Original_To:  PGLIST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 03:01:00 CST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Betty Harris <B1H6017@TAMVENUS.BITNET>
Subject:      bathroom ethics

Hiya again,
Sorry I've kinda dropped out of the bathroom/ethics/etc discussion.
Somehow the powers that be, decided that I ought to teach a section
on intro psych and 2 sections of an experimental psych lab this
semester plus try to finish a huge lit review, revise a paper to
resubmit and propose my dissertation this semester... (Perhaps
retribution for bad behavior in a previous life *laugh* I dunno)
Anyhow, here goes again. :)

Johan writes:
>So,  what does this have to with handwashing behavior, Betty? Is
>handwashing going to be considered a coping mechanism for personal space
>inavsion? I would be very happy to read about your proposed extension,
>please repost your thoughts on matter. Even if it is just for fun.
The original question of interest was a replication of a published
study on social norms to give my experimental psych class experience
at doin research.  Note that out of the 50 or so field studies we
found, they picked this one.  Then the methodologist in me came out and
I added the self report aspect of the study, to see if self report
would be congruent with observed behavior (Too late to actually
collect self report from the same sample we observed).  Anyhow,
I *do* want to run the project that I discussed in my earlier posting
and I think that I *would* of run it this semester if I hadn't brought
it up on this list, and had that scary word brought up (Ethics)
cuz personally I didn't see any problem with it.  I'm *still*
not real sure that I see a problem with it.  Altho now it will be on
the back burner till I have time to go thru the irb and see what
they have to say about it. On a sidenote, experimental psych labs
don't typically submit their projects to any IRC approval process
here at A&M.  Is this common practice?

I think it would be really cool if some of us used our exp psych
labs to replicate this paradigm in various 'public' situations
varying in the degree of social desirability pressures to see just
how biased self report is.  I study sexual behavior and it's a *very*
important issue to me!!!  The problem in my area is that I'd get thrown
in jail, don't pass go, don't collect $200 for snoopin on sexual
behavior!!

>Matthew writes:
>Larry, the relevance of the results were completely irrelevant to
>the discussion at hand (*er-hem*).  The relevance of the method was
>targeted at the issue of ethical treatment of subjects.  The question
>is, do we have the right, as researchers, to invade the privacy of others
>without asking for their consent.  What constitutes an invasion
>>privacy?  This is the relevant issue here, not the results of the
>study. Perhaps in another discussion the results could be put in
>question.
Welll Matthew... there's several questions here..
1) does the proposed benefits of the study outweigh the harm to the
   subjects?
In this case I think it does because we need to have some idea of
how biased self reports of behavior are, and in what situations
they tend to be more of less biased (I myself would prefer to study
systemic reponding that results from the construct of interest
rather than systematic social desirability responding).  Secondly,
our subjects were in a public area of the restroom.  There was no
intervention, it didn't affect their lives in any form or fashion
whatsoever.

2) just what is a public place?
That's a good question.  Anywhere that other people could observe
one's behavior?  I myself consider the sink area in public restrooms
to be a public area.  but by the same rationnale the urinals would
also be a public area... *shrug*  Is public defined by the
characteristics of the situation *or* by the subject's perception
of "aloneness" in the situation?

From the APS Discussion list chuck kalish wrote:
>I think the part that troubles me is that (in one condition)
> your observers are hidden.  If I remember the original
> message correctly one question was the difference in the
> rate of handwashing with observers present/absent. Here
> the subject is being deceived into thinking they are alone.
Ahhhhhh deception creeps into the picture...
3) is it ethical to observe someone in a public place who *thinks*
   that they are alone?
   a)  and does this depend on the "sensitiveness" of the
       behavior being observed?

Well I think it is if
  1) the subjects remain anonymous and,
  2) you don't affect their lives in any way.

Jeez... but from my criteria I *could* get a telephoto night vision
lens and go to favorite teenage 'parking' areas, or perhaps drive-in
movies and unobtrusively observe all sorts of courtship and sexual
behavior. why is that different from unobtrusively observing
people at shopping malls?

Comments?

*yawn*
Laters!
Betty
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU