跳到内容ScholarGate
文库我的文库桌面Review Studio助手
登录
Participant Debriefing Procedures/证据
方法证据记录

Participant Debriefing Procedures

Participant debriefing is a post-study conversation or disclosure providing information to participants after research participation concludes. Debriefing serves multiple ethical purposes: (1) explaining the research aims and design, (2) revealing any deception (if applicable), (3) addressing misconceptions, (4) offering support if the research caused discomfort, (5) providing information about study findings, and (6) ensuring participants understand their rights (e.g., right to withdraw data). Debriefing is especially important in research involving deception (participants must learn the truth), sensitive topics (participants may experience distress), or invasive procedures (participants deserve explanation). The American Psychological Association's Ethical Code, ESOMAR guidelines, and international research ethics frameworks emphasize debriefing as a core protective procedure.

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。

Post-Study Disclosure and Ethical Debriefing Protocols for Research Participants
分类方法记录 · process-pipeline / research-ethics
  • American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Section 8.08 - Debriefing. · URL
  • ESOMAR. (2016). ESOMAR Guideline: Conducting Qualitative Research Ethically. Data Collection Ethics. · 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
  • Williamson, V., & Williams, M. (2011). Using Narratives to Assess Ethical Issues in Longitudinal Research. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 3(1), 92-106. · URL
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 familyDeception and Debriefing in Researchmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyEthics Committee Application Processmachine-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.

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