Continuing Concerns in Cross-Cultural Ethics: A Report

Developing Multicultural Ethical Guidelines for Psychology

“…The 'advisory principles' of that group have been adapted by the International Association for Cross Cultural Psychology and represent the best systematic attempt to deal with cross cultural ethics by a psychological organization for psychological research thus far (IAACP 1978). Tapp et al (1974) pointed out that a researcher's ethical obligation goes beyond avoiding harm to the subject to include demonstrations of how the research will enrich and benefit rather than harm the host country. Generally the benefit to the researcher is much clearer than the benefit to a host culture providing data.…”

Psychological testing in papua new guinea: A critical appraisal of the work of the psychological services branch

“…Central to this paper on psychological testing in Papua New Guinea are the advisory principles relating to the responsibilities of the researcher and practitioner. From the paper by Tapp, et al (1974) it is clear that professional competence is seen as fundamental and that this competency should be reflected in the methodological adequacy of psychological endeavours and in the level of technical sophistication associated with both psychological practice and research.…”

Immigrants and Refugees

“…Tapp, Kelman, Triandis, Writsman, & Coelho, 1974) expect the researcher to act ethically according to the norms of both cultures involved. As illustrated in the example above, however, it may not be possible to honor both the culture of the researcher and the culture of the research participants.…”

“…The Tapp Report (Tapp et al, 1974), a landmark attempt to provide guidelines for ethical conduct of cross-cultural research, was developed by cross-cultural psychologists, primarily from the United States, but with extensive input from international colleagues and involvement of the American Psychological Association, the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology, and other organizations. Although it has been criticized more recently (Davidson, 1999) for being overly idealistic, the report represents the most comprehensive effort to date to provide ethical guidance to psychologists working in cross cultural situations.…”