Comparar métodos

	Engaño y "Debriefing" en la Investigación	Evaluación de Riesgos y Beneficios en Protocolos de Investigación
Campo	Ética de la investigación	Ética de la investigación
Familia	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Año de origen	1982	1979
Autor original	American Psychological Association; International research ethics community	U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; International research ethics community
Tipo	Guideline	Framework
Fuente seminal	U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2018). Protection of Human Subjects. Code of Federal Regulations Title 45, Part 46, Section 46.116(a)(5).	The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1979). The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research.
Alias	deceptive research, deception studies, debriefing, informed deception	risk-benefit analysis, risk-benefit calculation, risk-benefit justification, harm-benefit ratio
Relacionados	5	5
Resumen	Deception in research—withholding information about study procedures, hypotheses, or true purpose—is ethically permissible under limited circumstances when specific criteria are met. The regulatory framework (45 CFR 46.116(a)(5) in the U.S.; APA Ethical Code Section 8.07) allows deception if: (1) it is not reasonably possible to conduct the research without deception, (2) the deception does not involve risks greater than 'minimal risk,' and (3) participants receive full disclosure and the opportunity to withdraw data after debriefing. Deception is particularly common in social and behavioral research (studying prejudice, conformity, ethical decision-making) where awareness of the true hypothesis would fundamentally alter behavior. Understanding when deception is justified and how to implement it ethically is essential for behavioral researchers.	A risk-benefit assessment is a systematic evaluation of the potential harms and benefits of a proposed research study, documented in ethics committee applications. The Belmont Report (1979) established the principle of beneficence—maximizing benefits while minimizing harm—as a cornerstone of research ethics. Regulatory frameworks (45 CFR 46.111 in the U.S., equivalent in other jurisdictions) require ethics committees to determine that risks are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits before approving research. This assessment is not a simple calculation (risks + benefits) but a qualitative judgment incorporating probability, magnitude, and distribution of harms and benefits.