{"title":"社区药物使用研究中的道德压力、道德实践与伦理氛围:来自一线的观点","authors":"C. Fisher, Gala True, L. Alexander, A. Fried","doi":"10.1080/21507716.2013.806969","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The role of front-line researchers, those whose responsibilities include face-to-face contact with participants, is critical to ensuring the responsible conduct of community-based drug use research. To date, there has been little empirical examination of how front-line researchers perceive the effectiveness of ethical procedures in their real-world application and the moral stress they may experience when adherence to scientific procedures appears to conflict with participant protections. Methods: This study represents a first step in applying psychological science to examine the work-related attitudes, ethics climate, and moral dilemmas experienced by a national sample of 275 front-line staff members whose responsibilities include face-to-face interaction with participants in community-based drug-use research. Using an anonymous Web-based survey we psychometrically evaluated and examined relationships among six new scales tapping moral stress (frustration in response to perceived barriers to conducting research in a morally appropriate manner); organizational ethics climate; staff support; moral practice dilemmas (perceived conflicts between scientific integrity and participant welfare); research commitment; and research mistrust. Results: As predicted, front-line researchers who evidence a strong commitment to their role in the research process and who perceive their organizations as committed to research ethics and staff support experienced lower levels of moral stress. Front-line researchers who were distrustful of the research enterprise and frequently grappled with moral practice dilemmas reported higher levels of moral stress. Conclusion: Applying psychometrically reliable scales to empirically examine research ethics challenges can illuminate specific threats to scientific integrity and human subjects protections encountered by front-line staff and suggest organizational strategies for reducing moral stress and enhancing the responsible conduct of research.","PeriodicalId":89316,"journal":{"name":"AJOB primary research","volume":"110 1","pages":"27 - 38"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Moral Stress, Moral Practice, and Ethical Climate in Community-Based Drug-Use Research: Views From the Front Line\",\"authors\":\"C. Fisher, Gala True, L. Alexander, A. Fried\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21507716.2013.806969\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The role of front-line researchers, those whose responsibilities include face-to-face contact with participants, is critical to ensuring the responsible conduct of community-based drug use research. To date, there has been little empirical examination of how front-line researchers perceive the effectiveness of ethical procedures in their real-world application and the moral stress they may experience when adherence to scientific procedures appears to conflict with participant protections. Methods: This study represents a first step in applying psychological science to examine the work-related attitudes, ethics climate, and moral dilemmas experienced by a national sample of 275 front-line staff members whose responsibilities include face-to-face interaction with participants in community-based drug-use research. Using an anonymous Web-based survey we psychometrically evaluated and examined relationships among six new scales tapping moral stress (frustration in response to perceived barriers to conducting research in a morally appropriate manner); organizational ethics climate; staff support; moral practice dilemmas (perceived conflicts between scientific integrity and participant welfare); research commitment; and research mistrust. Results: As predicted, front-line researchers who evidence a strong commitment to their role in the research process and who perceive their organizations as committed to research ethics and staff support experienced lower levels of moral stress. Front-line researchers who were distrustful of the research enterprise and frequently grappled with moral practice dilemmas reported higher levels of moral stress. Conclusion: Applying psychometrically reliable scales to empirically examine research ethics challenges can illuminate specific threats to scientific integrity and human subjects protections encountered by front-line staff and suggest organizational strategies for reducing moral stress and enhancing the responsible conduct of research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":89316,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJOB primary research\",\"volume\":\"110 1\",\"pages\":\"27 - 38\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJOB primary research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21507716.2013.806969\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOB primary research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21507716.2013.806969","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Moral Stress, Moral Practice, and Ethical Climate in Community-Based Drug-Use Research: Views From the Front Line
Background: The role of front-line researchers, those whose responsibilities include face-to-face contact with participants, is critical to ensuring the responsible conduct of community-based drug use research. To date, there has been little empirical examination of how front-line researchers perceive the effectiveness of ethical procedures in their real-world application and the moral stress they may experience when adherence to scientific procedures appears to conflict with participant protections. Methods: This study represents a first step in applying psychological science to examine the work-related attitudes, ethics climate, and moral dilemmas experienced by a national sample of 275 front-line staff members whose responsibilities include face-to-face interaction with participants in community-based drug-use research. Using an anonymous Web-based survey we psychometrically evaluated and examined relationships among six new scales tapping moral stress (frustration in response to perceived barriers to conducting research in a morally appropriate manner); organizational ethics climate; staff support; moral practice dilemmas (perceived conflicts between scientific integrity and participant welfare); research commitment; and research mistrust. Results: As predicted, front-line researchers who evidence a strong commitment to their role in the research process and who perceive their organizations as committed to research ethics and staff support experienced lower levels of moral stress. Front-line researchers who were distrustful of the research enterprise and frequently grappled with moral practice dilemmas reported higher levels of moral stress. Conclusion: Applying psychometrically reliable scales to empirically examine research ethics challenges can illuminate specific threats to scientific integrity and human subjects protections encountered by front-line staff and suggest organizational strategies for reducing moral stress and enhancing the responsible conduct of research.