An ethical argument against leaving psychologists to their statistical devices

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    6 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    The frequent critiques of the statistical tools used by experimental psychologists, especially the null-hypothesis test, cast substantial doubt on the scientific integrity of experiments associated with them. This doubt leaves psychologists with weak grounds for promising results or benefits from their experiments. In addition to the methodological problems raised, the shortcomings of null-hypothesis testing and associated experiments suggest an ethical problem in which deception of the participants is involved. Psychologists who use deception claim that the scientific and educational gains from their experiments balance the ethical costs. But given a dubious prospect of scientifically respectable results, there are good reasons to wonder whether there can be anything to offset the deception. Null-hypothesis testing therefore undermines not only experimental rigor but a significant part of the ethical justification for deceptive methods as well.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)125-130
    Number of pages6
    JournalJournal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied
    Volume130
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    StatePublished - 1 Jan 1996

    Fingerprint

    Deception
    psychologist
    Psychology
    Equipment and Supplies
    hypothesis testing
    experiment
    integrity
    Costs and Cost Analysis
    Experiment
    costs
    Hypothesis testing

    Cite this

    @article{3eae47d08dbb47fcaf9234ea0891e919,
    title = "An ethical argument against leaving psychologists to their statistical devices",
    abstract = "The frequent critiques of the statistical tools used by experimental psychologists, especially the null-hypothesis test, cast substantial doubt on the scientific integrity of experiments associated with them. This doubt leaves psychologists with weak grounds for promising results or benefits from their experiments. In addition to the methodological problems raised, the shortcomings of null-hypothesis testing and associated experiments suggest an ethical problem in which deception of the participants is involved. Psychologists who use deception claim that the scientific and educational gains from their experiments balance the ethical costs. But given a dubious prospect of scientifically respectable results, there are good reasons to wonder whether there can be anything to offset the deception. Null-hypothesis testing therefore undermines not only experimental rigor but a significant part of the ethical justification for deceptive methods as well.",
    author = "Chris Herrera",
    year = "1996",
    month = "1",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1080/00223980.1996.9914994",
    language = "English",
    volume = "130",
    pages = "125--130",
    journal = "Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied",
    issn = "0022-3980",
    publisher = "Routledge",
    number = "2",

    }

    An ethical argument against leaving psychologists to their statistical devices. / Herrera, Chris.

    In: Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, Vol. 130, No. 2, 01.01.1996, p. 125-130.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - An ethical argument against leaving psychologists to their statistical devices

    AU - Herrera, Chris

    PY - 1996/1/1

    Y1 - 1996/1/1

    N2 - The frequent critiques of the statistical tools used by experimental psychologists, especially the null-hypothesis test, cast substantial doubt on the scientific integrity of experiments associated with them. This doubt leaves psychologists with weak grounds for promising results or benefits from their experiments. In addition to the methodological problems raised, the shortcomings of null-hypothesis testing and associated experiments suggest an ethical problem in which deception of the participants is involved. Psychologists who use deception claim that the scientific and educational gains from their experiments balance the ethical costs. But given a dubious prospect of scientifically respectable results, there are good reasons to wonder whether there can be anything to offset the deception. Null-hypothesis testing therefore undermines not only experimental rigor but a significant part of the ethical justification for deceptive methods as well.

    AB - The frequent critiques of the statistical tools used by experimental psychologists, especially the null-hypothesis test, cast substantial doubt on the scientific integrity of experiments associated with them. This doubt leaves psychologists with weak grounds for promising results or benefits from their experiments. In addition to the methodological problems raised, the shortcomings of null-hypothesis testing and associated experiments suggest an ethical problem in which deception of the participants is involved. Psychologists who use deception claim that the scientific and educational gains from their experiments balance the ethical costs. But given a dubious prospect of scientifically respectable results, there are good reasons to wonder whether there can be anything to offset the deception. Null-hypothesis testing therefore undermines not only experimental rigor but a significant part of the ethical justification for deceptive methods as well.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037511246&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1080/00223980.1996.9914994

    DO - 10.1080/00223980.1996.9914994

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:0037511246

    VL - 130

    SP - 125

    EP - 130

    JO - Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied

    JF - Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied

    SN - 0022-3980

    IS - 2

    ER -