Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

When Scientists Are Adversaries, Do Participants Lose?

When Scientists Are Adversaries, Do Participants Lose? In considering questions of the confidentiality of data, courts have focused their inquiry on the interests of litigants and the public, but they have neglected the fundamental privacy interests of participants. Because participants divulge their most private thoughts and experiences in research, involuntary breaches of their confidentiality should be barred. Congress has recognized this principle in the provision of certificates of confidentiality for mental health research, but ambiguity in the relevant section of the Public Health Service Act renders such protection less strict than Congress intended. Protection of confidentiality should extend beyond litigation to secondary data analysis, when there is a significant risk that participants’ identity will be divulged. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Law and Human Behavior American Psychological Association

When Scientists Are Adversaries, Do Participants Lose?

Law and Human Behavior , Volume 12 (2): 8 – Jun 1, 1988

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-psychological-association/when-scientists-are-adversaries-do-participants-lose-IsV3jFCie0

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
American Psychological Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 American Psychological Association
ISSN
0147-7307
eISSN
1573-661X
DOI
10.1007/BF01073127
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

In considering questions of the confidentiality of data, courts have focused their inquiry on the interests of litigants and the public, but they have neglected the fundamental privacy interests of participants. Because participants divulge their most private thoughts and experiences in research, involuntary breaches of their confidentiality should be barred. Congress has recognized this principle in the provision of certificates of confidentiality for mental health research, but ambiguity in the relevant section of the Public Health Service Act renders such protection less strict than Congress intended. Protection of confidentiality should extend beyond litigation to secondary data analysis, when there is a significant risk that participants’ identity will be divulged.

Journal

Law and Human BehaviorAmerican Psychological Association

Published: Jun 1, 1988

There are no references for this article.