Citation

Balk DE. Death Stud. 1995; 19(2): 123-138.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1995, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/07481189508252720

PMID

11652992

Abstract

Scholars should both contribute to knowledge and project research participants from harm. When research methods provoke bereaved individuals to feel their distress, are scholars obliged to do more than place some people in control groups? An ethical dilemma that emerged in a study with bereaved college students is discussed. The instruments used to gather data clearly elicited grief related distress. More bereaved students in control groups left the study than did participants in social support groups. Three alternatives to a traditional control-group design are discussed as means by which scholars can meet their ethical obligations. The multiple-baselane design seems to meet the dual obligations of contributing to knowledge and of protecting research participants from harm.

Language: en