New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

Research Ethics Week 3 Notes

by: Tara Dixon

Research Ethics Week 3 Notes CRJU3020

Tara Dixon
GPA 3.74
View Full Document for 0 Karma

View Full Document


Unlock These Notes for FREE

Enter your email below and we will instantly email you these Notes for Research Methods in Criminal Justice

(Limited time offer)

Unlock Notes

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

Unlock FREE Class Notes

Enter your email below to receive Research Methods in Criminal Justice notes

Everyone needs better class notes. Enter your email and we will send you notes for this class for free.

Unlock FREE notes

About this Document

Hi classmates!! I have made some notes that give a concise review on the ethics chapter :)
Research Methods in Criminal Justice
Mindy Bernhardt
Class Notes
IRB, Stanford Prison Experiments, Ethical, guidelines, milgram




Popular in Research Methods in Criminal Justice

Popular in Criminology and Criminal Justice

This 3 page Class Notes was uploaded by Tara Dixon on Sunday September 4, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to CRJU3020 at Georgia State University taught by Mindy Bernhardt in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 28 views. For similar materials see Research Methods in Criminal Justice in Criminology and Criminal Justice at Georgia State University.

Similar to CRJU3020 at GSU

Popular in Criminology and Criminal Justice


Reviews for Research Ethics Week 3 Notes


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 09/04/16
“b/c” = because  “diff” = different  “/” = and Research Ethics - Research ethics – principles designed to govern practices of researcher, also defined as confirming to the standard of conduct of a given profession/group (Webster’s New World Dictionary 2008). Common Ethical Principles - Every organized group has ethical standards i.e. attorneys/accountants/doctors/bankers/NCAA etc. - These ethical standards are designed to lead/direct research so it does little/no harm to subjects/researchers 2 big criminal justice/criminology professional organizations 1. Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences (ACJS) 2. American Society of Criminology (ASC) Institutional Review Boards - Institutional review boards (IRB) – first appeared around 1966, IRBs are groups of people who must approve planned research studies prior to them being conducted as well as monitor/review studies with focus on protecting rights/safety of study participants/researchers 2 general purposes of IRB 1. Make judgements about overall risk of a study 2. Determine whether there are inadequate safeguards in a study **IRBs also ENSURE researchers obtain consent of participants, provide truthful disclosure regarding purpose of the study, and protect vulnerable populations against exploitation during research - NOTE: Truthful disclosure usually involves revealing to an individual they are being studied, knowledge of being studied may influence a participant to act a certain way during a study/influence integrity of a study. It IS acceptable to change wording of a study to deceive participants a BIT so that the responses of a participants are not influenced ***Researchers must make consent forms understandable for their research participants, consent forms cannot contain “jargon,” - To gain consent from “at risk” populations like juveniles, must have a child advocate sign a consent form in place of parent; to get a prisoner study approved must have an ex-prisoner/prisoner advocate on the Institutional Review Board (IRB) *** IRBs initially created to regulate biomedical/lab sciences Promoting Compliance w/ Ethical Principles “b/c” = because  “diff” = different  “/” = and 1. Belmont Report (1979) – specifies ethical principles to protect subjects of research 2. Codes of Professional Ethics from the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences (ACJS) 3. U.S. Dept. Health/Human Services – established regulations, one being all agencies must have an “IRB” Ethical Guidelines 1. No harm to participants: it is not “black and white” issue, researcher must make participant aware of potential risk of participating in study Harm from research can come in many forms: physical, emotional, psychological, and financial 2. Informed consent/voluntary participation: many universities require signed written consent form, consent dox must have adequate description of study procedures signed w/ NO COERCION ***NOTE, coercion can take many forms, is coercion offering a poor person money to participate in a study? When thinking of coercion the vulnerability of participant must be taken into account - ***In the past, the most vulnerable groups of a population have been used for research without their CONSENT 3. Anonymity/Confidentiality: Anonymity means no one, including researcher can identify any specific participant, for a quantitative study this is simple bc no face to face contact is necessary but what if researcher needs to do follow-up research or contact a person for a qualitative study? In this case anonymity may not be maintained but CONFIDENTIALITY can, confidentiality includes knowing a participant’s info. but not being able to share it with anyone 4. Deceiving Subjects: Researchers must be truthful to their participants in all areas of the study including researcher’s aims/ what a participant will be doing etc. 5. Analysis/Reporting: considered inappropriate to massage/manipulate/alter data, let the data speak for itself!!, other than making sure data is “cleaned” a.k.a. coded, nothing else needs to be done, even if findings do not fit personal believes must report everything.. For a qualitative study important to not become personal with participants may affect neutrality/objectivity 6. Reduce Legal liability: researchers must take steps to make sure they do not engage in illegal behavior, certain crimes MUST be reported if witnessed, researchers do not have immunity to the law while researching “b/c” = because  “diff” = different  “/” = and Special Ethical Problems 1. Staff misbehavior 2. Research causes crime (indirectly) 3. Research includes withholding treatment i.e. Tuskegee Syphilis experiment Ethically Questionable Studies (studies revealed why IRBs became a necessity): summaries 1. Milgram’s Experiment – study was on obedience, Milgram tested subjects on how much pain they would endure in the form of electric shocks to appease an authority figure, was unethical b/c it caused HARM to participants 2. Tearoom trade (1970) – involved one man Laud Humphreys investigating fellatio in public restrooms among men, was deceptive in his study, occurred at Washington University, did not find out much new info. From his study, the benefits of his study did not outweigh the costs to participants/himself 3. Stanford Prison Experiment (1971) – study on how power/environment of a prison can change people, make them do cruel acts, voluntary participation of subjects was obstructed, lasted 6 days was supposed to last 14 ***2 prison hypotheses 1. Situational – environment of prison affects people’s behavior 2. Dispositional – there are “some bad apples” in every group, the character traits of the prison guards/prisoners creates the environment of prison 4. Tuskegee Syphilis Study – Alabama, lasted nearly 5 decades, began 1928, Black men were injected with syphilis unknowingly, Peter Buxton revealed story, U.S. govt. forced to pay $10 million in an out of court settlement, problems were withholding treatment/deceiving subjects/voluntary participation etc. Recent Requirements: Increasing role of IRB - Nuremberg Code (1947) – address research ethical issues following Nazi abuses of WWII - Research funding - the pressure to acquire funded research is great, especially in larger research focused institutions, there are certain ethics committees that decide which research is funded/not funded


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

0 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Jim McGreen Ohio University

"Knowing I can count on the Elite Notetaker in my class allows me to focus on what the professor is saying instead of just scribbling notes the whole time and falling behind."

Kyle Maynard Purdue

"When you're taking detailed notes and trying to help everyone else out in the class, it really helps you learn and understand the I made $280 on my first study guide!"

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."


"Their 'Elite Notetakers' are making over $1,200/month in sales by creating high quality content that helps their classmates in a time of need."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.