Spring, 2002 (Roos, Soc. 311)

Assignment 5: Ethics Panel Discussions

Presentations will be April 11th, 15th and 18th. Write-ups are due the day you present. NO late write-ups accepted.

First thing: read Chapters 18 and 19 in Babbie. Then, skim through the online annual ORSP memo that outlines Rutgers Policy on Human Subjects Research.

For this assignment, each of you will prepare to participate in a panel discussion on one of five readings (available online via websites or IRIS). You will be assigned to a panel on the basis of your last name (click here to get your panel assignment). Each panel will be responsible for one of the following readings:

The Ethics of Social Research

Panel 1. Stanford Prison Experiment (Philip Zimbardo, Stanford University, 1971) [read through the entire "slide show," from "Prelude" to "Conclusion" [date of presentation: Thursday, April 11th]

Panel 2. Morton Hunt, "Research Through Deception," New York Times Magazine. September 12, 1982. (Philip Zimbardo, Stanford, 1980) [go to IRIS, then Reserve Desk; type in Roos, then click on instructor; click on my name and look for article] [date of presentation: Thursday, April 11th]

The Politics and Uses of Social Research

Panel 3. Christopher Shea, "Don't Talk to the Humans: The Crackdown on Social Science Research, Lingua Franca, Volume 10, No. 6 - September 2000. [date of presentation: Monday, April 15th]

Panel 4. Jason DeParle, "Daring Research or 'Social Science Pornography'?: Charles Murray," New York Times Magazine. October 9, 1994. [go to IRIS, then Reserve Desk; type in Roos, then click on instructor; click on my name and look for article] [date of presentation: Monday, April 15th]

Panel 5. Hooking Up, Hanging Out, and Hoping for Mr. Right: College Women on Dating and Mating Today, Independent Women's Forum (IWF), July, 2001 [note that Rutgers students were among those interviewed] [date of presentation: Thursday, April 18th]

Once you have done the background reading, read the article assigned to you, keeping detailed notes for yourself so that you will be able to lead a discussion on the ethical issues involved in the research: what about questions of confidentiality, anonymity, danger to participants, etc.? For Panels 3-5, your focus should be on how research is used and the politics of social research, rather than ethical issues per se (see below).

Strategy: Panel members will "lead off" the discussion on their topic. The purpose is to summarize the research, ethical, and/or political issues involved. Each panel member will be expected to contribute to the discussion. Following the presentation of the "facts of the case," the discussion will be opened up to the remainder of the class for comments and questions. On the day your presentation is scheduled, we will randomly choose the leadoff speaker. We will moderate to make sure the discussion stays on course and that a few people don't dominate the discussion. Evaluation will be based on your knowledge of the research, your analysis of the ethical and/or political issues involved, your participation in the discussion, and your write-up.

Write-up: Each student is required to write up a brief statement (no more than 2 double-spaced pages typed) to be turned in the day of his/her presentation. The statement should consist of:

1) The number of your panel (i.e., Panel 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5), and the name of the article you reviewed.

2) Answer the following question (depending on your panel):

Panels 1 or 2: Do you think the study you reviewed was ethical? Why or why not?

Panel 3: How has the introduction of IRB rules and procedures transformed social research? Discuss the consequences of their adoption, for science and potential experimental subjects?

Panel 4 or 5: How can social science data be used for political purposes? Are there problems associated with such use?