RESEARCH ETHICS

The influence of risk and monetary payment on the research participation decision making process

J P Bentley, P G Thacker

School of Pharmacy, The University of Mississippi, University, MS, USA

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
J P Bentley
Faser Hall 219A, School of Pharmacy, The University of Mississippi, University, MS 38677, USA; phjpb{at}olemiss.edu

Objectives: To determine the effects of risk and payment on subjects’ willingness to participate, and to examine how payment influences subjects’ potential behaviours and risk evaluations.

Methods: A 3 (level of risk) x 3 (level of monetary payment), between subjects, completely randomised factorial design was used. Students enrolled at one of five US pharmacy schools read a recruitment notice and informed consent form for a hypothetical study, and completed a questionnaire. Risk level was manipulated using recruitment notices and informed consent documents from hypothetical biomedical research projects. Payment levels were determined using the payment models evaluated by Dickert and Grady as a guide. Five dependent variables were assessed in the questionnaire: willingness to participate, willingness to participate with no payment, propensity to neglect to tell about restricted activities, propensity to neglect to tell about negative effects, and risk rating.

Results: Monetary payment had positive effects on respondents’ willingness to participate in research, regardless of the level of risk. However, higher monetary payments did not appear to blind respondents to the risks of a study. Payment had some influence on respondents’ potential behaviours regarding concealing information about restricted activities. However, payment did not appear to have a significant effect on respondents’ propensity to neglect to tell researchers about negative effects.

Conclusions: Monetary payments appear to do what they are intended to do: make subjects more willing to participate in research. Concerns about payments blinding subjects to risks could not be substantiated in the present study. However, the findings do raise other concerns—notably the potential for payments to diminish the integrity of a study’s findings. Future research is critical to make sound decisions about the payment of research subjects.

Keywords: risk; research participation; payment; undue inducement; informed consent

Abbreviations: IRB, institutional review board; PCA, principal components analysis; SES, socioeconomic status

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Jones, E., Liddell, K. (2009). Should healthy volunteers in clinical trials be paid according to risk? Yes. BMJ 339: b4142-b4142 [Full Text]  
• Khazeni, N., Bravata, D. M., Holty, J.-E. C., Uyeki, T. M., Stave, C. D., Gould, M. K. (2009). Systematic Review: Safety and Efficacy of Extended-Duration Antiviral Chemoprophylaxis Against Pandemic and Seasonal Influenza. ANN INTERN MED 151: 464-473 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• DeJong, J., Mahfoud, Z., Khoury, D., Barbir, F., Afifi, R. A. (2009). Ethical Considerations in HIV/AIDS Biobehavioral Surveys That Use Respondent-Driven Sampling: Illustrations From Lebanon. AJPH 99: 1562-1567 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Dunn, L. B., Kim, D. S., Fellows, I. E., Palmer, B. W. (2009). Worth the Risk? Relationship of Incentives to Risk and Benefit Perceptions and Willingness to Participate in Schizophrenia Research. Schizophr Bull 35: 730-737 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Morgan, M., Thomas, M. (2009). Lay and Professional Constructions of Time: Implications for Illness Behaviour and Management of a Chronic Condition. Sociology 43: 555-572 [Abstract]  
• Jacobsen, K H (2009). Reporting of ethics-related methods in epidemiological research. J. Med. Ethics 35: 262-267 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Iltis, A. S. (2009). Payments to Normal Healthy Volunteers in Phase 1 Trials: Avoiding Undue Influence While Distributing Fairly the Burdens of Research Participation. J Med Philos 0: jhn036v1-jhn036 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Resnick, D B (2008). Increasing the amount of payment to research subjects. J. Med. Ethics 34: e14-e14 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Halpern, S. D., Doyle, R., Kawut, S. M. (2008). The Ethics of Randomized Clinical Trials in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension. Proc Am Thorac Soc 5: 631-635 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Danovitch, G. M (2008). From Helsinki to Istanbul: What can the transplant community learn from experience in clinical research?. Nephrol Dial Transplant 23: 1089-1092 [Full Text]  
• Denny, C. C, Grady, C. (2007). Clinical research with economically disadvantaged populations. J. Med. Ethics 33: 382-385 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Sayers, G M (2007). Should research ethics committees be told how to think?. J. Med. Ethics 33: 39-42 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Roff, S. R. (2006). Thinking the unthinkable: selling kidneys. BMJ 333: 51-51 [Full Text]  
• Dunn, L. B, Candilis, P. J, Roberts, L. W. (2006). Emerging Empirical Evidence on the Ethics of Schizophrenia Research. Schizophr Bull 32: 47-68 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Marson, D. C, Savage, R., Phillips, J. (2006). Financial Capacity in Persons with Schizophrenia and Serious Mental Illness: Clinical and Research Ethics Aspects. Schizophr Bull 32: 81-91 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Halpern, S. D (2005). Towards evidence based bioethics. BMJ 331: 901-903 [Full Text]  
• Dunn, L. B., Gordon, N. E. (2005). Improving Informed Consent and Enhancing Recruitment for Research by Understanding Economic Behavior. JAMA 293: 609-612 [Full Text]