Hotline Accountability

A Response to Baizerman: Rejoinder to Genther

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

Abstract

Replies to a response by R. W. Genthner (Professional Psychology, 1976, Vol. 7, 240-242) (see record 1977-01735-001) to the author's critique of Genther's article on hotline accountability (Professional Psychology, 1976, Vol. 7, 236-239) (see record 1977-01726-001). The author believes that he and Genthner believe in similar things, have similar values, and hold similar ethical positions on service and research. Differences between the two may exist on the issue of how central research ethics are to the design. "Identification" with either the hotline staff or the callers may not be the crucial issue; rather the crucial issue seems to be what we as researchers will and will not do in our research role, regardless of whom we identify with. Other points covered by Genthner deal with the author's "personal bias"; his motivation for doing the study; and data presentation, interpretation, and the location of these in a text. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Number of pages1
JournalProfessional Psychology: Research and Practice
Volume7
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 1976

Fingerprint

Hotlines
Social Responsibility
Psychology
Research Ethics
Research
Motivation
Research Personnel

Keywords

  • data presentation
  • hotline accountability
  • research ethics
  • research role

Cite this

Hotline Accountability : A Response to Baizerman: Rejoinder to Genther. / Baizerman, Michael L.

In: Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, Vol. 7, No. 2, 01.05.1976.

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

@article{916efed3d27c4ccd9fd44083e2e3827c,
title = "Hotline Accountability: A Response to Baizerman: Rejoinder to Genther",
abstract = "Replies to a response by R. W. Genthner (Professional Psychology, 1976, Vol. 7, 240-242) (see record 1977-01735-001) to the author's critique of Genther's article on hotline accountability (Professional Psychology, 1976, Vol. 7, 236-239) (see record 1977-01726-001). The author believes that he and Genthner believe in similar things, have similar values, and hold similar ethical positions on service and research. Differences between the two may exist on the issue of how central research ethics are to the design. {"}Identification{"} with either the hotline staff or the callers may not be the crucial issue; rather the crucial issue seems to be what we as researchers will and will not do in our research role, regardless of whom we identify with. Other points covered by Genthner deal with the author's {"}personal bias{"}; his motivation for doing the study; and data presentation, interpretation, and the location of these in a text. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).",
keywords = "data presentation, hotline accountability, research ethics, research role",
author = "Baizerman, {Michael L.}",
year = "1976",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/h0078598",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "7",
journal = "Professional Psychology: Research and Practice",
issn = "0735-7028",
publisher = "American Psychological Association",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Hotline Accountability

T2 - A Response to Baizerman: Rejoinder to Genther

AU - Baizerman, Michael L.

PY - 1976/5/1

Y1 - 1976/5/1

N2 - Replies to a response by R. W. Genthner (Professional Psychology, 1976, Vol. 7, 240-242) (see record 1977-01735-001) to the author's critique of Genther's article on hotline accountability (Professional Psychology, 1976, Vol. 7, 236-239) (see record 1977-01726-001). The author believes that he and Genthner believe in similar things, have similar values, and hold similar ethical positions on service and research. Differences between the two may exist on the issue of how central research ethics are to the design. "Identification" with either the hotline staff or the callers may not be the crucial issue; rather the crucial issue seems to be what we as researchers will and will not do in our research role, regardless of whom we identify with. Other points covered by Genthner deal with the author's "personal bias"; his motivation for doing the study; and data presentation, interpretation, and the location of these in a text. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

AB - Replies to a response by R. W. Genthner (Professional Psychology, 1976, Vol. 7, 240-242) (see record 1977-01735-001) to the author's critique of Genther's article on hotline accountability (Professional Psychology, 1976, Vol. 7, 236-239) (see record 1977-01726-001). The author believes that he and Genthner believe in similar things, have similar values, and hold similar ethical positions on service and research. Differences between the two may exist on the issue of how central research ethics are to the design. "Identification" with either the hotline staff or the callers may not be the crucial issue; rather the crucial issue seems to be what we as researchers will and will not do in our research role, regardless of whom we identify with. Other points covered by Genthner deal with the author's "personal bias"; his motivation for doing the study; and data presentation, interpretation, and the location of these in a text. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

KW - data presentation

KW - hotline accountability

KW - research ethics

KW - research role

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70350344538&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70350344538&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/h0078598

DO - 10.1037/h0078598

M3 - Comment/debate

VL - 7

JO - Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

JF - Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

SN - 0735-7028

IS - 2

ER -