ScholarGate
助手

方法对比

并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。

研究中的欺骗与汇报×研究方案中的风险-效益评估×
领域研究伦理研究伦理
方法族Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
起源年份19821979
提出者American Psychological Association; International research ethics communityU.S. Department of Health and Human Services; International research ethics community
类型GuidelineFramework
开创性文献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). link ↗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. link ↗
别名deceptive research, deception studies, debriefing, informed deceptionrisk-benefit analysis, risk-benefit calculation, risk-benefit justification, harm-benefit ratio
相关55
摘要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.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 4 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 4 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Deception and Debriefing in Research · Risk-Benefit Assessment in Research Protocols. 于 2026-06-20 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare