skip to main content
訪客
個人書架
我的帳戶
登出
登入
This feature requires javascript
檢索首頁
圖書館首頁
電子期刊
引用參考文獻查詢
指定參考書查詢
新書通報
標籤查詢
線上輔助
語言:
English
繁體中文
This feature required javascript
This feature requires javascript
Primo Search
館藏+文章
館藏+文章
館藏
查館藏
文章
查文章
機構典藏
機構典藏
Search For:
Clear Search Box
Search in:
文章
Or hit Enter to replace search target
Or select another collection:
Search in:
文章
進階檢索
瀏覽查詢
This feature requires javascript
顯示結果:
查詢種類
criteria input
包含在我的檢索語句內
完全相同
顯示結果:
查詢種類 索引
criteria input
任何地方
題名
ISBN
ISSN
Show Results with:
題名
Show Results with:
任何地方
題名
ISBN
ISSN
This feature requires javascript
The ethics of interrogation and the
American
Psychological
Association
: a critique of policy and process
Olson, Brad ; Soldz, Stephen ; Davis, Martha
Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM, 2008-01, Vol.3 (1), p.3-3
[同儕審閱期刊]
可取得全文
引用
被引用
線上檢視
詳細格式
評論和標籤
相關文章推薦
FullText@NUTN
引用次數
This feature requires javascript
傳送到
加入個人書架
從個人書架中移除
E-mail
列印
永久連結
引用
EndNote
導出 RiS
This feature requires javascript
題名:
The ethics of interrogation and the
American
Psychological
Association
: a critique of policy and process
著者:
Olson, Brad
;
Soldz, Stephen
;
Davis, Martha
主題:
Detention of persons
;
Human Rights
;
Humans
;
National security
;
Practice
;
Prisoners - psychology
;
Psychological
aspects
;
Psychologists
;
Psychology - ethics
;
Psychology, Military - ethics
;
Security Measures - ethics
;
Societies, Scientific
;
Terrorism
;
Torture - ethics
;
United States
所屬期刊:
Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM, 2008-01, Vol.3 (1), p.3-3
描述:
The
Psychological
Ethics and National Security (PENS) task force was assembled by the
American
Psychological
Association
(APA) to guide policy on the role of psychologists in interrogations at foreign detention centers for the purpose of U.S. national security. The task force met briefly in 2005, and its report was quickly accepted by the APA Board of Directors and deemed consistent with the APA Ethics Code by the APA Ethics Committee. This rapid acceptance was unusual for a number of reasons but primarily because of the APA's long-standing tradition of taking great care in developing ethical policies that protected anyone who might be impacted by the work of psychologists. Many
psychological
and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), as well as reputable journalists, believed the risk of harm associated with psychologist participation in interrogations at these detention centers was not adequately addressed by the report. The present critique analyzes the assumptions of the PENS report and its interpretations of the APA Ethics Code. We demonstrate that it presents only one (and not particularly representative) side of a complex set of ethical issues. We conclude with a discussion of more appropriate psychological contributions to national security and world peace that better respect and preserve human rights.
出版者:
England: BioMed Central Ltd
語言:
英文
識別號:
ISSN: 1747-5341
EISSN: 1747-5341
DOI: 10.1186/1747-5341-3-3
PMID: 18230171
資源來源:
DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
連結
View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
This feature requires javascript
This feature requires javascript
返回到檢索清單
This feature requires javascript
This feature requires javascript
正在檢索遠程資料庫,請稍等
查詢:
在
primo_central_multiple_fe
顯示現有記錄
This feature requires javascript
This feature requires javascript