Discuss ethical considerations related to research studies at the cognitive level.

Does the existence of neuro-strategy departments with-in marketing firms and the military scare
you? It should. Advanced brain scanning technology and well-funded research have made
tremendous progress in understanding the largely unconscious cognitive processes humans use
on a constant basis. The ultimate aim of such research is simple; understand the mind and it can
be manipulated. Perhaps methods could be found to limit aggression or encourage empathy. The
world could be a better place for all. Whose brain would you like to start with?

Following the lead of English and Nazi scientists and psychologists during WWII, the United
States military increased its research on chemical weapons including studying hallucinogenic
drugs for potential neutralizing effects on enemy combatants. In 1960, the U.S. Army started
clinical trials of a synthesized compound EA-2277 under the auspices of Dr. James Ketchum at
the Edgewood Arsenal base in Maryland. In the study codenamed Project Dork, the drug was
sprayed at eight volunteer soldiers who then underwent a combat simulation exercise. All eight
subjects experienced the predicted effects of profound disorientation, hallucinations and stupor,
but “all recovered fully within 72 hours.”1 When challenged on the ethics of subjecting
participants to mind-altering drugs, Dr. Ketchum defended his volunteer sampling vigorously.
“Unwitting guinea pigs? Naïve young men taken in by Army propaganda? Mentally marginal
soldiers who could not make good decisions?... In my view, none of the above.”2 However, in his
self-published book, Ketchum slips in his defense of informed consent and also portrays
potential researcher bias. He writes about the soldier participants, “I was fascinated by the ability
of these unsophisticated subjects, none having more than high school diplomas, to describe their
thoughts and emotions”.3

1
Lux. "Erowid Library : The Erowid Review, "Chemical Warfare: Secrets Almost Forgotten" Erowid Library : The Erowid
Review Chemical Warfare: Secrets Almost Forgotten. Erowid., 10 Sept. 2012. Web. 3 Jan. 2012.
<http://www.erowid.org/library/review/review.php?p=226>.
2
Ibid.
3
Weinberger, S. (2007, April 06). Army’s Hallucinogenic Weapons Unveiled. Wired.com. Retrieved November 5, 2012, from
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/04/the_secrets_of_/

1
While Project Dork had a funny name and is open to several ethics charges, it did not use
prisoners nor deceive its subjects as was done in other U.S. Army psychological studies.4 Never
the less, Dr. Ketchum certainly exposed the participants to possible mental and physical harm.
Good thing for him he was only following orders.

This then raises the eternal dilemma of ethics: whose? Whose ethics hold supremacy in
psychology? Choices range from God’s to standards published by national or even international
medical associations to the individual beliefs held by middle-aged scientists messing with the
mind. Is there a hierarchy of ethics in psychology so that ultimate authority can be determined?

For starters, it is likely that Dr. Ketchum never swore the Hippocratic Oath. In the 1950’s when
he graduated, few American medical schools administered it though all do so today.5 But few
schools administer the same one. The oath itself changes as each school writes or adopts its own
version of the pledge. Many contemporary versions clearly allow euthanasia or leave out
abortion. In fact, most of the oaths administered at American graduation ceremonies today are
purposefully bland and ambiguous in the values they require doctors to live by for the rest of
their lives.

Presumably, the highest allegiance sworn by Dr. Ketchum was to serve his country though
maybe it was to his god. (So far, establishing someone’s true faith lies beyond the ability of
cognitive research methods.) Evaluating the military ethics used with Project Dork requires a
very different set of assumptions than when judging varied Hippocratic Oaths. “First, do no
harm” is hardly conducive to military success. In addition, there are countless over-lapping
treaties and declarations on the rights and obligations of psychologists in the U.S. military.
Should Dr. Ketchum have followed the American Psychological Association code of conduct or
the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights? (They clash over the right of psychologists to be present

4
Ibid.
5
Tyson, P. (2001, March 27). The Hippocratic Oath Today. PBS. Retrieved November 4, 2012, from
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/hippocratic-oath-today.html

2
during coercive interrogations.6-7) In defense of the U.S. Army practices for Project Dork, it
worked with the National Academy of Sciences in 1978 and again in 1981 to follow up on the
soldier participants and “found that volunteers suffered no long term effects.”8 Sounds nice, but
several similar Army studies (from the same era and also on chemical weapons) remain
classified, raising issues of transparency. 9

Clearly, the hierarchy of moral authority in cognitive research studies is rarely clear. For Project
Dork specifically, earthly responsibility ultimately lies with the democratic mandate of The Oath
of Office for President of the United States who co-jointly serves as Commander in Chief of the
U.S. Military. In other words, ‘we the people’, one nation under God, authorized Project Dork.

Outside a military prevue, when studying cognitive processes such as orientation or decision-
making (as was done in Project Dork), psychologists face immense design obstacles when trying
to stay awake while reading long essays with words like cognitive. There are complex ethical
considerations to designing the procedure for any study. For example, cognition is rarely
independent of memory and emotions, two enormous contributors to individual self-awareness
and self-esteem. Therefore, collecting information on such personal aspects of identity requires
more than simply relying on hypothetical models and artificial brain scan imagery. In brief, to
ideally study cognitive aspects of emotions such as fear or trauma, psychologists need
traumatized participants. Outside of opportunity sampling however, this creates complex ethical
situations. So we torture bunnies instead, which obviously raises new ethical considerations in
turn. This moral business sure is tricky.

6
‘No Exceptional Circumstances’ for Torture — Whether War, Political Instability, Public Emergency, or National Security,
Says Secretary-General in Message. (2011, June 20). UN News Center. Retrieved November 4, 2012, from
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sgsm13657.doc.htm
7
APA Briefs Defense Department Officials on APA's Policies Related to Psychologists and Interrogation. (2009, December
14). APA Briefs Defense Department Officials on APA's Policies Related to Psychologists and Interrogation. Retrieved
November 4, 2012, from http://www.apa.org/news/press/statements/interrogation-brief.aspx
8
Weinberger.
9
MILITARY OPERATIONS ASPECTS OF SHAD AND PROJECT 112, 107th Cong., 39 (2002) (testimony of COMMITTEE ON
VETERANS’ AFFAIRS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS). Accessed 4/11/12.
http://democrats.veterans.house.gov/hearings/schedule107/oct02/10-9-02/oct9h02.pdf. Pg. 5.

3
Even without ethical considerations, studying the mind is notoriously difficult. Collecting valid
and reliable quantitative data such as how many seconds it takes a participant to detect a threat or
qualitative data such as observations of facial expressions when a hottie walks in the room is
tough to say the least. Such data includes constant, invisible and subconscious processes. Good
luck measuring those. And remember to be polite when trying.

Impressively, huge procedural strides have been made in ethical cognitive studies. For example,
since Loftus and Palmer’s (1974) groundbreaking study on leading questions, researchers have
continued to test their findings. Yuile and Cutshal (1986)10 replicated Loftus’ memory interviews
but with actual witnesses to a crime. They interviewed these opportunity participants long after
the robbery (much like real-life court cases) and with leading questions. The researchers found a
startling high degree of recall from real-life situations, which differed greatly from the 1974
results. In terms of ethics, the more recent study supports the validity of using eyewitnesses not
just for psychological studies but in courtroom testimony and therapeutic treatment as well.
While recalling a crime can be a traumatic experience, it can be argued that such purposive
sampling is important and worth continued testing. Avoiding delicate research into the recall of
emotional memories would allow more unfortunate cases such as the 1983 McMartin Preschool
Abuse trial in which researchers asked children about alleged abuse with such phrasing as
“maybe you could remember and help us?”11 Therefore, while ethically challenging, cognitive
studies on emotions are needed to help make this world a better place in which false memories
and any other ghosts in the machine are identified as such.

Speaking of machines, the use of technology, as always, raises even more ethical concerns.
(Subliminal messages are scary.) Improvements in biological and cognitive research techniques
come almost daily thanks to new advances in brain scanning and the legions of earnest
professionals puttering away in research centers and faculties around the world. Invasive
techniques, animal tests and reliance on a few dramatic case studies have been largely replaced

10
Yuille, John C, and Judith L Cutshall. “A Case Study of Eyewitness Memory of a Crime.”American Psychological
Association, American Psychological Association, 2017, psycnet.apa.org/record/1986-22197-001. Originally published as Yuille,
J. C., & Cutshall, J. L. (1986). A case study of eyewitness memory of a crime. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(2), 291-301
11
Doug, Linder. "Sample Interviews with Students of the McMartin Preschool." Sample Interviews with Students of the
McMartin Preschool. University of Missouri-Kansas City, 2003. Web. 03 May 2010.
<http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mcmartin/victiminterviews.html>.

4
with highly operationalized procedures and surreal devices that produce almost miraculous
results. In 2013, Dr. Adrian Owen in England used functional magnetic resonance imaging
(fMRI), to help a man thought to be in a coma for five years answer yes and no questions.12
FMRI’s expensive but benign technology tracks brain activity via blood flow but can also help
produce static and even moving images of mental processes though in clinical settings rather
than ‘in real life’. While amazing and well intentioned, Dr. Owen’s work raises strong ethical
questions such as the level of patient consent and the unintended consequences such information
may have on thousands of families with loved ones in vegetative states.

As Promethean legend warns, miraculous power in the hands of humans can be dangerous. The
competence and intent of the researcher must matter just as much as the risk of physical or
mental harm to the participant. In 2009, researcher Clinton Kilts of the BrightHouse Institute
founded a neuro-marketing department at the advertising agency to help corporate clients create
unconscious bonds between consumers and select products. As social identity theory and
conformity studies attest, self-identity in the modern western world is often highly correlated
with brands and consumer choices. By researching the little-known cognitive processes involved
in the formation of self, Dr. Kilts and his clients risk manipulating personal emotions and
identity for profit.

A discussion on ethics at the cognitive level requires more than defining ethical considerations as
questions about whose set of ethics and who decides how and when to bend the parameters must
also be answered. Pragmatic decisions must be balanced by justified moral guidelines as the
scholarship and application of cognitive research risks tremendous harm. To reach ethical
certainty in psychology requires one to really study the science’s strengths and its limits, and
then perhaps, to swear an oath.

(1,980 words)

12
"New Brain Scanner Helps Paralyzed People Spell Words." BBC News. BBC, 29 June 2012. Web. 03 Nov. 2012.
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18644084>.

5
 Works Cited

APA Briefs Defense Department Officials on APA's Policies Related to Psychologists and Interrogation.

(2009, December 14). APA Briefs Defense Department Officials on APA's Policies Related to

Psychologists and Interrogation. Retrieved November 4, 2012, from

http://www.apa.org/news/press/statements/interrogation-brief.aspx

Doug, L. (2003). Sample Interviews with Students of the McMartin Preschool. Sample Interviews with

Students of the McMartin Preschool. Retrieved May 03, 2010, from

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mcmartin/victiminterviews.html

Lux. (2012, September 10). Erowid Library : The Erowid Review, "Chemical Warfare: Secrets Almost

Forgotten" Erowid Library : The Erowid Review » Chemical Warfare: Secrets Almost

Forgotten. Retrieved January 3, 2012, from http://www.erowid.org/library/review/review.php?

New Brain Scanner Helps Paralyzed People Spell Words. (2012, June 29). BBC News. Retrieved

November 03, 2012, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/thesecretmessageis-‘wibble’.18644084

‘No Exceptional Circumstances’ for Torture — Whether War, Political Instability, Public Emergency, or

National Security, Says Secretary-General in Message. (2011, June 20). UN News Center.

Retrieved November 4, 2012, from http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011.doc.htm

Tyson, P. (2001, March 27). The Hippocratic Oath Today. PBS. Retrieved November 4, 2012, from

www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/hippocratic-oath-today.html

Yuille, John C, and Judith L Cutshall. “A Case Study of Eyewitness Memory of a Crime.” American

Psychological Association, American Psychological Association, 2017,

psycnet.apa.org/record/1986-22197-001. Originally published as Yuille, J. C., & Cutshall, J. L.

(1986). A case study of eyewitness memory of a crime. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(2),

291-301

Weinberger, S. (2007, April 06). Army’s Hallucinogenic Weapons Unveiled. Wired.com. Retrieved

November 5, 2012, from http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/04/the_secrets_of_/