This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (15)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letters  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Medical Ethics  • Randomized Controlled Trial  • Alert me on articles by topic

Laura B. Dunn, MD; Nora E. Gordon, PhD

JAMA. 2005;293:609-612.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

The use of financial compensation as a recruitment tool in medical research continues to be debated on ethical grounds. Critics are against economic or market models, in which market forces determine payment practices, primarily because of the perceived undue inducement potential^1-11 and on other grounds,^{1, 12} including that participants from lower socioeconomic levels bear a disproportionate share of the research burden.³ Many of these arguments apply not only to the purest market model but to any model in which compensation to participants exceeds some threshold. We argue that economic forces operate regardless of how investigators choose to compensate participants. Thus, it is imperative that investigators acknowledge these forces and design compensation schemes that explicitly take economic forces into account.

Economic principles predict that for otherwise undecided individuals, incentives serve as inducements, regardless of the compensation model used. If they did not, why would . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Economic Model

Author Affiliations: Departments of Psychiatry (Dr Dunn) and Economics (Dr Gordon), University of California, San Diego, and National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Mass (Dr Gordon).

RELATED LETTERS

Economic Behavior and Informed Consent
David A. Paz
JAMA. 2005;293(17):2092.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Economic Behavior and Informed Consent—Reply
Laura B. Dunn and Nora E. Gordon
JAMA. 2005;293(17):2092.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

Research Compensation and the Monetarization of Medicine
Stanley Joel Reiser
JAMA. 2005;293(5):613-614.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Worth the Risk? Relationship of Incentives to Risk and Benefit Perceptions and Willingness to Participate in Schizophrenia Research
Dunn et al.
Schizophr Bull 2008;0:sbn003v1-sbn003.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Phase I oncology trials: why the therapeutic misconception will not go away
Glannon
J. Med. Ethics 2006;32:252-255.
FULL TEXT  

Assessment of Therapeutic Misconception in Older Schizophrenia Patients With a Brief Instrument
Dunn et al.
Am. J. Psychiatry 2006;163:500-506.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Emerging Empirical Evidence on the Ethics of Schizophrenia Research
Dunn et al.
Schizophr Bull 2006;32:47-68.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Towards evidence based bioethics
Halpern
BMJ 2005;331:901-903.
FULL TEXT  

Economic Behavior and Informed Consent
Paz
JAMA 2005;293:2092-2092.
FULL TEXT  

Research Compensation and the Monetarization of Medicine
Reiser
JAMA 2005;293:613-614.
FULL TEXT