Lecture Ethics An intro to some important interaction laws
Exercise Paper helicopter experiment (lost my Fitt´s
law files Free experiment supervision/help
Next – and last - week Q&A session + exam discussion
Exam date stands – Bill Gates to blaim!
The experiment was created to explain some of the horrors taking place during WW2
Many war-criminals claimed they were ”just following orders”
Milligrams question was whether the Germans were just cold-hearted, or if what was happening was a group psychology phenomenon that could happen to anyone given the right conditions Can everyone become a war criminal?
The experiment aimed at getting an answer to the question:
“For how long will someone continue to give shocks to another person if they are told to do so, even if they thought they could be seriously hurt?” i.e. will people do morally wrong things
just because an authority figure tells them to?
Milligram created a ”shock generator” with 30 switches Each switch induces electric shock, from
15-450 volts Shock level was marked: ▪ Moderate – 75-120 volts▪ Strong – 135 – 180 volts ▪ .....▪ Danger – Severe Shock – 375- 420 volts▪ XXX – 435 – 450 volts
The shock generator was phony – it just produced sounds
In the text, 40 volunteer subjects were informed that their payment was for showing up – they could leave when they wanted
Next they met an experimenter – an actor posing as a distinguished professor – and another participant – a fake as well.
The two ”participants” drew lots about who was to be the ”teacher” and the ”learner” in the ”memory and learning experiment”
The lottery was faked, and the real participant always ended up as the ”teacher”
The ”teacher” then observed the fake participant being strapped to a chair with electrodes attached
They were then seated in another room with the shock generator, unable to see the ”learner”
The ”teacher” was then instructed to teach word-pairs to the ”learner”.
When the learner made a mistake, the ”teacher” was instructed to administer a shock, 15 volts stronger each time The ”teacher” was given a small 45 volt shock to
make it look like the shock generator was real
The experimenter was in the same room as the ”teacher”. If the ”teacher” grew concerned, the experimenter would use predefined ”prods” to try and make the ”teacher” continue the experiment.
The experimenter started with mild prods, who then grew more severe and authoritarian each time the subject contacted the experimenter
If asked, the experimenter said he was responsible for any damages to the ”learner”, which gave many ”teachers” a sense of relief to continue
The ”learner” was in radio contact with the ”teacher”.
After specific voltages, pre-recorded audio would play, which the ”teacher” could hear – for example:
75 volts: ”Ugh!!!” 180 volts: ”Ugh!!! I can´t stand the pain. Let me
out of here!” 285 volts: Screaming 345 volts +: Silence
Prior to the experiment, experts thought maybe 1-3% of the ”teachers” would not stop giving shocks
It was believed you would need to be a psychopath to give lethal shocks to a stranger
The original result had all 40 subjects obeying up to 300 volt shocks
25 of 40 continued up to the maximum level of 375 volts
Many participants showed signs of tension – 3 had uncontrollable seizures
So 65% never stopped giving shocks
Even after the ”learner” had grown completely silent
Why? It is believed that there is a strong innate behavior in people to do as they are told, especially from authority persons
Further studies showed that:
1.Women are about the same obedient as men
2.Distance to the victim affects the obedience
3.Distance to the person ordering you affects the obedience
4.The appearance of the authority person and his rank can increase or decrease the obedience
At the time of the experiment (1960s) Europe was recovering from WW2, and was looking for answers
By the stricter controls of today, the experiment would not have been allowed – for example because: The participants were deceived about the purpose of the
experiment They were not made aware of the consequences There was a risk that the participants would suffer short-
term emotional stress (they thought they caused harm to another person
There was a risk that participants would suffer long-term emotional stress (they found they would harm someone just because someone told them to do) [independent study found no long-term effects]
Another problem of deception-based experiments is that people may stop agreeing to participate in experiments
Because it becomes known that researchers use deception even research that is harmless or aimed at helping the subjects could loose participants
So, as researchers we cannot do this – but the media can
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcvSNg0HZwk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzTuz0mNlwU&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmFCoo-cU3Y&feature=related
Ethics (also known as moral philosophy) is a branch of philosophy which seeks to address questions about morality; that is, about concepts like good and bad, right and wrong, justice, virtue, etc.
Ethics is a fuzzy concept, dependent on human morality Gives rise to lots of problems in research
In the ideal world, when running experiments, we need to make various ethical considerations
In the real world, people will often try to make us run experiments that to not adhere to ethical guidelines Money is usually involved, often
private sector
Some general considerations:
As experimenters, we have psychological power and influence over participants -
Especially if we are wearing a white lab coat or otherwise place ourselves as figures of authority
Participants are psychologically vulnerable: They do not know the full ramifications of the experiments, and are psychologically in a weaker position thant the experimenters
Historically there has been a lot of problems with unethical experimentation (nazi Germany being an excellent example) – your reputation as a professionals is equally at stake
The ethical committee
Most research institutions have some sort of ethical clearing process that one must go through in order to get approval for experimentation on humans These processes can be extensive and time-consuming
Most companies do not – they are mainly concerned about the risk of a participant suing them
Companies that by law adhere to state rules, e.g. medical companies, follow very strict ethical guidelines
Ethical clearing is typically required when research involves humans, animals, dangerous materials and radioactivity
The approval process can be ridiculously extensive
Clearing by ethical committee is in the interest of safety of the participants And the institution (lawsuits)
The APA and British Psychological Society have defined very detailed guidelines about how experimenters should behave while running experiments, and what the rights of participants are.
We should follow these.
The Code of Conduct governs how professionals should operate in their work
The purpose of the Code of Conduct is to protect the people in our care – students, patients, participants etc.
The Code of Conduct and the ethical guidelines it contain however also cover how to treat our colleagues
Let´s take a look at what the code of conduct tells us ...
First and foremost, the code of conduct barrs us from engaging in certain types of research:
”For ethical reasons, some areas of human experience and behavior may be beyond the reach of experiment, observation or other form of psychological investigation.” British Psychological Society (2000)
For example, exposing innocents to nucelar radiation is illegal to experiment with
The guiding principle of the code of conduct is that the experiment should be considered from the perspective of the participants
How does the experiment affect them? Are there any risks associated with
participation? Are the risks equal for all participants?
(children vs. adults)
It is expected that we as experimenters are aware of the risks associted with the experiment and inform our participants
There should be mutual respect and confidence between experimenter and participants
To ensure this, a number of factors need to be considered, e.g. Consent Deception Debriefing Confidentiality Protection
We should always get permission by the participants to include them in the experiment.
Participants should be informed about the objectives of the study and all aspect of the research that could influence their willingness to participate
If participants have questions, they should be answered (sometime we need to deceive participants – more on this later)
Getting concent is important for several reasons So participants cannot sue us (and the
university/company) afterwards Because researchers are in a position
of authority – e.g. using students. This relationship can pressure participants to take part in experiments they find upsetting
When working with children or adults with impairments, the consent is given by the parents/wards (loco parentis)
If – for some reason – permission cannot be obtained from parents/teachers/similar, the Ethics Committee of the organization/company is used Sometimes independent consultant in private
sector
Paying participants is tricky – it is often necessary to get participants, but can induce them to participate where they really do not want to Especially in experiments which can
involve harm, discomfort or similar problems
Consent is given via a consent form
The consent form should contain: Description of the experiment Information about the participant Rights of the participant Signature and data of participant Contact information to the experimenter
Rights of the participant: Freedom to withdraw
The consent form states that participants have the right to withdraw at any time They should still be paid
The freedom to withdraw is tricky in observational and organisatorial settings, but we must still observe the right
A participant can withdraw retrospectively – after the experiment
Misleading participants is problematic because it leads to lawsuits – oh, and also it is unethical
Sometimes it is impossible to study psychological processes without witholding information about the purpose of the study For example, to avoid false feedback from participants
In these cases, it is important to: Ensure no alternative to deception exists Ensure participants get the information as early as
possible Consult about whether the deception is ethical
Witholding information from participants is wrong if the information is likely to cause them to: Reject participating Cause them unease once debriefed Cause them to object about the experiment Cause them harm Etc.
To check, consult with individuals who share the characteristics of the participants + Ethics Committee (cover your bee-hind)
Debriefing
Following the experiment, the participants should be told what the experiment was all about Discuss the experiment, its purpose, what will happen
with the information gathered Monitor the participant to see if any unforeseen
effects have occured
Participants should be brought back to their original state If we have run an experiment that e.g. induces a
negative mood, debriefing must return them to their original mood state
Confidentiality: Almost all countries have rules governing how we treat data collected from experiments involving humans
Information obtained about individuals is confidential unless otherwise agreed in advance You will go to jail if you do not
respect confidentiality!
If anonymity cannot be guaranteed, it must be stated in the consent form and participants informed
In research, we do not publish information that can be identified back to a person Only general stuff: ”3 of 10 did not like icecream”
A good way to avoid registering personal information is to use codes: Participant 01, participant 02, etc. etc.
Protection of participants
Experimenters have a responsibility to protect participants from physical and mental harm during the experiment
The risk of harm should be no greater than in everyday life (APA guidelines) A fuzzy statement, and it brings problems ...
Participants must be informed about factors that could create a risk Typically warning about pre-existing medical
conditions
Following an experiment, participants have a right to contact the experimenter (or experimenters organization) concerning any issues to do with their well-being
Procedures for contacting the investigator must be in the consent form
When disseminating results of an experiment, the confidentiality must be respected
Not doing this can lead to harm to the participants psychological well-being (and lawsuits)
When doing research, you may obtain information about participants which they are not aware E.g. psychological or physical problems
You should inform participants if you have reason to believe their future well-being is endangered
Do not advice participants on these issues if you are not specifically trained to do so – refer to a professional Accept the limitations of your expertise, mr. Hot-
shot-researcher! (again with the authority figure)
How far are you willing to go?
The power law of practice is one of the basic laws of interaction design, just like Fitt´s law.
The law states that the logarithm of the reaction time for a particular task – such as folding an origami figure – decreases linearly with the logarithm of the number of practice trials taken
I.e., the more times you do something, the faster you become, and the relationship is log-linear (linear on log-log-scale)
It is an example of a learning curve effect on performance
Power function: RT=a*P-b + c [also an exponential function]
RT= Trial Completion Time; P=Trial Number (starting from 1 for power functions and 0 for exponential functions), and a, b, and c, are constants
Fitt´s law was published in 1954
It models the relationship in a very common situation in interaction design:
A person moving an appendage (finger, cursor) at rest to a target area that is located somewhere else
The algorith for Fitt´s law is as follows:
MT = a + b log2(2A/W) [a and b are constants, Distance, Size]
This means that the time to acquire a target is the function of the distance to and size of the target.
Note that the width of the target is calculated in a straight line from the beginning point
The relationship is logarithmic, which means that the shape of the relationship between size and reaction time is curved
This means that a small increase in size for a small object results in a large decrease in movement time
And a small increase for big objects does not make much of a difference
Interface designers have used Fitt´s law to make some rules about best practices
1) The Rule of Target Size Combines Fitt´s Law and Hick´s law
The size of the button should be proportional to its expected frequency of use
Describes the time it takes for a person to take a decision as a result of the possible choices he or she has
The law assesses cognitive information capacity in choice reaction experiments
The law basically states that people subdivide the total collection of choices into categories, eliminating about half of the remaining choices each step rather than considering each in turn (linear)
– so logarithmic relationship between number of choices and decision time – like Fitt´s law
Like Fitt´s law heavily used in interface design
Importantly, the pointing task has an initial high acceleration phase and a deceleration component
The first phase is only affected by distance to the target - bigger links do not make you more eager to go and click them!
The width of the target is important Here the task at the right side is the
easiest
Fitt´s law becomes less accurate for rectangular targets and irregular objects
In this case, the target box has been attempted increased in two directions, but only one provies a shorter movement time
2) Rule of the infinite edge
A pointing device can only go so far in any direction – monitors have edges, which have infinite target widths
For an OS, the edges are the most valuable real estate – they are the most accessible
(infinite size means infinite movement speed according to Fitt´s law)
Also, they do not require deceleration – the edges of the screen stop the cursor
In web-applications, there is currently no benefit from the rule of infinite edgres – these rarely run at full-screen
Therefore interfaces of web-based OS´ will never be as good as those that use the entire screen real estate
Experiments have also shown that the reason it is slower to point with a mouse than with our fingers lies in our ability to decelerate accurately with a mouse
This is where multi-touch monitors come in!
Fitt´s law remain one of the basic laws of interaction design – hundreds of experiments have confirmed it
Recommended