In one line: Researchers have a responsibility to protect the people they study — good data never justifies harming participants.
Responsibility is one of the six concepts. Because psychology studies real people, researchers must put participants' wellbeing above the study's results.
History includes studies that caused real distress, which is why every study today is checked against ethical guidelines before it can run. These guidelines are not optional extras — they are the price of doing psychology at all.
Memory hook: People before data. If protecting participants and getting results ever clash, protection wins.
Free preview
This is the free notes preview
You're reading the free notes. Aimnova Pro unlocks the full study experience — and you can try it free for 7 days:
- FlashcardsLock in vocabulary and key terms with spaced repetition.
- Practice questionsAnswer exam-style questions and get instant AI marking.
- Mock exams & past-paper vaultSit full mocks and see exactly how examiners award marks.
- Personalised study planA daily plan built around your exam date and weak areas.
Key idea: A short set of duties protects participants before, during and after a study.
Core ethical guidelines
Informed consent
People agree to take part knowing what it involves. For children, a parent or guardian consents.
Protection from harm
Participants should not be put at risk of lasting physical or psychological harm — no more stress than everyday life.
Confidentiality
Data is kept private and anonymous, so individuals cannot be identified in the results.
Right to withdraw
People can stop and leave at any time, and can have their data removed, without penalty.
Consent · No harm · Private · Free to leave · Debrief
Sometimes a study needs mild deception (not revealing its true aim) so people behave naturally. If so, it must be justified, cause no real harm, and be followed by a debrief — telling participants the true purpose afterwards and checking they are okay.
Go further — higher-level insight: Ethics can create a trade-off. Full information can spoil a study (people act differently if they know the aim), so researchers balance scientific value against participant welfare. When they use deception, thorough debriefing and the right to withdraw their data are what keep it ethical.
Stop wasting time on topics you know
Our AI identifies your weak areas and focuses your study time where it matters. No more overstudying easy topics.
How this is tested: Ethics is a guaranteed evaluation tool. For almost any study you can ask: was there consent, protection from harm, confidentiality, a right to withdraw, and a debrief? Name the guideline and say how it applies.
A researcher wants to secretly observe how students react to a staged argument in a library, then measure their stress. Explain the ethical responsibilities they must consider.
Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
Common mistakes: 1. Just listing guidelines. Say how each applies to this study.
2. Forgetting the debrief. Deception is only acceptable with a proper debrief.
3. Ignoring protection from harm. It is usually the most serious concern.