ABSTRACT
The use of self-reported data on conforming and deviant behavior is a risky business insofar as the respondents may underreport the amount of deviance. This chapter shows how six hypothetical research proposals involving human subjects were constructed for review by authors' respondents. In each proposal there were ethical dilemmas relating to how the human subjects would be treated on the consent or the risk-benefit ratio issues. All six were included in the National Survey questionnaire, and two of the six were presented to the researchers interviewed in the authors' study. The number of respondents whose ethical standards and practices are ranged on the permissive end of the scales is likely, if anything, to be an underestimate of the actual amount of permissiveness. The chapter provides evidence which seems to indicate that studies with less favorable Risks-Benefits Ratios for Subjects tend not to be counterbalanced by high benefits to others or to science as often as studies more favorable to subjects.
