ABSTRACT
In a consideration of research with nonclinical populations, BRODY, GLUCK & ARAGON discuss the status of informed consent as it is actually practised. They point out that a prime consideration when a person consents to participate in research is that the person must be accorded personal autonomy. This autonomy requires a) full disclosure of material that would affect willingness to participate, b) adequate comprehension of the information presented by researchers, c) a voluntary decision to participate, and d) competence to make that decision. In research conducted in psychology with college students, the first three considerations may be most relevant. These authors interviewed students to assess their responses to research projects in which the students had participated. When the students characterized studies positively, it was because participation was interesting or fun, or had provided some self-insight; negative characteristics related to boredom and apparently pointless activity. Approximately 80 per cent characterized informed consent positively; negativity arose when informed consent information was vague, incomplete, or inaccurate. In a few cases, students asserted that they would have opted out of the study had they been more fully informed of the procedures. The students also felt uncomfortable with the idea of withdrawing from the study, especially in group-testing sessions; some claimed to have faked participation (leading to invalid responses). The authors point out that students frequently do not understand the purpose of the informed consent procedure, rendering it less effective in helping them make a decision about participation. They suggest ways to ameliorate the situation.
