Ethics in Research

Thinking of doing a Master's thesis at Duquesne? Mary Tudor, a speech-language pathology student at the University of Iowa elected to do a thesis... as a result of her work, the world is calling her a monster!

Her advisor, Dr. Wendell Johnson (pictured left), tried to prove his theory of stuttering at the expense of children living in an Iowa orphanage. The research had some very unfortunate consequences for many of the subjects. Dr. Johnson distanced himself from the study fearing that the bad press would be damaging to his career. He thereby let his student, Tudor, suffer the adverse publicity and other personal consequences herself.

When the media reports of the affects of this study surfaced years later, it prompted ASHA to make profound changes to the Code of Ethics.

Read about what Tudor did and what happened to her and the subjects in her research! The 'Monster' Study

Listen to what National Public Radio reported; Click on the "Listen" button toward the top of the NPR web page (not recommended for dial-up connections)
(1)	The Stuttering Study	(6/11/01)
(2)	The Case Goes to Court	(9/23/03)

How did the case get settled?
Click here to read about it in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (8/18/07)
Click here to get the scoop from the Quad-City Times (8/18/07)

Hazel Potter Dornbush (2007)

The "Monster Study" took place a long time ago -- well before you were born. The scientific community has taken steps to provide better safeguards for subjects used in research. In 1974, Congress established the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The commission issued the Belmont Report in 1978 [suggested reading, but not required for the class] which provides guidelines to be used by institutional review boards (IRB's) at agencies receiving federal funding for human subject research. The job of the IRB is to examine research proposals to protect the rights and welfare of individuals participating in the research project.

The Commission felt that it is inappropriate to treat persons merely as a means to the ends of research. They emphasized the importance of obtaining informed consent from subjects prior to incorporating them into an experiment, in part in respect for their ability and right to make informed decisions based on sufficient information. The Commission also promoted the concept of trying to maximize the benefits to subjects, while minimizing the risks of harm. They also concurred that discriminate in the selection of subjects is inappropriate, and drew special attention toward safeguarding vulnerable populations, such as prisoners, children, the sick, the elderly, and the orphans in the monster study.

What policies and required procedures are in effect at Duquesne University to protect human subjects? [suggested, but not required reading for class] If you do a thesis you'll need your proposal to be approved by the IRB at Duquesne.

What protections do you feel should be afforded to "non-human" (animal) subjects used in research?

In the 2003 revision of the ASHA Code of Ethics, guidelines pertaining to ethical behaviors in research where included to the previous document which was hadn't been changed since 1994.