a subject is receiving. Blinding is a critical part of a randomized control trial or RCT. It reduces the bias that affects the results. In an RCT, blinding is used in the form of a placebo. A placebo effect occurs when untreated subjects falsely believe they have received the treatment and report improved symptoms. A placebo or a dummy treatment is administered to subjects to negate the bias caused by such an effect.
You might also read
Related Articles
Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.
Sort by
Same author
Single or double needle insertion in twin's amniocentesis: Does the technique influence the risk of complications?
European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X·2019
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 5, 2026
11:51
Combining Behavioral Endocrinology and Experimental Economics: Testosterone and Social Decision Making
Published on: March 2, 2011
Payment for research participation: a coercive offer?
1Department of Bioethics, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Building 10, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-1156, USA.
Journal of Medical Ethics
|May 2, 2008
Summary
Paying participants for research is not coercive, as offers of benefit are not coercion. However, excessive payments may constitute undue inducement, raising ethical considerations in research.
Area of Science:
- Bioethics
- Research Ethics
Background:
- Ethical concerns surrounding payment for research participation often center on potential coercion.
- Distinguishing between acceptable compensation and undue influence is crucial for ethical research conduct.
Purpose of the Study:
- To analyze the concept of coercion in the context of research participation payments.
- To refute misconceptions regarding the coercive nature of research compensation.
- To clarify the ethical distinction between payment, coercion, and undue inducement.
Main Methods:
- Conceptual analysis of coercion.
- Examination of ethical principles related to research participant compensation.
- Distinction between offers of benefit and coercive threats.
Main Results:
- Offers of benefit, such as payment for research participation, do not constitute coercion.
- Misconceptions regarding coercion in research payments are identified and refuted.
- In certain circumstances, payment may lead to undue inducement, which differs ethically from coercion.
Conclusions:
- Characterizing payment for research participation as coercive is ethically inaccurate.
- Ethical guidelines should differentiate between permissible compensation and undue inducement.
- Understanding these distinctions is vital for maintaining the integrity of research involving human participants.