Is it ethical for the ends to justify the means?
This week we were studying different types of research and the ethics requirements and processes involved. Ethics is very important to modern research so that we don’t cause harm to the subjects as researchers have in the past. There are two lines of thought with research: Absolutist and Relativist.
Respect for the research candidates sits above all in modern research, the candidate must always have control over what happens to them and their data. Today I will be investigating both the implications and differences of the two ideas and why each is important.
My initial thoughts:
The largest factor is the importance and nature of the work, but I lean towards a relativist view but I also understand that it’s important to have limits to protect both the researcher and candidates. This is where the
Absolutist view comes in as a solid set of rules that cannot be broken to prevent us from becoming or creating monsters.
Feelings:
The main reason I believe that sometimes the means will justify the ends is that the idealism of an Absolutist view could lead to serious issues. In my life, I have already seen the world brought to its knees and without the will to break the rules a little, we may not survive. It’s why I volunteered for Covid research during the pandemic. I also expect many difficult choices over my lifetime with things like global warming and without the willingness to make these decisions we as a species may not survive.
A quick evaluation and analysis:
There are many different standpoints on ethics, what some consider fine may be too much for others, the university has a sub-committee to oversee all cases of ethical research in an effort to ensure the institution and its researchers perform in an agreed-upon and ethical manner.
According to Ethical relativism vs absolutism: research implications, “Ethical relativity should be distinguished from situational relativity or, as it has been more commonly referred to, “situational ethics”, which completely
ignores the presence of a moral standard as a guide to decision making. With ethical relativity, the existence of moral standards is recognized and although these standards may vary considerably across circumstances, moral standards are still available and are used for reference” (McDonald, 2010). This shows us that the situation can play a major role in what is ethical or not, but at the same time acknowledges that rules must still exist, even if breaking them is for the greater good. But they must exist nevertheless as a standpoint for what is acceptable to us as humans.
The quote also suggests that there are times where we must do what is needed because the situation requires it, and it may be more moral to act even at the cost to our ethics. But ultimately these situations are extreme, and research does not often exist purely to save the human race.
As a game developer, the most research I will be doing is user testing and market research. The ends are pretty simple and are not worth risking the health of the participants. In fact, I will likely get better results with a more comfortable audience. (Peters and Vissers, 2004) Suggest that for games, specifically research
games, a debrief should have 3 functions:
- Providing an opportunity for participants to cool down
- Protecting the instrument of gaming simulation
- Validating the researcher’s interpretation of simulation outcomes.
The first point Peters and Vissers discuss is entirely directed towards ethical treatment of the candidate but also gives them time to get their own thoughts together, changing their mindset form immersion to retrospection, giving better results overall.
The only time I can really see ethical concerns within testing for games is when we may lie or keep information from players to better judge their reaction.
It can sometimes be important to lie when user testing, we wouldn’t want players having a game experienced changed because they have a certain expectation. It would be like playing a horror game but telling the player
how the monster works, it fundamentally changes the experience and would ruin the results.
Sef-Crit
What I did
This week I performed an analysis of 2 case studies in the guise of an ethics review committee.
I also assessed the ethical risk of three proposed studies using the ethics checklists that my university uses.
What went wrong
I am sure my answers may be controversial when compared to others, I focused on the research. In the first case study, I had several issues with the studies premise and while I gave suggestions that were not taking into account my own personal bias and that focused on the research, I did also note my reservations.
During the proposed studies, I had to research several aspects, we live in unusual times and I responded for both current and usual times.
How can I overcame what went wrong
Given I was aware my responses may be controversial, I ensured I explained all my reasoning, backed up with references containing the required statistics. One part of education and research is that we don’t have to agree on a theory, work can be reviewed and tests can be performed again to confirm results. As long as the reasoning is there with statistics to back it up, personal opinion never has any impact upon research.
What went well
I gave my recommendations, I was surprised to see how other people responded to the same task, it was not as clear-cut as I expected and it also taught me that we have different opinions on ethics. This makes the topic pretty interesting as it means that over time what we consider ethical will change and so its never anything we can learn, only something we can check up on from time to time.
What can I improve and how
I think ethics is something I will keep referring back to over time. I don’t think there’s too much damage I can do within games but knowing there’s a sub-committee to handle approval means I don’t actually have to
worry about it too much. Plus we all have common sense, if it seems your research is risky, it probably is.
Action Plan:
- Consider ethics of any research I perform
- Continue to be an ethical person
Conclusion
Ethics is an area that’s different from others, It’s more formal for our own protections and ethics can be affected greatly by different situations. Something that was ethical 10 years ago may not be now and 10 years from now things may change further. The key takeaway I have noted is that respect is the key to ethical research.
Bibliography
McDonald, G., 2010. Ethical relativism vs absolutism: research implications. European Business Review, 22(4), pp.446-464.
Peters, V. and Vissers, G., 2004. A Simple Classification Model for Debriefing Simulation Games. Simulation & Gaming, 35(1), pp.70-84.