41.  What ethical considerations should I be thinking about?

Drew Freeman: Welcome Joe. How are you doing this week?

Joe Marcantano: I'm doing good, I'm doing well. How about you?

Drew Freeman: I am excited. Here in the Midwest it's starting to get a little bit warmer. Maybe we're past false spring and we're starting to get to real spring. So that's always exciting.

Joe Marcantano: This feels like a little bit of time travel for me because when this episode comes out, I think will be the last couple days of, my vacation. So if you're listening to this, I'm probably looking at something historical, in.

Drew Freeman: Europe somewhere and hopefully with a beer in hand.

Joe Marcantano: Well, I wasn't goingna say that out loud. I thought that was kind of implied.

Drew Freeman: All right, well, hopefully you're enjoying yourself. I'm sure you will be. But let's get, into this week's topic so folks can still have something to listen to while you're gone.

Joe Marcantano: I love that idea. Let's do it.

Drew Freeman: All right, so this week we're gonna be covering the question, what ethical considerations do I need to be thinking about as I'm doing my research?

Joe Marcantano: That is such a good question. It reminds me of, the most famous part of the Hippocratic oath, the do no harm. Exactly. We certainly have this responsibility to our participants, just like we have a responsibility to our stakeholders. And it's, you know, something that's kind of easily forgotten about, because everything kind of becomes routine. So I'm glad we're talking about this.

Drew Freeman: Well, and I think even beyond the basic, you know, human decency, human morality of do no harm, ethical research is just good research. Like doing non ethical research means that your research and the answers that you get will be less usable, less, you'll be able to be less confident in them, all that sort of thing.

Joe Marcantano: Yeah, a lot of times it comes down to just be a good person and that if you've got that as kind of like your. Even if you don't know the exact rules, if you've got that in mind, you're on the right track.

Drew Freeman: So you're saying that this episode can be about two minutes long?

Joe Marcantano: Well, I think we'll stretch it out a little bit, but yeah, we really could simplify it down.

Drew Freeman: All right, so in order to make sure that we have an episode, let's let's dive in a little bit. So let's start with maybe what most people are thinking of, which is PII or personally identifiable information.

Joe Marcantano: Yeah. So it is a little bit self explanatory but also a little bit tricky because there are super obvious things that are pii. Right. Like your name for example. But then there are other pieces of information you need to think about. So if two or three pieces of information in concert might give away someone's identity, then that is also pii.

Drew Freeman: that was exactly the thought that I had in my brain too.

Joe Marcantano: Yeah. So a super easy example of this might be, you know, it might not be a big deal to say somebody works at Microsoft and it might also not be a big deal to say someone is a CEO. But if you put those two pieces of information together, we all know exactly the individual you're talking about at that point.

Drew Freeman: Right. So two pieces of information that if given alone would be not pii, would not identify anybody, would be fine to use combined together are now personally identifiable and something that we need to stay away from.

Joe Marcantano: The thing that's kind of weird about this, and I almost want to call it an exception, even though it's really not an exception, is for most folks there's not really an expectation that you would blur out faces if you were going to put together a highlight reel or show a video clip from your study.

Drew Freeman: I was going to say this really depends on the organization that you're doing research for. As, working for an agency, I've had some clients where faces are considered pii. I've had some clients where faces are not considered pii. So it really depends on the organization and you really need to make sure that you ask what is considered pii? What is okay to use for the individual organization.

Joe Marcantano: Yeah, that's interesting. I've not personally run into that, but you know, in the back of my head there's always been like if you're doing an interview around a sensitive thing or maybe you're talking somebody's healthcare, like because you talked

00:05:00

Joe Marcantano: about how you worked for a healthcare company. So I could see like in those specific instances, where that would be the appropriate answer.

Drew Freeman: Well, and I've even had clients where they considered not only face to be PII but also voice. So when I was making video reels for that client, I always had to blur out the face and use a voice modulator to change the voice just a little bit. You know, it didn't need to go all robotic, but just change it enough so that it wasn't the actual person's voice. So, yeah, some clients have. Some companies have really strict definitions of what is pii.

Joe Marcantano: That's interesting. I'm curious, when you had to do that in those instances, did you notice or were you aware at all of, Or maybe did the video clips have a lesser impact? Were they kind of less sticky, less punchy? Because it wasn't like a person whose eyes I could look into, and identify with.

Drew Freeman: No. This particular team within this organization already had a high level of UX maturity, so they were already well aware of what their organization's policies were or what their team's policies were. So it was just something that they had kind of gotten used to. Also it helped that this was a physical product or at least a partly physical product. So it was a little bit less about the facial expressions and more about the physical interaction with the prototypes.

Joe Marcantano: Okay, interesting. The last thing I would say about PiIuse, we've talked a lot about, like, names and faces. Right. But keep in mind that it's any piece of information that could identify someone. So that might be a Social Security number, that might be a email address, it might be a specific thing that somebody says that that kind of identifies them. Right. So just keep in mind that it's something that you kind of always got to keep that filter in the back of your mind of. Okay. That was pii. I need to make sure that that is obscured. If I'm going to show this, whether it be a screen grab or a video clip or whatever to the client, to my stakeholders, I need to redact this.

Drew Freeman: Well, and not only is it about after the fact redaction in reports, in, slide decks, in video clips, it's also about what information we're gathering as part of recruitment. And a good rule of thumb is really think about, do I need this data? And if you can make a good argument that you don't need the data, then don't collect it and save yourself the hassle.

Joe Marcantano: Yes, and I want to gently push back there because I think that there are folks who might hear that statement and say, I don't need to collect something like gender, I don't need to collect something like ethnicity because my product is so ubiquitous that everyone uses it and it doesn't matter.

Drew Freeman: I would hear those people's arguments and I would push back against them and say, no, you do need that data. And I imagine that I would use a very similar argument to what you would use.

Joe Marcantano: Yeah. The fact is, yes, your product might be as ubiquitous as email. Right. But if we don't collect that data, if we don't know that we're getting a diverse sample, we actually don't know that the usage pattern is the same.

Drew Freeman: Exactly.

Joe Marcantano: So number one, we want our research to be inclusive, we want to include everyone. But also we don't know where the differences are unless we're conscious about keeping an eye out for them.

Drew Freeman: Well, and even beyond keeping an eye out for differences, which is completely valid and important, I think the inclusivity argument there is the more important argument. Without, without gathering that gender information, our sample might be 80% men and 50, 15% women and 5% non binary, when really we need to be much closer to, let's just say 45, 45 and 10 as an example.

Joe Marcantano: Yeah, I mean, it reminds me of the, you know, I mean, I guess to a certain extent it still happens today, but, you know, back 40, 50 years ago, where medical studies were done almost exclusively with men and doctors in the medical field in healthcare didn't realize that, women might present with different signs of heart attacks. And that was cause all the research had been done on men. And you know, these doctors were acting on the best information they had. But because the information in the recruitment pool was skewed so heavily, they didn't realize that there were differences that have.

Drew Freeman: Very real effects on people having done research and worked in the medical field for a number of years. Unfortunately, there has been

00:10:00

Drew Freeman: not as much progress in that area as you would like.

Joe Marcantano: That is disappointing to hear. And we should also say that, like, we're not saying this, like not recognizing that certain samples are themselves going to be skewed just by the nature of the samples. Right. So like, if you're trying to interview senior vice presidents, in the tech area, like the engineers, the programmers, like Drew and I know that that pool skews mail and it's going to be tougher. So like, while we want to be as close to representative as we can, you know, sometimes that goal, unfortunately, based on the realities of the world, is a little more aspirational.

Drew Freeman: Well, I think it, I don't even think that needs to be aspirational, because what you said is we want a representative sample. And if that means that our pool that we can draw from is skewed, then representative to that pool would be skewed in the same way that the pool is. So yes, we always want to be inclusive, but aiming for a representative sample doesn't mean that we're aiming for equal in all, regards. It means that we're aiming for roughly equaling what the real world population looks like. Does that make sense?

Joe Marcantano: It does. And that's a fair enough point. Yeah.

Drew Freeman: As much as many of us would like to right so many what we see as societal wrongs, that's not our job in research when it comes to accurately m measuring and gaining insight from a representative sample. Representative is the keywordd there.

Joe Marcantano: And we've kind of focused in on gender as we were talking about this. But, you know, that can. Representative can mean a lot of things. It can mean sexual identity. It can mean income level. It could mean lots of things. Right.

Drew Freeman: Education level, race or ethnicity. It can mean any. It can mean any variable or spectrum that you might be measuring in one way or another.

Joe Marcantano: And we're not trying to be unrealistic about the product that you're researching. So, for example, if the product I'm researching is men's running shoes, we're not trying to suggest or say that you recruit outside of who you would be using the product.

Drew Freeman: In that case, your pool of eligible participants is vastly going to be men. So you should match that pool precisely. Okay, so let's talk a little bit about. Let's talk a little bit about. Now that you're in a session, how do you kind of set up a session, introduce the participant to this research in a way that is going to be the most ethical and set things up for the most success?

Joe Marcantano: So, Drew, one thing I'm not a fan of is surprises. And so I try to try to conduct my research accordingly. I try to let the participants know as much as possible so as not to skew the test results. This is what we want to do today. This is what I want to talk about today. I give them outs if you want it for whatever reason. You don't have to tell me why. You want to skip a question. You want me to move on, just let me know. No big deal. We move on. Try to make sure that they understand what they're getting themselves into and let them know that they can get out.

Drew Freeman: Absolutely. And I think that this has become just so ingrained in most researchers that the introspiel, as many of us call it most m people don't even think that that is like an ethical consideration. It's just something that we do. But really think about why you're doing the things that you're doing, and that'll steer you in the right direction.

Joe Marcantano: M. You know, it really has become automatic. I can think of specific instances where I was doing work for stakeholders who were familiar with me already. And for my introduction on my discussion guide, I just wrote Joe's intro spiel.

Drew Freeman: M. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, you tell me. Okay, you need to do an intro spiel. And I already know exactly what Im'going to say. Not down to the word, but I know the exact bullet points I'm going to hit.

Joe Marcantano: Exactly. Yeah, it definitely becomes automatic, and there's nothing wrong with that. And if you're somebody who still wants to write it out, that's awesome, too. You know, it's just make sure you're doing that. Make sure you're talking about it. If you're doing in person stuff, there are a couple of extra considerations. You know, have a bottle of water ready, let them know that they can take bathroom breaks, know where the bathroom is so you can direct them the right way. Drew, I know you've done in person stuff where,

00:15:00

Joe Marcantano: like, parking was specifically complicated. So providing those instructions, like not setting somebody up to get all frustrated and flustered and angry.

Drew Freeman: Yeah. So again, you might not think of this as an ethical consideration, but if parking is going to be a factor or transportation to your testing site is going to be a factor, that is an ethical consideration. Because, you know, we shouldn't necessarily ask people to spend money to come and take our test. That doesn't feel ethical. That doesn't feel right. So in my particular example, what we would do is say, you know, if you park in this garage, this is owned by. Owned by the organization, and your parking can be validated and it'll be free parking. Or, you know, you can park in this lot that is next to the building. Parking is $5, and we've increased your incentive by $5 to cover that cost.

Joe Marcantano: Yeah, you don't want to be in a spot where you're paying $50 incentives, but the parking cost is 15 or $20.

Drew Freeman: Exactly.

Joe Marcantano: And yeah, that, at that point is just silly.

Drew Freeman: Okay, so let's talk more about some of those kind of sensitive situations that you can get into. Obviously, in research, we are potentially asking questions that can make participants uncomfortable. What's the most ethical? What's the best way to handle those types of situations?

Joe Marcantano: Yeah, so this is probably one of those areas where most researchers are not gonna have to worry about this. But if you are a researcher, for example, working, with a nonprofit that works with victims of domestic abuse, you are kind of, by the nature of the clientele, dealing with sensitive areas, people may or may not be comfortable talking about it. Talking about it may be distressing. So in a very similar way that we said, like setting up expectations. It's kind of the same thing. This is not the place to pull the rope, a dope on people. This is not the place to say we're going to talk about this thing, pivot, and then secretly, I'm going to pivot to this other thing. There are instances where, like, you're doing a prototype test on something and you don't want to prime somebody, and so you might hold back certain details. This is not one of those instances. If you're going to talk about a situation or an event or a context that, you know, frankly, can be very traumatizing for people, then you need to let them know when you're recruiting them. You know, maybe even in the screener stage, hey, we're going to be talking about these things or in these contexts. Is this still a research project you want to move forward with?

Drew Freeman: Yeah, that's such a good way and a really easy framework to handle those kinds of topics. I also want to. Yes, Andrew, a little bit in that you said most researchers aren't going to have to deal with this. And I'm going to push back on that a little bit because I think, there'every researcher can encounter these situations or even create these situations without meaning to. And what I mean by that is, let's say you want to use in one of your task scenarios, you're a new parent who is shopping for baby supplies. That doesn't sound like it would be a sensitive situation at all. Right. Well, we know that unfortunately, so many couples experience miscarriages and loss, of an unborn child that is extremely emotionally heavy and can be triggering for a lot of different people. And you're never gonna know that.

Joe Marcantano: So for sure, I should more refine what I was going to say when I said most researchers won't have to deal with this. That was specific to the more obvious in your face. You know, working with. If you're doing a project for a charity for victims of domestic violence, or you're doing research for maybe a funeral home or whatever. Like, those were kind of the scenarios. When I said most researchers won't have to deal with it, that's kind of what I was talking about.

Drew Freeman: Yeah, that makes total sense. But the situations that I'm talking about are almost more concerning because in that sit.

Joe Marcantano: Oh, yeah, for sure. In that situation, you know, you're doing.

Drew Freeman: It in that situation where you're working for a, you know, maybe it's a domestic violence resource charity, the participants are very likely to

00:20:00

Drew Freeman: know that that's the charity that they're doing research for. And there's an understanding when they sign up that I'm very likely to talk about my experiences in this area. Whereas if you as a researcher bring in a situation as part of a task, there's almost no way for the participant to know that beforehand. So how do you speak to those kinds of situations? What advice do you have?

Joe Marcantano: I think, like you said, there's, you know, understanding that, like, be a little selective. Don't use the newborn child story, using air quotes here if you don't have to. And then the way I handle this is every time I have, I write a scenario I've got, maybe it's not even written down. Maybe it's just in my head, I have a backup scenario in mind. So if my scenario, let's say it's the newborn one and it's clear that that was distressing, even if they don't say it right, I pick up on it, I intuit it, I move on to the next thing, say, hey, you know what? I think, I take the onus on me. I think I went out of orderard on something. Is it okay if we take a quick pause and reset here? I want to give you a different scenario, and then I will come back to whatever it is I was looking at with my backup scenario in mind.

Drew Freeman: That's so interesting. I've never even considered having backup scenarios for that kind of thing.

Joe Marcantano: I mean, ultimately, prevention is the best way. You just don't use those kind of stories. But sometimes it's unavoidable. If I'm working for, I'm going to age myself here. But if I'm working for kids are us or babies are us, that's the nature of what they sell, and that's the scenarios we're going to use. But can always. We can avoid that stuff. We can stick to the more generic things. You're buying a birthday gift for a friend. Now, that doesn't mean that that scenario is perfect. You don't know that the person you're talking to didn't lose their best friend a couple of weeks ago. But we can try to avoid, certain situations and just be ready to pivot if things go in an unexpected direction.

Drew Freeman: Yeah. To give an example, the. And this is not a perfect solution either. But the, you know, working for Babies R Us example that you gave made me think, well, instead of saying you're a newborn parent, maybe you're a new aunt or maybe you're a new uncle, and so you're not buying for your own child, but you're buying a for you know, your sister or your brother's child. Again, that does change the scenario and people very well, I know that they do. People do think differently about buying for their own child versus buying for their niece or nephew.

Joe Marcantano: There is probably more than one person out there who's listening to this, thinking we're overthinking this, it's not a big deal. And the fact is the majority of the time they are probably right. For most people it probably is not a big deal and we probably are overthinking it a little. But just like doctors have a do no harm, so do we. And we need to make sure that we're not using scenarios that might be very obvious. I'll call them landmines. Because when we do step on them, it is going to be crushing for.

Drew Freeman: Those folks and to not to discount that we shouldn't be harming other people physically or they emotionally because of course we shouldn't. Just to be selfish about it, that kind, you know, stepping on those kinds of landmines as Joe calls them, is bad for our research. So even if you're only going to look at this selfishly from your researcher perspective, it's bad for the research.

Joe Marcantano: Yeah, 100%. You know, from a practical like cold logistical standpoint, you can't use that participant if you've already used your backup because there was a no show like it can really throw a monkey wrench into the finely tuned research project that you have.

Drew Freeman: Okay. So we ve spent a bunch of time talking about kind of the recruiting phase and the during moderation phase. What kinds of considerations do you think about when it comes to reporting?

Joe Marcantano: So the big one I think about other than, you know, we talked about blurring pii. Right. And that also kind of includes if there's sensitive data, if you did a screen share of all at all.

Drew Freeman: Login

00:25:00

Drew Freeman: information, financial information, health information, anything like that.

Joe Marcantano: Yeah, company information. the other thing that I try to think of is, you know, we all have had those moments where a participant did something completely unexpected. and like we might say a participant did something wrong with a prototype. But it's important to remember that the user is never wrong. So when that doesn't mean like don't show that, don't use it, don't talk about it, but when you frame it, it is not Participants couldn't figure this out. It is the prototype was not intuitive enough for X number of participants. The situation or the tool or the product was wrong, not the person. And the way we frame that really does matter. And like on the extreme end, we don't want to show video clips that make people look silly or dumb or, you know, embarrass them. Right. Like don't imagine the participant was one of your stakeholders and watching, would they look at that and laugh or would they go, ugh, man, I'm turning red here.

Drew Freeman: And it's okay to have kind of painful or cringy clips, but that pain or that cringe should come from, oh man, this product is just, this led them down the wrong path. This is not working the way we need it to work. It should never come, at the participants expense.

Joe Marcantano: Yeah. When you're framing it, it is never the user that was wrong.

Drew Freeman: All right. Anything else that you want to cover?

Joe Marcantano: No, I think that covered the big things. You know, this is such a huge and kind of, all encompassing topic that I don't think it's realistic for us to cover everything in under 30 minutes. But I do think that we've hit some of the big ones and we've given people a starting point about what to think of.

Drew Freeman: Yeah. And I think where we started was a joke that this could be two minutes long, which was do no harm and think about. Basically think about how your actions will impact others. And if you're sticking to those principles, then you're very likely going to be making good decisions the majority of the time.

Joe Marcantano: Yeah, I think if you're sticking to those principles, you're 90% of the way there. Just like I said at the beginning, be a good person.

Drew Freeman: Yeah, exactly. All right, well, thank you everyone for listening today. Please give us a like or a ah, review on the podcast platform of your choice. If you have questions or topics that you would like us to talk about, please send us those thoughts@inside uxrmail.com. with that, I'm Drew Freeman.

Joe Marcantano: And I'm Joe Marcantano.

Drew Freeman: And we'll see you next time.

00:27:57