Ethical Principles Of Psychologists Research Articles

On conducting ethically sound psychological science in the metaverse.

As the next generation of the internet, the metaverse is an immersive three-dimensional (3D) world that incorporates both physical and virtual environments. The metaverse affords numerous advantages for advancing our theoretical and practical understanding of human cognition, emotion, and behavior, as well as shaping our methodological approach to conducting psychological science. However, undertaking research in a world that merges the physical and virtual, also presents new and unique ethical challenges that are not addressed by current ethical guidelines such as the Belmont Report, the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, and the Association of Internet Researchers Internet Research Ethical Guidelines. We discuss the different domains of the metaverse relevant to psychological research and consider how three categories of ethical challenges (i.e., "respect for persons," "beneficence," and "justice") may arise when conducting research in the metaverse. We also provide recommendations for addressing these challenges that include reconfiguring existing ethical guidelines as well as creating new ones. Together, these can inform and assist researchers and institutional review boards in making decisions about conducting ethically sound psychological science in the metaverse. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

ETHICAL PRINCIPLES OF CONDUCTING THE PSYCHO-CORRECTIONAL PROCESS AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE ANALYSIS OF THE ETHICAL CODES OF UKRAINE AND CANADA

In Ukraine, the practice of providing psychological and coaching services in social networks has become widespread and these services occurred and continue to occur with violations of the rules of ethics of psychological counseling. In fact, in the current conditions when many different counseling services are available, the line between professional psychological help and “personal growth schools” is blurring. Those schools do not so much help as harm a person, without solving his/her problem at a deep level. Therefore, the goal of our research is to actualize the need to modernize the practice of applying ethical norms by Ukrainian psychologists and improve it by borrowing international experience from the world psychological community and comparing ethical approaches in Canada and Ukraine. The research presents the author’s practical experience of working with clients (taking into account all confidentiality rules). During the research, a mini-survey was conducted on social networks, which shows a certain trend that the ethical principles of psychologists’ work aren’t a high priority for their clients. It becomes obvious, that such low demand from society for ethical norms creates a corresponding supply of services that neglect generally accepted rules of professional activity. By analyzing some aspects of the Canadian and Ukrainian Ethical Codes, the author considers it necessary to draw attention to the need for quick and decisive actions to change the general paradigm in the services of Ukrainian psychologists with an emphasis on strengthening the ethical component and increasing the responsibility for violations of rules recognized by state institutions and public associations.

Interprofessional collaboration: Ethical considerations for school psychologists.

To meet the diverse needs of school-aged children, school psychologists often must collaborate with other professionals within and outside the school setting. Despite potential benefits, challenges exist related to interprofessional collaboration, including ethical challenges. This article explores some of the most salient ethical dilemmas that school psychologists are likely to face when collaborating with other professionals. Specifically, ethical issues related to competence, multiple relationships, informed consent/assent, privacy/confidentiality, assessment, and therapy are examined. Using vignettes, recommendations for navigating common ethical issues that may arise when engaging in interprofessional collaboration are offered. Suggestions are contextualized within the ethical principles and standards outlined in the American Psychological Association's Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (2017) and the National Association of School Psychologists Professional Standards (2020), which includes the Principles for Professional Ethics. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

A solution in search of a problem: Commentary on O'Donohue and Fisher (2022).

O'Donohue and Fisher (2022) make some good arguments about how free speech has been jeopardized in recent years, but few if any of those arguments concern psychologists directly. Furthermore, because free speech is codified in the First Amendment, it is unclear why or how its inclusion in the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (American Psychological Association, 2017), would add anything meaningful. The arguments posed by O'Donohue and Fisher are far ranging but seldom specific to the work of psychologists. While the additional language on free speech might be well suited for the Ethics Code's aspirational principles, the proposed amendment is neither suitable nor necessary within the enforceable standards. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Censoring and punishing free speech is unethical: Reply to Jackson (2022) and Smith (2022).

The ethically proper response to problematic speech is more speech and not censorship. To the extent that Jackson (2022) and Smith (2022) advocate for all to be able to criticize all, for example, for unempowered undergraduates to criticize privileged White male professors or for anyone to criticize racist or hate speech, we are in agreement. The speech involved in criticism can be risky and hence ought to be protected by the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (American Psychological Association, 2017). However, except in very circumscribed circumstances, to the extent that Jackson or Smith advocate for acts such as the suppression, censorship, or punishment of speech, we are in disagreement. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Are illiberal acts unethical? APA's Ethics Code and the protection of free speech.

The American Psychological Association's (APA's) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (American Psychological Association, 2017b; hereinafter referred to as the Ethics Code) does not contain an enforceable standard regarding psychologists' role in either honoring or protecting the free speech of others, or ensuring that their own free speech is protected, including an important corollary of free speech, the protection of academic freedom. Illiberal acts illegitimately restrict civil liberties. We argue that the ethics of illiberal acts have not been adequately scrutinized in the Ethics Code. Psychologists require free speech to properly enact their roles as scientists as well as professionals who wish to advocate for their clients and students to enhance social justice. This article delineates criteria for what ought to be included in the Ethics Code, argues that ethical issues regarding the protection of free speech rights meet these criteria, and proposes language to be added to the Ethics Code. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Beyond the bump: ethical and legal considerations for psychologists providing services to pregnant individuals who use substances

ABSTRACT Psychologists providing services to pregnant individuals using substances face a number of complicated ethical dilemmas, however guidance in this area is sparse. This article presents the ethical and legal issues that may arise in working with this population within the framework of the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (2017). The recommendations made are designed to assist psychologists with understanding factors that contribute to substance use during pregnancy, navigating punitive policies and liability risk, and methods to increase access to care for this vulnerable group.

Ethical decision making in the 21stcentury: A useful framework for industrial-organizational psychologists

AbstractEthical decision making has long been recognized as critical for industrial-organizational (I-O) psychologists in the variety of roles they fill in education, research, and practice. Decisions with ethical implications are not always readily apparent and often require consideration of competing concerns. The American Psychological Association (APA)Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conductare the principles and standards to which all Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) members are held accountable, and these principles serve to aid in decision making. To this end, the primary focus of this article is the presentation and application of an integrative ethical decision-making framework rooted in and inspired by empirical, philosophical, and practical considerations of professional ethics. The purpose of this framework is to provide a generalizable model that can be used to identify, evaluate, resolve, and engage in discourse about topics involving ethical issues. To demonstrate the efficacy of this general framework to contexts germane to I-O psychologists, we subsequently present and apply this framework to five scenarios, each involving an ethical situation relevant to academia, practice, or graduate education in I-O psychology. With this article, we hope to stimulate the refinement of this ethical decision-making model, illustrate its application in our profession, and, most importantly, advance conversations about ethical decision making in I-O psychology.

Ethical Considerations for Psychotherapists Participating in Alcoholics Anonymous.

As the demands of professional psychology can be taxing, psychotherapists are not immune to the development of mental health and substance use disorders. One estimate indicates that roughly 30-40% of psychologists know of a colleague with a current substance abuse problem (Good et al., 1995). 12-step mutual self-help groups, particularly Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), are the most widely used form of treatment for addiction in the United States. AA has empirically demonstrated effectiveness at fostering long-term treatment success, and is widely accessible throughout the world. However, psychotherapist participation in AA raises a number of ethical concerns, particularly regarding the potential for extra-therapy contact with clients and the development of multiple relationships. This article attempts to review the precarious ethical and practical situations that psychotherapists, either in long-term recovery or newly sober, may find themselves in during AA involvement. Moreover, this article provides suggestions for psychotherapists in AA regarding how to best adhere to both the principles of AA (i.e., the 12-steps and 12-traditions) and the American Psychological Association's Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct.

Ethical considerations for treating the old order Amish

ABSTRACT The Old Order Amish are the fastest growing religious subpopulation in the United States. The Amish population, most recently estimated at 340,000, is expected to double in size during the next 20 years. While still relatively few in number, their growing population and increasing interaction with American society will likely result in more Amish individuals seeking mental health treatment. Despite the call for culturally competent mental health professionals, this population has been underrepresented in the psychotherapy literature. To the best of the author’s knowledge, this article is the first known attempt to review the ethical considerations that may arise when working with members of the Old Order Amish. This article uses the American Psychological Association’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct to frame the discussion of ethical mental health treatment with Amish individuals.

Empowering psychologists to evaluate revisions to the APA ethics code

ABSTRACT The authors argue that individual psychologists have an obligation to understand, review, and comment on upcoming revisions of the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Psychologists may want to consider several factors as they review and prepare comments on these revisions. Among other things, commenting psychologists should consider (a) the purposes of ethics codes and how the writing of a code can meet or balance these often-conflicting purposes; (b) the overarching ethical theory or theories that should form the basis of the APA Ethics Code; and (c) the extent to which individual standards are useful and comprehensive, and avoid unnecessary harm to both the public and psychologists. The authors provide examples from the current and recent APA Ethics Codes to illustrate the types of decisions that psychologists must make when evaluating revisions to the APA Ethics Code.

Identifying Points of Engagement Versus Disengagement When Consulting During Crisis Negotiations: A Flexible Model for Applying the Ethics Code

Application of the American Psychological Association (APA) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (American Psychological Association 2018) to consultation during crisis negotiations by psychological consultants is an emerging area. Common and emerging ethical dilemmas not addressed in previous works are discussed including use of third-party intermediaries, bounds of psychological principles that are applied to negotiation strategies, and tactical disengagement by law enforcement and SWAT teams. A flexible model along a continuum of the psychological consultant’s participation based upon ethical considerations is suggested. Concerns about the psychological consultant’s proximity to decision-making regarding “going tactical” is moot when experienced teams have a shared understanding of the various roles of team members and consulting mental health professionals are mindful of the “ceiling” of ethical decision-making based upon the General Principles of the Code of Conduct.

Ethical issues related to the undergraduate-graduate-faculty mentoring triad in psychology

ABSTRACT A triad approach to mentoring, involving an undergraduate student a graduate student and a faculty member, offers unique benefits to all involved. However, complexities and tensions within the triad also contribute to ethical dilemmas unique to this mentoring approach. The aims of this article are to review ethical dilemmas that members of the undergraduate-graduate-faculty triad may face when forming and navigating the triad, including a discussion of cultural considerations, and offer recommendations based on ethical guidelines in psychology Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct.

Use of practice guidelines and position statements in ethical decision making.

Professional ethics guide appropriate professional conduct through their reflection of the shared values of the profession. Professional ethics codes, such as the American Psychological Association's (APA) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (henceforth, APA Ethics Code) are intended to provide guidance across psychological activities, contexts, and specialties. As such, they must, by necessity, be rather general in nature. The APA Ethics Code provides aspirational general ethical principles and enforceable ethical standards. Despite the value of these principles and directives, psychologists commonly need more specific guidance for establishing and maintaining ethical practices in their specific professional contexts. The APA Ethics Code acknowledges in its Introduction and Applicability section the broad nature of the code and the importance of considering additional resources. The APA and other professional organizations provide practice guidelines and position statements that clarify appropriate professional behavior in specific aspects of practice. Although all U.S. psychologists are aware of the APA Ethics Code, far fewer are as familiar with the practice guidelines and position statements of professional organizations, and fewer utilize such valuable resources in their ethical decision making. Practice guidelines and position statements from professional organizations complement ethics codes and facilitate ethical decision making. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Criticisms of the Ethical Principles for Psychologists and Code of Conduct

ABSTRACT Beginning in 1953 the American Psychological Association (APA) has advanced twelve iterations of a professional ethical code. In recent years the adequacy of the Ethics Code as well as APA’s ethics enforcement has come under increased scrutiny. In 2015 the APA empaneled an Ethics Commission which made a series of recommendations; however, the Commission itself as well as its recommendations are also controversial. This paper presents criticisms of the Ethics Code that have generally not been discussed in the previous literature.

Adaptive Functioning (AF) Evaluations of Foreign Nationals Facing Capital Punishment

Abstract Objective The US Supreme Court ruled against the application of the death penalty to individuals with intellectual disability (ID) (Atkins v. Virginia, 2002). Diagnostic criteria for ID require subnormal adaptive functioning (AF) in addition to IQ test scores (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013). The American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD) (2010, 2012) and APA (2013) recommend using culturally sensitive approaches. Assessing AF in immigrants is a challenge because their cultural backgrounds are different than those of the standardization samples of United States AF measures. When typical AF measures are not appropriate, AAIDD (2010) offers guidelines about appropriate sources such as school, work, and medical records, prior psychosocial evaluations, and qualitative adaptive behavior interviews with multiple informants. However, defendants facing the death penalty are often raised in impoverished areas with a paucity of pertinent documentation. This study identifies and discusses issues related to the use of self-report, selection of respondents, questions, collateral information, and clinical judgment in AF evaluations of immigrants facing the death penalty. Case Description We present a case study of an AF evaluation of a Mexican national seeking ID exemption from capital punishment. Discussion We offer a framework for developing and judging the quality of an AF evaluation that adheres to the (AAIDD) (2010, 2012) and APA (2013) guidelines, and includes 1) strengths and limitations of adaptive functioning in relation to others of his age group and culture; 2) reliable evidence concerning the individual’s history in specific periods of time; 3) an account of the individual’s cultural and linguistic differences; and 4) an account for potential bias on the respondents’ side. References Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002). American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. fifth ed. Washington, DC: APA; 2013. American Psychological Association. (2016). Revision of ethical standard 3.04 of the “Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct” (2002, as amended 2010). American Psychologist, 71, 900. Schalock, R.L., Borthwick-Duffy, S.A.,Bradley, V. J., Buntix, W.H.E.,.Coulter, D.L., Craig, E.M…..Yeager, M.H. (2010). Intellectual disability: Definition, classification, and systems of supports. (11th ed.).Washington, DC: American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. doi:978-1-935304-04-3. Schalock, R.L., Luckasson, R.A., Bradley, V., Buntinx, W.H.E., Lachapelle, Y., Shogren, K.A…Wehmeyer, M.L. (2012). Intellectual disability: Definition, classification, and system of supports: User's Guide. Washington, DC: American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.

Societal-level ethical responsibilities regarding active euthanasia: an analysis using the Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists

Using the Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists as an ethical framework, some of the major successes, challenges and needs that psychology has regarding its responsibilities to society in the area of end-of-life decision making and active euthanasia are outlined in this paper. Four particular responsibilities are highlighted: (a) increase professional and scientific knowledge; (b) use psychological knowledge for beneficial purposes; (c) adequately train its members: and (d) encourage beneficial social structures and policies. For each responsibility, some of the major societal-level ethical issues and current needs discussed in the literature are identified, as well as ways that psychology has contributed to dealing with those issues and needs. In conclusion, several recommendations are offered regarding ways in which psychologists and psychology could increase its contribution.

Ethics of Collaboration: Comments on the AUCCCD White Paper

ABSTRACT Recently, the Association of University and College Counseling Center Directors (AUCCCD) published a White Paper on a multidimensional understanding of organizational structures for counseling centers (Mitchell, Oakley & Dunkle 2019). This article provided a historical overview of such structures, argued that there is no one optimal structure for all campuses, provided recommendations for factors to consider in related decision-making, and advocated for collaboration regardless of structure. The authors of this article extend the conversation by elaborating on some of the ethical issues involved in collaboration, as the White Paper did not address the limits of acceptability in such processes. Given that the authors are psychologists, we will be focusing on the Ethical Principles for Psychologists and Code of Conduct (2017) of the American Psychological Association (APA). Similar language can be found in the ethical codes of other mental health professionals, and we note these sources as well.

Feedback in Forensic Mental Health Assessment: A Preliminary Review of Ethics, Research, and Practice

ABSTRACTUnlike assessments in other fields of psychology, forensic mental health assessment (FMHA) does not emphasize feedback. The Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology, and foundational FMHA texts provide little guidance regarding whether and what type of feedback can be provided to forensic evaluees. Mirroring the trend in academic discourse, little empirical research exists on feedback in forensic contexts. This paper reviews ethical standards, practice guidelines, and foundational FMHA texts pertaining to feedback in forensic settings. Due to ambiguous guidance from these sources, we also present results from a survey of forensic mental health professionals about feedback practices and beliefs about the ethical parameters surrounding feedback in forensic settings. Results from the survey suggest that, although evaluees request feedback a moderate amount of time, there is no consensus among mental health professionals regarding the ethical parameters surrounding feedback or how to respond to evaluees’ requests for feedback during FHMA. We conclude by offering suggestions for forensic mental health professionals and identifying areas for future research.

Mental Abnormalities in Sexually Violent Predator Evaluations: Ethical Use of Paraphilic Disorder Diagnoses

ABSTRACTForensic psychologists and psychiatrists are regularly called upon to conduct sexually violent predator (SVP) evaluations. Commonly, the DSM-5 diagnostic category of paraphilic disorders is used to establish whether an offender has a mental abnormality outlined by the SVP laws. Importantly, the use of paraphilic disorders to establish the mental abnormality criterion has given rise to several ethical concerns, including questions related to validity and reliability. The diagnoses of unspecified paraphilic disorder and other specified paraphilic disorder (including the nonconsent and hebephilia specifiers) have been especially controversial. Therefore, the present article will explore the use of paraphilic disorder diagnoses in the context of SVP evaluations, with emphasis on the other specified paraphilic disorder (OSPD) and unspecified paraphilic disorder (UPD) categories. Moreover, we provide relevant ethical considerations and recommendations for clinicians conducting SVP evaluations in light of the guidelines set forth by the American Psychological Association’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct and the American Psychological Association’s Specialty Guidelines in Forensic Psychology.