4: Research Ethics | Course - Courseasy | Courseasy

Course Progress

Completed 0/55

4: Research Ethics

The quiz will be on the following text — learn it for the best chance to win.
Research Ethics in Behavioral Neuroscience

The pursuit of scientific knowledge in behavioral neuroscience, which often involves human and animal subjects, is bounded by a critical framework of research ethics. These principles arose from necessary responses to historical abuses, most notably the Tuskegee Syphilis Study (1932-1972) and Stanley Milgram's obedience experiments (1961-1963). Such events led to the formalization of ethical codes, including the Belmont Report (1979), which established three core principles: Respect for Persons (informed consent, autonomy), Beneficence (maximizing benefits, minimizing harm), and Justice (fair distribution of research burdens and benefits).

For research involving human participants, these principles are operationalized through Informed Consent, where participants must voluntarily agree to partake after understanding the procedures, risks, and benefits. Researchers must ensure Confidentiality and allow participants to withdraw at any time without penalty. All proposed studies must be reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB), which weighs the scientific merit against potential risks to participants.

Animal research is governed by equally strict guidelines to ensure humane treatment. The Three Rs frameworkReplacement (using non-animal alternatives when possible), Reduction (using the minimum number of animals), and Refinement (minimizing pain and distress)—guides experimental design. Oversight is provided by an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC), which mandates appropriate housing, veterinary care, and the use of anesthesia and analgesia for painful procedures.

Contemporary ethical considerations also extend to scientific integrity, including accurate data reporting, transparency, and the avoidance of plagiarism. Furthermore, the rise of advanced neuroimaging and genetic testing raises new questions about neuro-privacy, incidental findings, and the potential for biological determinism, requiring ongoing ethical vigilance.