Talk:APA Ethics Code

J.R. Council (talk) 19:24, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

=Ethics Article=

Assignment 5
List one item (from the Talk section if appropriate) identifying a problem or issue with the article. Cite two references that do not already appear in the article's reference list that contain information relevant to this article. These must be legitimate publications - published books or journal articles. Web pages (including other Wikipedia articles) do not count. List two questions or comments for me regarding the article. I will address these on the Talk page of your sandbox.

Brandon's List
– Problem:
 * –the article does not yet exist.

– Two References:
 * – Ethics and Society: Ethical analysis and new sfrom the Fordham University Center for Ethics Education
 * – Ethics in Psychology

– Questions or Comments:
 * – none yet, will update as I proceed.

Brandon.saxton (talk) 18:20, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

The reason you were getting the text in the grayed out boxes is that you started those lines with a space. Use : to make an indent. J.R. Council (talk) 05:42, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Sam's List
- Problem:
 * The articles that exist now only relate to a general "code of ethics" or something similar and frankly do not do that great of a job even for those topics.

- References:
 * Ethics Code, APA (this needs to be cited correctly, I could not figure out how to cite an article from an encyclopedia)
 * Essential Ethics for Psychologists

- Questions/Comments:
 * How far away from APA should we stray for resources for this topic?
 * As far as you like, as long as the sources are credible. There are a lot of articles about APA ethics code that are not by APA. Most likely APA journals, but that's different.


 * How do you know when you might have "too much" in an article and think we should maybe break things into separate articles. For example if we wanted to break things into clinical ethics and research ethics?
 * That's a judgment call. I think when the article gets long enough that the reader could start getting lost, it's time to break out separate articles. This would be a good question for the teahouse. type WP:teahouse into the search box. J.R. Council (talk) 05:50, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

--Samantha.myhre (talk) 04:15, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Brittany's List
Problem: The article does not exist. References: Two questions or comments:
 * APA's website on practice ethics
 * APA's website on research ethics
 * One of the links Jim sent us. This may be dated enough to serve as part of our history (1992); we'll have to determine that upon delving in.
 * There is a very complete general "Ethics" page that we should add a blurb to, as well as a link to our page. Someone had already proposed adding a brief psychology and/or research section on the talk page of this article, and I replied mentioning that we could link to our main article and just put our lead on the main Ethics page or something brief.
 * I am wondering how much emphasis is warranted on each ethics in practice and research, and whether these two should be synthesized in one article (perhaps titled "Ethics in Psychology") or if these should be separated into two articles.
 * Sam also had this question. See above. J.R. Council (talk) 05:53, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Britty5096 (talk) 12:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

David's list
Problem: The article does not currently exist. Ethics in psychological research may partially exist in other pages.

References: Questions/comments:
 * The Belmont Report
 * Federalwide Assurance (FWA) for the Protection of Human Subjects
 * There is already a Wikipedia article about institutional review boards. It is obviously not exhaustive, but, to avoid too much overlap, I think we should focus this new article on ethics in psychological clinical practice, like what Sam suggested. This focused article could then more deeply investigate and report on the steps APA has taken to establish a modern code of ethics.
 * I really don't see a problem with a general article that covers both clinical and research ethics. No problem either with putting more detail in the clinical section. Wikipedia is not static. This article will grow and develop after you start it. Eventually it may get big enough to split into two or more articles about different areas of ethics in psychology.


 * Our current starting place may possibly be ethnocentric in that it is focused almost exclusively on ethics in psychology in the U.S. Does APA have global influence? Should we instead specify that this is a regional description of ethics in psychology?
 * If you title this article "Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct" and identify the topic in the lead as the current APA code and its historical development, it is not an issue. J.R. Council (talk) 06:03, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Dareichenberger (talk) 18:07, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Tharaki's List
- Problem: There is no specific article on the ethics code for Psychology (Research and Practice) but just a few articles mentioning professional ethics in general (not specific to Psychology).

- References:

Changes in ethics code in 2002

Historical perspective

Ethical principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct

- Questions/Comments:

The ethics code includes five general principle and ten ethical standards. To what extent should we discuss these, since there is a lot of detail under each of these? Is it necessary that we address each and every standard?
 * You don't need to go into unnecessary detail. However, you should be complete. I would list and briefly define the general principles. Same for the 10 ethical standards. Perhaps that could be in an early "overview" section.

The ethics code has been revised a number of times. Should each of these changes be addressed in the article or only the changes that we think are significant?
 * Yes. Remember this is a history class. I think it is important to list all the revisions, and summarize the changes in each. Again, this can be brief. J.R. Council (talk) 06:16, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

--TJS1989 (talk)

My comments
I'm putting bulleted comments in the material below to indicate my feedback at the appropriate places. J.R. Council (talk) 21:22, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll also use this as a spot to comment on the article as it is developing in the sandbox. J.R. Council (talk) 21:27, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

To-Do List

 * 1) Weave together a coherent story of the history of ethics
 * 2) Describe current and past ethical codes
 * You've made a good start on the history section. I think it could use a bit more detail. What changes in emphasis, format, etc., have developed across the successive revisions? J.R. Council (talk) 21:29, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Gather examples of psychological ethics controversies, describe
 * 2) Write a lead that summarizes the most important points from the article
 * Good start on lead. Needs more detail. Add a couple of sentences about the historical development of the code. J.R. Council (talk) 21:22, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Link this page to many other relevant pages
 * 2) Write a paragraph for general Ethics page and link to here for main article
 * 3) Insert links to our page in other relevant pages

Outline
Title: Ethical Principles of Psychologist

Lead: Introduction/current conceptualization within psychology

Current APA Ethical Principles of Psychologist and Code of Conduct
 * 1) 5 General Principles
 * 2) Principle A
 * 3) Principle B
 * 4) Principle C
 * 5) Principle D
 * 6) Principle E
 * 7) 10 Ethical Standards
 * 8) Ethical Standard 1
 * 9) Ethical Standard 2
 * 10) Ethical Standard 3
 * 11) Ethical Standard 4
 * 12) Ethical Standard 5
 * 13) Ethical Standard 6
 * 14) Ethical Standard 7
 * 15) Ethical Standard 8
 * 16) Ethical Standard 9
 * 17) Ethical Standard 10

History/historical development

Controversies
 * The title of this section should more clearly relate to ethics.
 * 1) Conversion therapy plus current standing
 * This section has about the right length and amount of detail. What needs to be added are some specific references to ethical standards that have been violated. This goes for other examples in this section as well. J.R. Council (talk) 21:33, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Use of treatments with questionable empirical support
 * 2) Dual relationships plus current standing and cases
 * 3) Any other controversial ethical topics concerning practice
 * 4) Be sure to mention psychologists involved in torture. J.R. Council (talk) 06:22, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Further readings

References

Sign your contributions!
Remember, you need to be logged in and sign off with the 4 tildes after you've added something. Otherwise, it's hard for me to keep track of who has done what. J.R. Council (talk) 06:20, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Division of Work
Title: Ethical Principles of Psychologist

Lead = Everyone

Current APA Ethical Principles of Psychologist and Code of Conduct
 * 1) 5 General Principles as well as incorporating these principles into the controversies section = David
 * 2) Principle A: Beneficence and nonmaleficence
 * 3) Principle B: Fidelity and responsibility
 * 4) Principle C: Integrity
 * 5) Principle D: Justice
 * 6) Principle E: Respect for people's rights and dignitity
 * 7) 10 Ethical Standards = Tharaki and Brandon
 * 8) Ethical Standard 1
 * 9) Ethical Standard 2
 * 10) Ethical Standard 3
 * 11) Ethical Standard 4
 * 12) Ethical Standard 5
 * 13) Ethical Standard 6
 * 14) Ethical Standard 7
 * 15) Ethical Standard 8
 * 16) Ethical Standard 9
 * 17) Ethical Standard 10

History/historical development = Sam Samantha.myhre (talk) 12:50, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Origins
 * 2) First Version
 * 3) Revisions Throughout the Decades
 * 4) Current Version

Controversies = Brittany Britty5096 (talk) 15:03, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Conversion therapy
 * 2) APA involved in torture
 * 3) Use of treatments with questionable empirical support
 * 4) Dual relationships

Further readings = Everyone

References = Everyone

I guess we'll need to choose exactly which of our 5 different outlines/layouts we would like to go with in order to know exactly what work there is to divide, but regardless of the exact layout, I'm sure we'll have some sort of controversies section, right? I offer to work on some of the current and past ethical controversies, including the ones I listed in my outline, but of course I am open to suggestions about what to include in that section. Britty5096 (talk) 02:05, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I included this above, but I would like to work on the history of the ethical code if possible. Or at the least the where it got started portion. Samantha.myhre (talk) 05:34, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I would like to take the part on the current Ethic code,if that is OK with the others. TJS1989 (talk) 18:09, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I will continue to work with Tharaki to work on outlining and defining the ten ethical standards of the APA. Brandon.saxton (talk) 16:59, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I will accept the responsibility of writing up the general principles and contributing to the lead and any other parts that need help. I plan to reduce each principle to its core statement(s). I'm not sure how lengthy these will be but I will try to make sure they are adequately representative of the principle. Dareichenberger (talk) 19:42, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

If anyone has any good ideas about how to best format my little section listing the citations of the various revisions of the code, it would be greatly appreciated. It might look a lot better once the signatures are all out but right now it just does not feel appealing to the eye. Samantha.myhre (talk) 21:01, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Lead
Specify post WWII, not just post war

New section suggestion
I just noticed that there is no mention of the "Introduction and Applicability" section at the beginning of the APA ethics code. I suggest you put in a few sentences covering some of the main points of this section. Note in the fourth paragraph of this section, there is a link to the "procedures for filing, investigating, and resolving complaints of unethical conduct are described in the current Rules and Procedures of the APA Ethics Committee." I think this is important information for the public. Mention this and provide the external link.

General ethical principles
Should expand more on D Justice and E Respect

Ethical standards

 * Resolving ethical issues: instead of "article" use the term, "section." I think the description of the first section, misrepresentation, goes beyond what is actually written in the APA document.
 * I think the rest of this section looks fine.

History

 * I'm a bit confused on the two committees, one chaired by Tolman and one by Hobbs. Is this the same committee, just different chairs?
 * The section heading, "Revisions throughout the decades" is too 'flowery.' I think the heading, "Revision history" would be better.

Ethical controversies
Nice job, everyone! J.R. Council (talk) 18:36, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * This section is much better now. Good job maintaining neutral tone.
 * Need to explain "dodo bird verdict." Luckily, there is a Wikipedia article on this that you can link to. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodo_bird_verdict
 * One final note - I've done some spot checking to make sure nothing has been copied in verbatim. Nothing turned up, but just the same, make sure that you are using appropriate paraphrasing. J.R. Council (talk) 18:48, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Final edits
I read the article through carefully, and made a few changes to improve grammar and clarity. See edit notes in history. This is ready to move to article main space. J.R. Council (talk) 17:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC)