Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


PhilPapersPhilPeoplePhilArchivePhilEventsPhilJobs
Switch to: References

Add citations

You mustlogin to add citations.
  1. Financial Payments for Participating in Research while Incarcerated:Attitudes of Prisoners.Ravi Divya,Paul P. Christopher,Eliza J. Filene,Sarah Ailleen Reifeis &Becky L. White -2018 -IRB: Ethics & Human Research 40 (6):1-6.
    The practice of paying prisoners to for their participation in research has long been debated, and the controversy is reflected in the differing policies in the U.S. prison systems. Empirical study of financial payments to inmates who enroll in research has focused on whether this practice is coercive. In this study, we examined whether monetary incentives have the potential to be unduly influential among fifty HIV‐positive prisoners. The majority of prisoners surveyed believed that inmates should receive some compensation for their (...) involvement in research and disagreed with statements suggesting that the offer of payment constitutes undue influence. However, a sense of potentially being susceptible to undue influence was significantly higher among participants who had spent a longer time in prison and had less education. Overall, our findings suggest that most prisoners feel that they would be able to make a decision about research enrollment that is not solely based on an offer of monetary payment. (shrink)
    No categories
    Direct download(2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Coercion and Access to Health Care.Keramet Reiter -2017 -Hastings Center Report 47 (2):30-31.
    In this issue of the Hastings Center Report, Paul Christopher and colleagues describe a study of why prisoners choose to enroll in clinical research. The article represents an important methodological and policy contribution to the literature on prisoner participation in research and medical experimentation. Given the methodological and ethical debates to which this research seeks to make an empirical contribution, the careful manner in which the study was conducted and the transparency with which the authors describe the research is especially (...) noteworthy. In sum, I respect the research steps the authors took. However, I disagree with their conclusions about both the absence of coercion for prisoner clinical research participants and the merits of applying risk-benefit models to govern prisoner research participation. (shrink)
    Direct download(2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  

  • [8]ページ先頭

    ©2009-2025 Movatter.jp