While
pondering over how the Hippocratic oath would apply to research in SIE, I thought about
the responsibility of designers to create spaces that no only safeguard the
survival needs of the users (both physiological and physical safety) but also
meet their needs of comfort, cultural identity, creativity etc… I thought that
there was even more to it: What about the nurturing and restorative aspect of
our design? Healthy buildings can be wonderfully comforting and lead to creating an emotional climate
in which people can flourish and express their identity freely.
Similarly
when proceeding with experimental studies for design research, we owe our
subjects to not judge them and respect their cultural differences and identity.
in a nutshell, our experiments should be designed around concerns for the
dignity and welfare of the participants.
Subjects should not only feel respected but also accepted for who they
are and know how significant their testimony is for the experiment. As Nora
mentioned in class, “refusal is data”.
Meaning, we must be open to and take into account our participants
rights (and maybe duty) to refuse to go further in the experiment.
When
taking the subway I often think of a study Nora
mentioned in class last semester: students (who were actually not the
subjects of experiment that I know of) were asked by their professor to go up to strangers in the
subway and to ask them to give up their sit for no reason whatsoever; the study found out that once in the field, the students could not get themselves to do it. They could not ask someone to just get up and give up their seat. Their ethics is what stopped them from doing the experiment. Identically the meaning
of this refusal, just like the controversial Milgram’s study on obedience to
authority, is very relevant in regards to ethics in research; results were certainly
disturbing - our ability to obey authoritative figures or actually inability to
say no to “orders” – but what was for me mostly disconcerting was the stress under which
the participants were put.
We
don't want our participants to tell us what we want to hear and certainly not
obey commands; with that in mind, we must remember to conduct our survey with
full awareness that we must remain unbiased and praise our participant’s
performance and remind them hat they are free to take responsibility for their
action.
On this last note, I think we (as class) are on good track: When we decline filling out a form that aims to
grade one another, we fully know we are "disobeying” the board of education system. Yet, for
some of us, we feel we have to follow our codes and ethics: "First do no harm"; because we support
one another to achieve the best of our capacity, we don't need to judge and rank each other. And that's ethics as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment