Gå til innholdScholarGate
BibliotekMitt bibliotekPultenReview StudioAssistent
Logg inn
Deception and Debriefing in Research/Bevis
Metodebevisregister

Deception and Debriefing in Research

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.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Kilderegister

Siteringer kopiert ordrett fra metodens kilderegister. Ingen påstandsnivåverifisering er underforstått fra dem.

Ethical Framework and Procedures for Deception in Behavioral and Psychological Research
Taksonomisk metoderegister · process-pipeline / research-ethics
  • 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). · URL
  • American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Section 8.07 - Deception in Research. · URL
  • 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. · URL
  • Festinger, L., Riecken, H. W., & Schachter, S. (1956). When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study of a Modern Group That Predicted the Destruction of the World. University of Minnesota Press. · ISBN 9780816606246
Åpne full metode

Kuraterte påstander

Påstander lagret i bevishovedboken, hver med sin egen vurdering.

Ingen kuraterte påstander ennå

Denne visningen finner ikke opp en påstandsvurdering når hovedboken ikke har noen.

Relaterte metoder

Generert fra metodegrafen og vist som maskinforslåtte relasjoner – ingen bevispåstand er underforstått.

Same method familyEthics Committee Application Processmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyParticipant Debriefing Proceduresmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyResearch with Vulnerable Populationsmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyRisk-Benefit Assessment in Research Protocolsmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyTypes of Ethics Committees in Researchmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Bevisstatus

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Kilder

4 registrerte siteringer, kopiert fra metodens kilderegister.

Handlinger

Åpne metodeside
ScholarGate

Et innholdsfokusert oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder — hva hver metode er, hvordan den fungerer, og hvor den kommer fra.

Åpne data (CC-BY)

Oppdag

  • Bibliotek
  • Søk i metoder…
  • Bla etter fagfelt
  • Fagfelt
  • Reise
  • Sammenlign
  • Hvilken metode?

Referanse

  • Fagområder
  • Atlas
  • Ordliste
  • Metodikk
  • Filosofi

Arbeidsområde

  • Mitt bibliotek
  • Pulten
  • Chat

Selskap

  • Om
  • Priser
  • Kontakt
  • Foreslå en metode

Oppføringene er sammenstilt fra publiserte kilder til referansebruk. Å kontrollere at informasjonen er korrekt og egnet for ditt eget bruk, er fremdeles ditt eget ansvar.

© 2026 ScholarGate · Et oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder
  • Personvern
  • Informasjonskapsler
  • Vilkår
  • Slett konto