手法を比較

	研究における欺瞞とデブリーフィング	研究プロトコルにおけるリスク・ベネフィット評価
分野	研究倫理	研究倫理
系統	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
提唱年	1982	1979
提唱者	American Psychological Association; International research ethics community	U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; International research ethics community
種類	Guideline	Framework
原典	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.
別名	deceptive research, deception studies, debriefing, informed deception	risk-benefit analysis, risk-benefit calculation, risk-benefit justification, harm-benefit ratio
関連	5	5
概要	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.