In your discussion this week, you will be talking about one of the research stud
ID: 3444305 • Letter: I
Question
In your discussion this week, you will be talking about one of the research studies mentioned in the lesson: The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, Zimbardo's Prison Experiment, or The Tea Room Trade Study. You are welcome to choose which study you would like to discuss. If you see that many others have chosen the same study in which you are interested, I encourage you to use one that has been used less frequently. For the discussion, do the following:
Do a little research about the study to learn about it.
BRIEFLY describe what happened in the study. You DO NOT need to go into great detail here; a few sentences will suffice. And make sure to cite your sources! Here is a good resource for any questions you have about citing: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/2/ (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. I've also included a citation guide in the module.
Each of these studies is well-known for its ethical violations. What ethical violations or concerns did you see in your study? Some things to include:
Identify the type of ethical concern (for instance, a violation of confidentiality, informed consent, etc.).
Explain why you think this ethical concern applies to this study. Try to add something new here; don’t just repeat what other people have said.Â
Identify any potential long-term consequences to participants.
Do you have any additional thoughts about the study?
Explanation / Answer
The Tea Room Trade research by Laud Humphreys is a highly controversial study as it violates several ethical principles. The researcher observed acts of homosexuality by disguising himself as a voyeur, did not ask for consent from any of the participants, utilised their license plate numbers in their cars to obtain more private information about them and interviewed them by masking himself to be a health service provider.
Tearoom Trade has thus violated the participants privacy and also deceived them in the initial part of the study, and in the follow-up interviews. However, I do feel that this study would not have been able to obtain any true information about homosexual activities in public restrooms, had the researcher not violated these ethical standards. Considering that the study took place in the 1970s, when homosexuality was highly stigmatised, perhaps any in depth observation in this phenomenon would require some amount of deceit.