Ethical issues and challenges in psychological practice and research

Background. There is no generally accepted psychological understanding of how a doctor’s representation of risk and uncertainty affects professional medical decision-making. The concept of a Unified Intellectual and Personal Potential can serve as a framework to explain its multiple and multilevel regulation. Our objective was to research the connections between medics’ perceptions of risk and related personal factors.

Design. Medical doctors were compared to different control groups to identify their personal and motivational characteristics in three studies. 

Study 1 assessed the motivational profile of doctors (using Edwards Personal Preference Schedule) in connection with their risk-readiness and rationality (measured by the Personal Factors of Decision-making questionnaire, also known as LFR) in a sample of 33 doctors, as compared to 35 paramedics and 33 detectives. 

Study 2 compared 125 medical students and 182 non-medical students to 65 doctors as to the levels of their risk perception (measured by Implicit Theories of Risk questionnaire, the LFR, and their direct self-esteem of riskiness [1]), tolerance for uncertainty (measured by Budner's questionnaire), and rating on the Big-Five personality traits (TIPI). 

Study 3 presented two new methods of risk perception assessment and investigated the connection between personality traits, risk reduction strategies, and cognitive representations of risk in 66 doctors, as compared to 44 realtors.

Results. Study 1 found differences between the doctors’, paramedics’, and investigators’ motivational profiles. The doctors’ motivations were not associated with conscious self-regulation. In Study 2, risk-readiness was positively related to tolerance for uncertainty (TU) and the self-esteem of riskiness. The latter was significantly lower in doctors compared to the student groups and had different relationships with personality variables. In Study 3, doctors differed from realtors not only in their traits (i.e.,being less willing to take risks), but also in their choices and greater integration of their risk representations.

Conclusions. The three studies demonstrated the multilevel processes behind the willingness to take risks and risk acceptance, as well as the relationship between the multilevel personality traits and doctors’ assessments of medical risks and their preferences in risky decision-making.

1. The “self-esteem of riskiness” refers to an individual’s self-esteem in light of their willingness to take risks. This formulation will be used throughout this article, as to constantly elaborate its meaning would be too unwieldy.

Background. Both authors are working on the Board of Ethics of the Czech-Moravian Psychological Society. They face a recurring pattern of complaints, where one parent in the multilateral contractual field of the child custody domain complains about the psychological report in their case, including the psychologist´s procedure, conduct, partiality, etc. The child custody domain is under Civil Law jurisdiction, where psychologists serving as expert witnesses report their evaluations at the request of the court.   

Objective. To point out some of societal and professional challenges confronting psychologists as expert witnesses in child custody cases. To improve ethical awareness in this area of psychological expert witness practice. 

Design. We compiled an overview of the complaints obtained by the Board of Ethics of the Czech-Moravian Psychological Society from 2013 to 2019, against psychologists who served as expert witnesses in child custody cases in the Czech Republic. We then compared these complaints with the ethical norms established by the Czech Code of Ethics of the Psychological Profession; the recommendations of the European Federation of Psychologists’ Associations (EFPA) (c.f., The European psychologist in forensic work and as expert witness); and the guidelines of the American Psychological Association (APA) (c.f., Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Family Law Proceedings).  

Results and Сonclusions. Testimony by psychological experts in child custody cases is occurring in the context of societal changes and political decisions concerning child custody arrangements, and the best interests of the child in the context of gender neutral laws. Several ethical concerns seem to be of special importance: 1) the “psychological best interest of the child” in the multilateral contractual field; 2) the purpose and contribution of psychological expert testimony in child custody cases; 3) the role, task, and responsibility of the expert witness, including establishing working alliances and parallel processes; 4) the appropriate allocation of responsibilities in the multilateral contractual field; and 5) the ethics of reflexivity, responsibility, and courage. The “complaint bias” is discussed.

Background. A growing body of evidence shows that people's attitudes toward lies could be predictive of their actual deceptive behavior. However, few studies have examined both attitudes and deceptive behavior, and none have related attitudes toward the likelihood of self-reported deception as it develops over people’s lifespans.

Objective. Our study addresses attitudes toward lies and the likelihood of deceptive behavior in a variety of contexts, relating them to self-reported frequency of lying. We were also interested in whether individual differences in social desirability and social anxiety predict self-reported frequency of lying across lifespans.

Design. Using a cross-sectional design that included children as well as young adults, we assessed a total of 177 participants with the same questionnaire about deception, adapted from Lundquist et al. (2009).

Results. The age differences in the frequency of self-reported lying followed an inverted U-shape trend over time. Children’s lower social desirability and more lenient attitudes toward white lies predicted higher lying frequency, whereas for adults, a greater likelihood of telling prosocial lies predicted higher lying frequency.Children with decreased anxiety were less likely to tell prosocial lies, implying that anxiety might be a key factor in children’s development of deception.

Conclusion. Our work offers an integrative view into people’s attitude towards deception and their self-reported lying as they mature. Attitudes toward white lies and the self-reported likelihood of telling prosocial lies were the most relevant predictors involved in self-reported lie-telling. Individual differences in anxiety and social desirability also played a relevant role in children’s and young adults’ attitudes toward deception.

Background. Throughout the last forty years, an emerging set of global norms addressing the rights and treatment of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI) people have emerged and are continuing to evolve. This article will outline the trajectory of LGBTI concerns in the context of international human rights, and make a case for psychological ethics that are inclusive of concerns specific to sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression (SOGIE). These discussions will be framed in the context of the historical stigma and pathologization associated with SOGIE concerns, as well as the increasing global visibility and political and social organizing of LGBTQI communities.

Discussion. First, the rise of international and regional ethics codes pertaining to SOGIE concerns, including the role of the United Nations, will be reviewed. Second, recommendations for an ethical approach to psychological research, practice, training, and advocacy inclusive of SOGIEconcerns will be discussed. These recommendations will be informed by the existing ethical framework of the European Federation of Psychologists’ Associations (EFPA), and will address the unique concerns of sexual orientation minority populations; transgender, non-binary, and gender-expansive (TNG) people; and intersex populations. Finally, the International Psychology Network for LGBTI Issues (IPsyNet) will be introduced as a model for networking in support of SOGIE interests within LGBTQI-affirming national psychological organizations.

Conclusion. As European ethical practices respond to calls from human rights stakeholders for increased inclusion of SOGIE concerns, this paper proposes that it is the responsibility of international psychological practice to support the human rights of allglobal citizens.

Background. Although widely acknowledged as a distinct professional practice, clinical supervision has not consistently been a component of graduate training in psychology,and has not achieved recognition commensurate with its importance to the field in the United States or internationally. Although competence in supervision had been inferred, multiple international studies reveal high frequenciesof unethical, inadequate, and harmful supervision. Implicit in clinical supervision is ethical acumen, practice, modeling, teaching, andadherence to multiple ethical principles and codes.Specifically, this role calls for respect, integrity, doing no harm, competence, confidentiality, and not entering multiple relationships that may do harm.

Objective. The objective of the current article is to describe the essential components of ethical clinical supervision and training, ethical imperatives for both supervisor and supervisee, and aspects of training and supervision that ensure protection of the client. A framework of enlightened globalization harmonizes rules and ideals of the profession with cultural diversity and provides both a structure and guidance for supervisors and supervisees.

Results. We analyze the ethical development of supervisees which occurs through a complex process of integration of personal values and ethical positions with professional ethics; through an intentional, systematic process; and through supervision, to enhance their metacompetence (i.e.,knowing what one knows and doesn’t know). 

Conclusion. Through a review of the strategic literature, we define current international and cultural perspectives on ethical practice and training, outline critical ethical issues, and provide strategies for effective and ethical clinical supervision, including an informed consent document and a supervision contract.

Background. It is crucial for psychology students and graduates to study ethics. However, neither teaching nor learning ethics is always an easy process. Course syllabi often include philosophical texts, specialized concepts, and numerous ethics or procedural codes. Could we consider all of this as a cognitive process? The students should be aware of all the vulnerabilities that can impact ethical decision-making, such as cognitive errors, emotional factors, social and organizational pressures, and situational factors.

There is a great deal of new research on the advantages of including emotional dimensions in the decision-making process (Decety & Cacioppo, 2012; Decety & Cowell, 2015); this research evenclaims that emotions strengthen the contribution of the cognitive process, and as a result enrich the final ethical judgments. Additionally, there is also a kind of hidden curriculum that we provide to students (Goold & Stern, 2006; Hafferty & Franks, 1994). It is exactly this area (internships, the way we relate to the students) to which we need to pay attention during their undergraduate and graduate years.

Conclusion. Expecting students to learn and internalize knowledge in a meaningful way necessitates new modes of instruction. Specifically, teaching and learning ethics in an interactive way, while paying attention to both good decision-making skills and emotional cues, would provide exactly what students would enjoy and learn from the most. In this article, we will suggest that, if the question is how to sensitize students to ethical issues in psychology, and in the profession, it is important to give them an active role and responsibility for disseminating ethical principles. We will also introduce different techniques that help combine knowledge with emotionality while teaching ethics in psychology. 

Background. There is a growing movement worldwide for ethical regulation of psychologists’ research-oriented, educational, and practical activities. However, expectations that the better the code of ethics, the safer and more effective the professional activity will be, are not being met. For this reason, it is beneficial to distinguish two levels of the psychologist’s professional functioning: that related to his or her role, and that on the personal level; this makes it possible to more adequately analyze the psychological aspects of ethical and moral regulation in professional interaction.

Objective. To compare the psychological foundations of the educational psychologist’s ethical and moral professional behavior at the role and personal levels.

Design. Analysis, generalization, and identification, through a review of the literature, of the main factors influencing the ethical and moral regulation of professional behavior of psychologists.

Results. Surveys of specialists show that it is difficult both for the client and for the psychologist to follow a formal ethical code unconditionally. We considered the limitations of ethical regulation of professional activity, when, even with a good knowledge of the ethical norms on the part of the specialists, external monitoring is required to guarantee the safety of their subjects. We emphasize that the wide variety of psychological assistance provided by psychologists to their clients requires different degrees of personal involvement on the part of the specialist. We propose to distinguish two levels of professional interaction in the psychologist’s activity: the role level and the personal level, corresponding to different mechanisms of the moral regulation of the specialist’s behavior. At the role level, there is no need for deep personal involvement; the external motives of moral regulation (knowledge of the code requirements and fear of administrative sanctions for negative consequences) serve as psychological mechanisms of compliance with ethical standards. On the personal level, other psychological mechanisms are required for the performance of professional duties, such as internal motives underlying moral behavior (a mature and sensitive conscience and a positive philosophy of life). The personal level of moral professional behavior regulation makes it possible to provide a much greater degree of safety in the interaction between psychologist and client, and in the absence of external oversight.

Conclusion. We compare two approaches to the explanation of the psychological foundations of moral functioning: models enumerating the personal qualities defining moral behavior and models of integrated moral functioning. The article describes the existential-ontological concept of moral functioning, correlating the maturity of individual moral consciousness, awareness of the adoption of a particular ethical system of norms and ideals, and the conscience. We conclude that it is necessary to educate future specialists as mature, integrated personalities, ensuring integrated moral functioning in their professional interactions.

Background. The implementation of ethical principles in forensic psychology in Russia is facing serious challenges.  Expert’s evaluations have to be managed in accordance with the basic ethical principles of practical psychology in general. At the same time, the specific activities and role of a forensic psychologist differ from the professional activities and roles of a psychiatrist, psychologist-consultant, or psychotherapist. 

Objective. This study focused on the identification of the main ethical problems of psychologists, who are obligated to conduct expert evaluations for the court. 

Design. This study was conducted according to a qualitative paradigm, using a combination of the  methods: content analysis of court materials and written expert opinion; analysis of court cases; interviews with experts; and analysis of international standards and guidelines for the professional activities of forensic experts. 

Results. The ethical problems are determined by several factors: 1) the lack of a scientific basis for the regulations; 2) the complexity of the role structure of the expert’s practice; 3) the lack of practically oriented studies devoted to ethics; and 4) the lack of a venue for systematic discussion and supervision. Ethical problems are often solved by specialist exclusively according to their personal attitudes which could be risky in terms of violations of professional ethics. 

Conclusion. There is a lack of systematic studies on the ethical problems in forensic practice. The preliminary data show that the rapidly growing field of expert evaluation requires the closest attention in developing ethical standards and  understanding of the expert’s activity and role structure. 

Background. Rationality, emotions, and intuition all seem to underlie the decision-making process. In a profession such as psychology, it is crucial to improve the rational dimension of decision making. Ethical reasoning can be compared to moral decision-making, but it is also linked to professional judgment. In psychology and other professions, ethical reasoning seems to be the basis for the development of professional skills. 

Objective. Present and discuss the role that rationality, emotions, and intuition can play in people's decision making, especially in the field of psychological intervention.

Design. A theoretical perspective is presented which takes into account the relevant literature in the field.

Results. We support the idea of five fundamental preconditions for ethical reasoning: self-knowledge, excellent training, experience or supervision, humility, and intervision. We recommend that psychologists meet these conditions in their professional decision making in order to promote the best quality of professional practice.

Conclusion. We can say that ethical reasoning is a professional moral decision. As professionals, we are primarily intuitive in our decision making, which is why we make decisions almost automatically; but our decisions are based on our professional experience. Psychologists should reflect on and understand the processes involved in decision making in order to avoid conclusions based on their personal experiences.