In recent years，With the overall development of society, especially information technology progress，Social science research tools are richer and advanced，The problems involved in research have also increased significantly，Large -scale field survey experiments that were difficult to carry out are increasingly common。But，Scientific research ethics does not seem to keep up with the pace of advancement。Large -scale social intervention with the purpose of social science research may cause physical and mental health to individuals and groups、Interpersonal relationship、Economic and other influence，Even damaging social fairness and just，Some research has caused controversy。Such cases will destroy the public's trust in science，The legitimacy and reasonableness of threat scientific research。So，Some scholars call on the ethical challenges of the academic community to respond to the social science field experiments，Especially to discuss the impact of the social science field experiments on public interests，Strengthen the implementation of existing scientific research ethical policies，and formulate new scientific research ethical standards。

　bet365 Play online games

The Herbinky Declaration of the 1960s and 1970s and the Bellmond Report laid an important foundation for modern medical ethics，It has also had a broad impact on other scientific research fields。Current，Medical institutions in developed countries、Universities and scientific research institutions generally have an institutional review committee，Responsible for reviewing the research activities involved in human subjects in the institution that meets the international ethical rules and relevant laws and regulations。But，In the past half a century,，The nature of scientific experiments has undergone tremendous changes，Related ethical risks are also changing。

Rose McDermott, a professor of international relations at Brown University in the United States, and Peter K. Hatemi, a professor of political science at Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, in 2020 in the "Academy Bet365 app download of Sciences of the National Academy of Sciences) in 2020. Published an article "Field Experimental Ethics: Call for the establishment of new standards to protect the public from reluctant manipulation and real damage" proposal，Many social science field experiments take large -scale people as research objects，It even affects the public who has not participated in research。But these social science field experiments have not followed ethical specifications，For example, respect、Fair、Kind, etc.。and，The existing scientific research ethics standards are mainly applicable to research in the laboratory environment at the beginning，rarely incorporates wider social consequences into consideration。

Introduction to McDmotmot and Hartmi，No matter which subject field is，There is no special research on the ethics of the field of social science fields，Therefore, it is impossible to make a system review。They chose the following 6 types of cases to analyze the ethical challenges facing the social science field survey: published in top high influence factor journals and interdisciplinary journals such as "Science", "Nature" and "National Academy of Sciences"; Reference rate; very common; scientific researchers and government、Enterprise、International organizations jointly carried out; affecting a large population; it has caused actual harm to the public。

　Ethical hidden dangers are not uncommon

According to the research of McDmart and Hartmi，In the field of social science fields，A common behavior that violates ethical principles is social pressure manipulation。Some studies in order to identify or reduce the voting rate of voters，Through social media in real elections、Phone、On -site access and other methods to conduct large -scale intervention。When this intervention measures involved enough, the number of people involved enough for a long time，enough to change the election results。For example，There is a study based on a research object of African voters in a certain historical inequality in southern United States.，Send information to 25%of them send information containing racial conflict content，As a result, the voting rate of African -American voters in real elections decreases。The voting rate of a minority who is in a weak position in the weak position will bring negative consequences to the group in the next Bet365 lotto review few years，Violation of the principle of good。The principle of goodness includes two requirements: so as not to harm，or maximize possible benefits、minimize possible damage。Considering that African -American in history has not been able to enjoy equal voting rights，This research is likely to arouse African -American hostile emotions，Deepen racial contradictions。Even those who claim to help increase the voting rate，In fact, it is also the advantage of strengthening the capable voting group，Deepen the inequality of the election。

McDmart and Hartmi discovered，In cases of social pressure manipulation，No study has consent from the participants in advance，or explain to the participants afterwards。This violates two basic principles suitable for all field experiments or laboratory experiments: inform the participants the risk of participating research;，Rebirth of the other party's consent。Knowing consent power allows people to choose not to participate in a certain research to avoid risks，This is the moral premise of any research。Report afterwards is also a necessary component of "respect for people"，Its key functions are: the negative consequences of remedy research to participants; restore the participants to the state before the study，Including how to look at yourself and others。The participants are in the process of listening to the report，Get understanding the purpose of research，Eliminate the confusion caused by research。

Social media is the "severe disaster area" of the ethics of social science field experimental ethics。Facebook Company and three researchers at Cornell University in the United States in 2014 studied the "Experimental Evidence of Large -scale Emotions on Social Networks" for suspected violation of privacy、Crimsation of the ethical red line and attract a lot of criticism。A function of Facebook is to push the content shared by friends to users，The content of the pushed is screened by the algorithm。This research reduced the positive or negative emotional content to 689003 Facebook users through modification algorithms in January 2012，Whether the emotions expressed on social networks with friends will affect people's own emotions。Results show，When the positive emotional content of the user is pushed is reduced，The proportion of words bet365 best casino games that express negative emotions in the status update of their own release rises，The proportion of words to express positive emotions decreases; when the negative emotions pushed by the user are reduced，On the opposite situation。This proves that emotional infection can also occur when there is no direct interaction between people。

This experiment manipulated the emotion of nearly 690,000 people for a week，But the subject's consent is not obtained in advance，Not any ethical censorship。Coronel University Institutional Centers believes that the study does not need to be approved，Because the data is collected by Facebook Company。Facebook company said that all users have chosen to agree to service terms and data use policies，It shows that the company will collect user information for "development、Test and improve products，Including investigation and research，Test and fail to exclude new products and functions "。But，Whether the subject will be in a bad psychological state due to emotion，This affects normal life and interpersonal relationships，No one answers the follow -up questions，No one is responsible。

McDmart and Hartmi said，Social media's service clauses are formulated for clarifying civil liability，Not necessarily in line with scientific research ethics specifications。Based on the "Bell Mon Report" "U.S. Federal Human Human Agency Protection Policy"，One of the conditions for the institutional review committee to exempt the right of informed consent in one study is: the probability and degree of the probability and degree of discomfort caused to the subject of damage or discomfort，Do not exceed the subjects encountered in the daily life of the subject，Or the damage or discomfort adopted in a conventional body or psychological examination/test。deliberately increased the negative emotions that the subject came into contact with and lasted for a week，This approach may have exceeded the above minimum risk range。Even in daily life, there may be negative emotions、Encounter negative events，This does not mean that in the name of scientific research, it intentionally puts them in this situation that is ethical。Regulatory social media is not the responsibility of scientific researchers，But they still have the responsibility to establish ethical principles for their work and abide Bet365 lotto review by。It can be said，Serious academic personnel should never take the terms of social media service terms as guidelines in field research，Data scandal of Facebook and Cambridge Analysis Company in the UK is enough to show this (the data of tens of millions of Facebook users was leaked to Cambridge Analysis Company and used to affect the public's choice in political activities)。

With academic personnel and government、Increase cooperation from non -governmental organizations，It is also necessary to be alert to the side effects of field research that aims to enhance public interests。For example，In 2010, a study in the United States based on 400 households in New York City applied for housing subsidies as research objects，Rejects the application of 200 families in two years，To track and observe whether they will have no home。Another example，Some researchers provide miniature financial services or direct cash subsidies to women in poor areas/countries，To examine how to empower women。But，Display with evidence，These studies sometimes lead to an increase in domestic violence against women，Because of the rise in women's economic status, it pose a threat to the local traditional patriarchal system and social customs。and，When the research is over、When funding support stops，Women's situation may be more difficult。

McDmart and Hartmi said，The above cases reflect that some intervention studies do not take into account the specific situation of the subject and the negative consequences that may suffer in advance。The common ethical issues commonly available in social science field experiments involved in resource allocation include: provide benefits for some people，Even random，It may also cause dissatisfaction among those who have not obtained welfare，Stimulate the group or inter -group conflict; if the rewards provided by the study exceed the income of the subjects in the normal circumstances，So they may not really have the freedom to refuse to participate in research; when academic personnel cooperate with non -academic institutions，The goals of these institutions and the resources provided will affect the design and implementation of research，And these institutions are not restricted by scientific research，It is difficult for academic personnel to implement the ethical specifications of these institutions。

　Perfect and update the scientific research ethics guidelines

McDmart and Hartmi think，Social Science Field Experiment is a powerful research method，But its degree and range are much higher than laboratory experiments，It is unreasonable to relax the ethical standards for it。They suggest，To ensure that social science researchers respect the public's knowledge consent、Avoid unnecessary damage，It should strengthen scientific research ethical education at the graduate stage of various disciplines of social sciences; scientific research institutions、Academic Journal、The Academic Association must update the existing ethical standards and formulate new policies; fully evaluate the impact of large -scale intervention during the design and publication stage of research，Perform public discussions，Consultation public opinion。Two scholars also propose to join the scientific research ethical norms for "respect and benefit social" standards。where，"Respect" The objects referred to not only include the subject，Also includes others。This is because the guidelines used to protect individuals may not apply to protect groups，Intervention in the real society may have an impossible impact and spread to others，Their rights should also be respected。

Professor Margaret Sleeboom-Faulkner, a professor of anthropology at the University of Sussex, said in an interview with this reporter，All scientific research institutions in the UK have ethical rules，Specific criteria that social science researchers need to comply depends to a large extent on the institution of their inauguration。The ethical problem of the field of social science field experiments is indeed worth exploring，But different disciplines、Different types of studies required for the ethical guidelines in different types of studies are huge，It may be difficult to set up universal rules。For example，Psychological research and history、The ethical specifications required for anthropological research are obvious differences，Because the former is often highly programmed。

Jaap Bos, associate professor of Social and Behavior Sciences of Wallech University of the Netherlands, told this reporter，All social scientific researchers in Europe have been constrained by the "General Data Protection bet365 Play online games Regulations" that have taken effect in 2018，Among them, it includes the content of the development of the research must be obtained.。The ethical risk of discussing the social science field experiment is very useful，But the relevant discussion should be avoided too technical、Description。From Bos's view，There are some more basic issues that need to be discussed，Including the autonomy of research participants and the role of research。Another，Formulate scientific research ethical policy、The subject of supervision and execution and evaluation results shall not be limited to the Ethical Committee，The participation of ordinary people is also very important。