 After the importance of dispensing informed consent, now we are looking into some other areas where research and publication needs different code of ethics. For instance, offering inducements for research participation, we really carefully need to see that in what circumstances this could be allowed and by and large we can see that this is not allowed. This makes efforts to avoid excessive and inappropriate inducements to participation if these could force participation. But in some circumstances, we can use them. For instance, agar hum bachon ke upar ek developmental studi kare hain, hum unke milestones ko studi karna chare hain, hum unke behaviors ko studi karna chare hain, in those circumstances bachon ke saad, jo toddlers hain, infants hain, unke saad repo establish karne ke liye unko koi suites dee jaa sakti hain, unko koi toys dee jaa sakti hain, unke liye koi music play karke unke saad tori si koi fun activity ki jaa sakti hain with balloons and with colors and things like that. Aur uske baad usme hamari kuch investments bhi ho sakti hain aur uske baad hum unke behavior ko studi kar sakti hain. But not in all the cases agar hum, let's say ke general public ko ye incentive dein ke if you are going to fill this questionnaire for us and we are going to pay you certain amount, let's say rupees 100 for per questionnaire, this is unethical. Kyuki ye in appropriate way hoga jisme log just because of taking that small amount or maybe this could be a big amount for them, po participation jo hain wo inshore karein rekin unki jo true representation hain unke responses ki wo iss behavior ki veja se hum inshore nahi kar sakte. Then offering professional services as an inducement. Verify the nature, risk, obligations and limitations of the services. Let's say as a psychologist aap unko apni kisi research study ka part banaate hain. Aap unki performance anxiety dekhna chaate hain aur saat me aap unsi ye commitment karte hain ki aap ki anxiety reduction techniques jo hain wo hum aap ke upar baad me paan sessions jo hain wo lagaakar unko hum reduce karein hain, aap ki anxiety ke symptoms ko hum remove karein. So be very careful in making any such agreement if it is feasible for you as a psychologist and researcher to do such kind of commitments. Agar aap ke paas itni time, energy aur ethically aap itna competent hain ki aap ye kar sakte hain. Only then in those circumstances you can commit such kind of things. Otherwise it's better ki aap unko ye batayin ki ek research ki participation hain aur hum uske baad aap ko aap ki anxiety ka maybe score batah sakte hain and if you need treatment you can go for a relevant person to seek treatment or appropriate professional help. Now another important thing is deception and research. Deception is such an important area that it comes again and again when we talk about ethics and ethical issues in psychology. Psychologists do not conduct a study involving deception unless they have determined that the use of the deceptive technique is justified by the study's significant prospective scientific educational or applied value and the effective non-deceptive alternative procedures are not at all feasible. Like although we have been talking about that yes deception could be used but this is something which we need to be very very careful in applying that. Jaisi hum bhoh sari social scenarios mein baad kartte hain ke kut cheezin jo hain wo applicable hoti hain society pe. Likin hum unko bhoht unavoidable conditions mein apply kar sakte hain. Ishi tarah deception bhi ek aisi technique hain jo ke although ek preview deti hain ke aap kar sakte hain. Likin ye kaha par karne hain this should be very much carefully waged. Like not in every case not in every scenario each of the person is going to use a deceptive technique or rather wo ye baad mein kahe ke this could be the only thing which I can use in this scenario. So jo alternative justifications hain that why this technique has been used should be very strongly established. Like you have a very strong rationale to why you are going to use that technique rather than ke you just use that and say this was the only possible reason to do. So hume uska rationale uska counter narrative aur uske jo alternative procedures hain unke limitations ko clear karna wo hain zeroori hota hai. Psychologists do not deceive prospective participants about research that is reasonably expected to cause physical pain or severe emotional distress. Like wo situations jaha hume ye pata hain ye iss research ke andar kisi ko koi electric shock diya jaega let's say kisi ko koi unpleasant drink diya jaega peene ke liye. Koi aur aisa emotional experience hoega jo ke stressful hosakta hain let's say koi aap violence se bharivi ek screen pe movie dikha hain jiske andar boh brutal tarike se scenes fell rahe hain usme boh blood shed hain killing hain murder hain aur wo ek individual ke liye boh difficult to see hain not everyone is comfortable enough to watch violence So aisi situasion ke andar ye carefully vey karna che hume individual ko ye batana hain ke you are going to experience certain emotions after watching this movie. So aaj ke labh dekhne boh sari movie se pehle ek wo alert detein ke iss movie me isra ke scenes onge to agar koi log nahi dekhna chate to usko na dekhne. So this is something which is related to the ethics, which is something related to the informed consent ke you are priori being warned that yes, ye situasion aap ke liye se ho sakte ye. So either you are going to take participation into it or not and then a psychologist explain any deception that is an integral feature of design and conduct of an experiment to participants as early as it's visible. Once the project has been done, so as soon as possible you are going to tell them that at that stage of the research, at that stage of the experiment this technique was used as a deceptive technique, rader den ke aap unko kabhi bhi na batahin. So it's very much important ke aap usko batahin. Aur uske baat agar wo further research me participation se withdrawal rinna chate to ye bhi usko right hai. Aap usko force nahi kar sakte to remain the part of your research for again and again or for another trial or something like that. Now comes coming towards the debriefing jese hum ne a project kar liya, hum ne experiment kar liya aur uske and pe hum na usko debriefing kar niye, so what to do that. Psychologists provide a prompt opportunity for participants to obtain appropriate information about the nature, results and conclusion of the research and they take reasonable steps to correct any misconceptions that participants may have of which the psychologist aware of. Aap ne debriefing me unko fully batahin hain us research ke baare mein, uske methods ke baare mein, uske design ke baare mein, aapne aisa kyun kiya, I mean like whatever the deception you have used uski jo, main aabhi aapko prior li batahin hain ki rational or limitations of other alternative procedures aapne pehle se discuss kyun hain, wo aapne participants ko bhi batahin hain, then the participants would aware of all those information which the psychologists know about that design. Yani jo bhi information debriefing ke liye, psychologists ne pne past prepare ki bhiya wo sari ki sari usko batahin aapne participants ko bohot important hai aur bohot zada ethically relevant bhi hai. If scientific or human values justify delaying or withholding that information, psychologists take reasonable measures to reduce the risk of harm. Okay, so what if in certain circumstances one session is being closed, but the other session is in continuity of the first one. So kya hain usse situation ke andar debrief karke apne research ke cause ko kharaap karte denge? Let's say hain maare pas ek control aur ek treatment group hai aur treatment group me se kuch participants ko hain original drug nei dey rahe, usse hain koi placebo dey rahe hain. A drug which has no medical properties aur uska effect hain unke depression pe dekh rahe hain. Aur ek session ke baad humne unko ko debrief kar diya ki ye drug jo aap khaare hain, iski koi medical property nei hai, to maybe agle session ke andar to phir unke behavior me hain hume koi bhi psychological change nazan nahi aas kega. So in any such kind of circumstances where we need to hold the information for some other sessions we have to do that. When psychologists become aware that the research procedures have harmed a participant, they take reasonable steps to minimize the harm. Koi aisi research hai, jisko kandak karte we, kisi kisam ka bhi koi physical, financial niya psychological harm ho gaya, jise systematic desensitization kese develop hui thi, isi tara develop hui thi, ek experiment ke daraan student jo tha jo participant tha bacha tha usme phobias develop hoge thi. So the psychologist who was working on him, he take reasonable steps to cure that aur phir usne uske upa bahad bhi research ki aur phir usne uske phobias ko eliminate kane ki koshish ki. Although it took a very long time to devise the technique of systematic desensitization like for 10 years, but still they were able to do that. So jo chote-chote harms hota hai, like you can say koi physical injury hai, koi psychological distress hai, wo to hum as soon as possible remove kar sakte hai. So sari scenario samne hunne chahiye like it is instant if it would be a very small harm, it would be of big in nature, whatever it is, it is the responsibility of a psychologist to remove that as soon as it is possible for that.