The effects of researcher precautions on perceptions of the ethicality of unobtrusive field experiments

Robert Reeves, Gary Baker, Steven J. Goldberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The effects of stating researchers' precautions on perceptions about the ethicality of questionable studies were examined. The studies used were by West, Gunn, and Chernicky (1975) and by Middlemist, Knowles, and Matter (1976). The first study was generally evaluated more favorably than the second study. Women viewed the West et al. study more negatively than did men, regardless of precautionary information. Most important, precautionary information enhanced men's, but not women's evaluations of the Middlemist et al. study. Implications of these results for ethical decision making, publication policy, and the image of the profession are noted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)321-327
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied
Volume130
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1996

Fingerprint

Research Personnel
experiment
Publications
Decision Making
profession
decision making
evaluation
Precaution
Field experiment
Evaluation
Ethical decision making

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)
  • Education
  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

The effects of researcher precautions on perceptions of the ethicality of unobtrusive field experiments. / Reeves, Robert; Baker, Gary; Goldberg, Steven J.

In: Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, Vol. 130, No. 3, 01.01.1996, p. 321-327.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3a0cae6b0287481eb6ab5cb816279dfe,
title = "The effects of researcher precautions on perceptions of the ethicality of unobtrusive field experiments",
abstract = "The effects of stating researchers' precautions on perceptions about the ethicality of questionable studies were examined. The studies used were by West, Gunn, and Chernicky (1975) and by Middlemist, Knowles, and Matter (1976). The first study was generally evaluated more favorably than the second study. Women viewed the West et al. study more negatively than did men, regardless of precautionary information. Most important, precautionary information enhanced men's, but not women's evaluations of the Middlemist et al. study. Implications of these results for ethical decision making, publication policy, and the image of the profession are noted.",
author = "Robert Reeves and Gary Baker and Goldberg, {Steven J.}",
year = "1996",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/00223980.1996.9915013",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "130",
pages = "321--327",
journal = "Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied",
issn = "0022-3980",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The effects of researcher precautions on perceptions of the ethicality of unobtrusive field experiments

AU - Reeves, Robert

AU - Baker, Gary

AU - Goldberg, Steven J.

PY - 1996/1/1

Y1 - 1996/1/1

N2 - The effects of stating researchers' precautions on perceptions about the ethicality of questionable studies were examined. The studies used were by West, Gunn, and Chernicky (1975) and by Middlemist, Knowles, and Matter (1976). The first study was generally evaluated more favorably than the second study. Women viewed the West et al. study more negatively than did men, regardless of precautionary information. Most important, precautionary information enhanced men's, but not women's evaluations of the Middlemist et al. study. Implications of these results for ethical decision making, publication policy, and the image of the profession are noted.

AB - The effects of stating researchers' precautions on perceptions about the ethicality of questionable studies were examined. The studies used were by West, Gunn, and Chernicky (1975) and by Middlemist, Knowles, and Matter (1976). The first study was generally evaluated more favorably than the second study. Women viewed the West et al. study more negatively than did men, regardless of precautionary information. Most important, precautionary information enhanced men's, but not women's evaluations of the Middlemist et al. study. Implications of these results for ethical decision making, publication policy, and the image of the profession are noted.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030138838&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030138838&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/00223980.1996.9915013

DO - 10.1080/00223980.1996.9915013

M3 - Article

C2 - 8667287

AN - SCOPUS:0030138838

VL - 130

SP - 321

EP - 327

JO - Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied

JF - Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied

SN - 0022-3980

IS - 3

ER -