跳到内容ScholarGate
文库我的文库桌面Review Studio助手
登录
Deception and Debriefing in Research/证据
方法证据记录

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

源记录

引文逐字复制自方法源记录。这些引文不代表任何层级的验证。

Ethical Framework and Procedures for Deception in Behavioral and Psychological Research
分类方法记录 · 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
打开完整方法

精选声明

声明已持久化到证据分类账中,每个声明都有自己的评估。

尚无精选声明

当分类账中没有声明时,此视图不会自行创建声明评估。

相关方法

从方法图中生成,显示为机器建议的关系 — 不推断任何证据声明。

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.

证据状态

Sources recorded, not reviewed

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

来源

从方法源记录复制的 4 条记录的引文。

操作

打开方法页面
ScholarGate

以内容为本的研究方法参考文库——每种方法是什么、如何运作、源自何处。

开放数据(CC-BY)

探索

  • 文库
  • 搜索方法…
  • 按领域浏览
  • 学科领域
  • 历程
  • 对比
  • 该用哪种方法?

参考

  • 学科
  • 图集
  • 术语表
  • 方法论
  • 哲学

工作区

  • 我的文库
  • 桌面
  • 聊天

公司

  • 关于
  • 价格
  • 联系我们
  • 建议新方法

本词条系根据已发表文献整理,仅供参考。核实任何信息的准确性及其是否适用于您的具体用途,仍由您自行负责。

© 2026 ScholarGate · 研究方法参考文库
  • 隐私
  • Cookie
  • 条款
  • 删除账户