SOCIALLY SENSITVE RESEARCH

STANELY defined socially sensitive research as ‘studies where there are potential
social consequences or implications, either directly for the participants involved in
the research or the people that are represented by the research.’

It attracts a great deal of media attention, and can lead to people to form misguided
conclusions or not allow people to remain ignorant about such issues. Also, it cannot
be ignored because this can cause groups of society to feel ignored and discriminated
against. Psychologists are obliged to study socially sensitive topics to further
knowledge.
The ethics of socially sensitive research are as follows: privacy, confidentiality, sound
and valid methods, justice and equitable treatment and scientific freedom.

Psychologists conducting socially sensitive research must be cautious when extracting

information from participants, because they must not ask unnecessary questions, as
they might be reluctant to disclosing personal information. For example, research into
HIV/AIDS might require asking questions about sexual habits, which can be
considered an invasion of privacy.

Some studies concerning socially sensitive topics are poorly designed, which might
cause misinterpretation of results and has a massive impact when generalising to other
members of the population. If the media has access to the findings then it could have
an impact on social policies (e.g. the gay gene by Dr Hammer might require
everyone to be tested, which is not fair), which means that socially sensitive research
must have sound and valid methods.

JENSON conducted socially sensitive research into race and IQ, which was criticised
due to its poor design – i.e. the language used in the IQ test was aimed at middle class
white participants, and it was given to different races. Therefore, they were at a
disadvantage from the start, which can lead to inaccurate results because they may not
have understood the questions and thus gained a lower score non-representative of
their real IQ.
He found that an average White American scored 15 points more in IQ score than
black Americans, which caused an emotional outcry and political argument about
blaming this on genetic inheritance.

HERNSTEIN commented that as black Americans are less intelligent then there is no
point in allowing them access to further education. This is very socially sensitive du
to its racist nature, which could provoke segregation, and gives white Americans a
reason to see themselves as superior just after black Americans attainted their civil
rights.

It is also socially sensitive in the sense that it places parental blame on children’s
low IQ, which could have serious implications for parenting techniques and how to
nurture ethnic minorities and socially deprived children. The nature-nurture debate
has much relevance here, because even if intelligence does have a genetic origin then
research into environmental influences shouldn’t be ignored. It has also been found
that an environment that encourages intelligence does contribute to the development
of IQ in ethnic and deprived children.
Participants must be treated fairly with no discrimination in socially sensitive
research. This creates equal opportunities for everyone (e.g. homosexual and
heterosexual). Ideas that can lead to prejudice should be carefully dealt with (e.g.
Freud’s theories in the early 1900s led to people believing that women were second-
class citizens), which means research should observe ‘justice and equitable
treatment’.

SCHWARTZ conducted socially sensitive research into sexual orientation and

promiscuity, from which he found that homosexual males are the most promiscuous.
Therefore, it is unfair to make this generalisation across the whole population of
homosexual males because they may find it offensive as they are being portrayed in a
negative light.
It may lead to those individuals feeling vulnerable and could develop ideas of
homophobia and discrimination against sexual orientation. In order to overcome these
issues Schwartz should have taken caution and ensured that all his participants were
protected from psychological and physiological harm after the study so that they were
not left feeling alienated.

Socially sensitive research into homosexuality is ethically justifiable for psychologists

to study because it is beneficial in broadening an understanding about such
relationships. It also helps to reduce prejudice due to the plain fact that they have been
researched, which proves that they are valued and important. Psychologists should be
able to study socially sensitive topics whilst fulfilling their obligation to protect their
participants from psychological/physiological harm, which is known as ‘scientific
freedom’.

This particular ethic of socially sensitive research should always be taken into account
because if psychologists were unable to investigate into certain areas then no insight
could ever be gained. Therefore, they must be encouraged to do so, which will lead to
breakthroughs in psychological research. For instance, society’s knowledge and
understanding about the following: schizophrenia, depression, OCD, eating disorders,
and homosexuality have been developed due to socially sensitive research.
Psychologists are obliged to studying unknown topics that are deemed socially
sensitive because then they cannot be ignored, instead people can become more open-
minded about such topics.

ARONSON stated that socially sensitive research will inevitably cause participants
some kind of psychological/physiological harm, but the long-term benefits will
outweigh the short-term effects of discomfort. A cost-benefit analysis should be
conducted in order to make such a decision. He also stated that psychologists have the
responsibly of educating the public about socially sensitive issues, as they carry great
importance.

Psychologists should also maintain that the ethics of socially sensitive research do not
cover the wider society; they only focus on the sample of participants used in the
research, which means that the findings are limited in terms of generalising the
conclusions to other members of the population.