Premium
Referring and Reporting Research Participants at Risk: Views from Urban Adolescents
Author(s) -
Fisher Celia B.,
HigginsD'Alessandro Ann,
Rau JeanMarie B.,
Kuther Tara L.,
Belanger Susan
Publication year - 1996
Publication title -
child development
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.103
H-Index - 257
eISSN - 1467-8624
pISSN - 0009-3920
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1996.tb01845.x
Subject(s) - psychology , confidentiality , juvenile delinquency , referral , context (archaeology) , poison control , suicide prevention , developmental psychology , human factors and ergonomics , injury prevention , ninth , child abuse , clinical psychology , medicine , family medicine , medical emergency , paleontology , physics , political science , acoustics , law , biology
Researching developmental risks of urban youth raises ethical concerns when an investigator discovers a participant is in jeopardy. This study collected data on 147 seventh, ninth, and eleventh graders' views of 3 investigator options: (1) taking no action and maintaining confidentiality, (2) reporting the problem to a concerned parent or adult, and (3) facilitating adolescent self‐referrals. Participants judged these options within the context of 5 risk domains: substance abuse, child maltreatment, life‐threatening behaviors, delinquency, and shyness. Judgments of reporting options were related to grade and ratings of risk severity, but not to moral reasoning. Confidentiality was viewed favorably for risk behaviors of low perceived severity or for which the consequences of adult discovery might introduce greater risk. Confidentiality was viewed unfavorably and reporting to adults favorably for child maltreatment and threats of suicide. Self‐referral was viewed favorably across all grades and risk behaviors. Implications of adolescent perspectives for research ethics are discussed.