Charles and the Ethics Factory

Indicating that the consumption of chocolate constitutes consent to participate in a research project may have some drawbacks when it comes to implementing the principles of partnership and informed, voluntary consent.

To begin with, participant voluntariness is significantly compromised in the presence of chocolate. Chocolate’s rich aromas and textures along with its inviting appearance subverts people’s reasoning powers and leads them to contemplate activities that they had previously barely dreamt of, let alone seriously entertained. When such a coercive influence is present, the voluntariness of consent cannot be assumed. It’s a bit like a teacher asking her students to participate in research about their coursework.

Consuming chocolate is also dubious evidence of informed consent. In what way does slowly mixing chocolate and saliva in one’s mouth indicate that one is aware of the purpose of the research and what it is that the researcher is doing by enticing one to consume chocolate. It would be unlikely to be a study about the effect of poisoning in relation to the experience of pleasure. Research ethics committees are wary of participants experiencing that and prevent researchers from inflicting it in an unconstrained manner. However just what is the researcher trying to do? Are there odious comparisons being made between chocolates or is the intrinsic value of chocolate being undermined by ill-founded prejudices that value one colour of chocolate more highly than another or that impose some arbitrary standard of cocoa purity upon the experience of gustatory pleasure? And just who is really benefitting from the chocolate consumption? Is the consumer’s intense though all too brief pleasure the only benefit from this research? Perhaps the researcher is also benefitting through some significant reward, such as a lucrative contract with a famous chocolatier for the provision of a seductively addictive new flavour. Consuming chocolate gives little indication that one is aware of and adequately informed about the purpose and nature of the research being undertaken.

And then there is the way in which partnership is occurring. Whose chocolate is it that is being offered and is the researcher sharing the delights of chocolate consumption with the participant? Just how equal is the relationship and is there a mutual reciprocity involved? What is the researcher expecting to receive from the participant and how is that being acknowledged and appropriately rewarded. Is the all too fleeting taste but the beginning of a lifelong addiction and craving, the disadvantages of which far outweigh the benefits of the tasting?

Another consideration is ensuring that there is adequate evidence of the consent and the participation. In this regard, consuming the chocolate is a little like paying a bill with a rare and therefore valuable pearl given in glass of champagne. A glorious gesture but one that leaves no tangible evidence of its occurrence, thereby leading to representation of the bill by an unscrupulous and greedy creditor. What evidence is there of the chocolate having been consumed once the saliva and gastric juices have done their job? How adequate has the consumption been? The consumption itself proves highly inadequate in the research context.

Ensuring adequately evidenced, fully informed, and uncompromised voluntariness of consent is an essential component of good research into the variety and glory of chocolate and every researcher needs to carefully plan their research to ensure it happens.

Please contact me should you have any further enquiries regarding this matter.

Author: Charles Grinter, Kairuruku Matatika | Ethics Coordinator, AUT