Trauma and Sex Surveys Meet Minimal Risk Standards: Implications for Institutional Review Boards
Trauma and Sex Surveys Meet Minimal Risk Standards: Implications for Institutional Review Boards
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/0956797611435131
复制
发表时间：
2012-01-01
影响因子：
8.2
通讯作者：
Nason, Erica
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Yeater, Elizabeth;Miller, Geoffrey;Nason, Erica
机构审查委员会认为，询问敏感话题（例如创伤和性）的调查问卷比看似无害的措施（例如认知测试）给受访者带来更大的风险。我们通过要求 504 名本科生回答有关创伤和性的调查或认知能力的测量（例如词汇和抽象推理测试）来测试这一假设。参与者评价他们的积极和消极情绪反应以及参与的感知收益和心理成本；他们还将与研究相关的痛苦与正常生活压力源引起的痛苦进行了比较。相对于完成认知测量的参与者，完成创伤和性调查的参与者认为该研究产生了更高的积极影响，并且具有更大的感知益处和更少的心理成本。尽管完成创伤和性调查的参与者报告的负面情绪水平略高于完成认知测量的参与者，但两组的平均值都非常低，而且异常值也很少见。所有参与者都认为每个正常生活压力源比参与研究更令人痛苦。这些结果表明创伤和性调查带来的风险很小。
Institutional review boards assume that questionnaires asking about sensitive topics (e.g., trauma and sex) pose more risk to respondents than seemingly innocuous measures (e.g., cognitive tests). We tested this assumption by asking 504 undergraduates to answer either surveys on trauma and sex or measures of cognitive ability, such as tests of vocabulary and abstract reasoning. Participants rated their positive and negative emotional reactions and the perceived benefits and mental costs of participating; they also compared their study-related distress with the distress arising from normal life stressors. Participants who completed trauma and sex surveys, relative to participants who completed cognitive measures, rated the study as resulting in higher positive affect and as having greater perceived benefits and fewer mental costs. Although participants who completed trauma and sex surveys reported slightly higher levels of negative emotion than did participants who completed cognitive measures, averages were very low for both groups, and outliers were rare. All participants rated each normal life stressor as more distressing than participating in the study. These results suggest that trauma and sex surveys pose minimal risk.