Case Study #1

In an experiment reported by Smith, Tyrell, Coyle, and William (1987) in the British Journal of Psychology, the effects of experimentally induced colds and influenza on human performance was measured to determine whether minor illnesses "alter the efficiency of human performance." The experiment involved recruiting volunteers who stayed at the Common Cold Unit for ten days. The volunteers were housed in groups of two or three and isolated from outside contacts. Following a three-day quarantine period the participants were inoculated with nose drops containing either a virus or a placebo. An incubation period of 48-72 hours followed. Then each participant was assessed by a clinician who evaluated the severity of the illness. Objective measures included temperature, number of paper tissues used, and the quantity of nasal secretion.

Then, two performance tasks were done. In one task, the participants were to detect and respond quickly to target items that appeared at irregular intervals (a detection task). The second task tested hand-eye coordination. The results indicated that influenza impaired performance on the detection task but not in the hand-eye coordination task. Colds generally had the reverse effect.

The local ethical committee approved the procedures used in this experiment, and the informed consent of the volunteers was obtained. All participants were screened to exclude pregnant women and people who took sleeping pills, tranquilizers, or antidepressant medicines. The participants also took a medical examination, including a chest X ray, and anyone who failed the examination was excluded. The participants were not paid but received food, accommodation, traveling expenses, and pocket money. Other clinical trials were also conducted.

1) Did the experiment follow acceptable ethical guidelines? Why or why not?

2) Was the risk-to-benefit ratio acceptable?

3) Were alternative methods available to collect the data?