47 - Consent and Assent Practices in Behavior Analytic Research

Background: The purpose of this study was to explore self-reported consent and assent processes in behavior analytic research by surveying researchers about their knowledge, practices, resources, barriers, and solutions with respect to consent and assent.

Methods: Data were collected via a self-developed, anonymous online survey. A variety of question formats were used, including one-selection options, multiple-selection options, Likert-type scale responses, open-ended response options, and fully open-ended questions. The survey consisted of five sections that were directly linked to the research questions. Section 1 asked participants to provide demographic information. Section 2 assessed respondents’ knowledge of and training about consent and assent requirements. Section 3 requested information about practices related to consent and assent (e.g., methods for obtaining consent and assent and confidence in research participants’ understanding of consent and assent. Section 4 inquired about resources used to develop consent and assent practices. Section 5 asked about barriers and solutions related to consent and assent practices. One hundred twenty-three behavior analytic researchers (55% with a doctoral degree; 41% with a master’s degree), recruited via convenience, purposive, and snowball sampling, participated in the study. Data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methodologies.

Results: Results suggested that while most behavior analytic researchers report a high level of confidence in their understanding of consent and assent, they express less confidence in participants' comprehension of these procedures. For example, approximately half of the participants were highly confident that consent providers fully understood the risks, benefits, and procedures of participation in research, but only 27% indicated the same high confidence for individuals providing assent. This may be due to identified barriers, reported by participants, including a paucity of empirically validated assent procedures and a lack of training and resources available. Despite these data, results suggested that a variety of methods are being used to seek consent and assent, even though those processes are not always described in published literature. For example, respondents reported using standard and customized forms, using a process of continuous consent or assent whereby participants were asked if they wanted to participate before every research session, and relying on secondary responses, such as indices of happiness or unhappiness, to determine assent or assent withdrawal.

Limitations: A primary limitation of this study is the informal approach used to develop the survey and analyze the qualitative data. Additionally, respondents of the current survey may not reflect the full range of behavior analytic researchers. However, these data supplement what is being reported in published literature about the utilization of consent and assent procedures (e.g., Morris et al., 2021).

Discussion: Generally, the results of this study supported one of the hypotheses suggested by Morris et al (2021): Even though most published behavior analytic studies do not include information about assent processes in the article itself, researchers report that they are actually doing quite a lot with respect to assent. Further, although researchers report confidence in their understanding of consent and assent, they report less confidence that their participants understand research procedures, risks, and benefits; especially when seeking assent. These results suggest the need for more research, training, resources, and social contingencies related to assent methodology.