Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Perceptions of Financial Payment for Research Participation among African-American Drug Users in HIV Studies

  • Original COntributions
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Financial compensation for participating in research is controversial, especially when participants are recruited from economically disadvantaged and/or marginalized populations such as drug users. Little is known about these participants’ own views regarding payment for research participation.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to elicit underserved minority drug users’ views about monetary payments for participating in research.

DESIGN

Semi-structured in-depth interview study of motivations for and perceptions of participation in research was used.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-seven adult, economically disadvantaged African-American crack cocaine smokers were the participants of the study.

APPROACH

Participants were recruited from among those taking part in three HIV prevention studies. Interviews were conducted at one of 2 research field offices located in underserved minority neighborhoods in Houston, Texas. Interviews lasting 30–45 min were recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed for categories and themes using both conventional and directed qualitative content analysis. This report addresses themes under the broad category of financial motivations for participating in research.

RESULTS

Participants viewed monetary payment for research as essential to attract participation and desirable to provide optional income. Payment for research participation was perceived as one potential income source among others. Participants considered self-determination a prerogative for themselves and others. They rejected the notion of payment for participation as encouraging drug use or as inducing risk taking.

CONCLUSIONS

Research regulators should consider participants’ views of their desires and capacity for autonomous decisions about financial compensation for research rather than assume participants’ diminished capacity due to poverty and/or drug use. Payment for research participation appears to be part of the “informal economy” that has been observed in underserved communities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Macklin R. Due and undue inducements: on paying money to research subjects. IRB: A Review of Human Subjects Research. 1981;3:1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Newton L. Inducement, due and otherwise. IRB: A Review of Human Subjects Research. 1982;4:4–6.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wilkinson M, Moore A. Inducement in research. Bioethics. 1997;11:373–89.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. McNeill P. A response to Wilkinson and Moore. Paying people to participate in research: why not? Bioethics. 1997;11:390–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lemmens T, Elliott C. Guinea pigs on the payroll: the ethics of paying research subjects. Account Res. 1999;7:3–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Tishler CL, Bartholomae S. The recruitment of normal healthy volunteers: A review of the literature on the use of financial incentives. J Clin Pharmacol. 2002;42:365–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Grant RW, Sugarman J. Ethics in human subjects research: do incentives matter? J Med Philos. 2004;29:717–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dunn LB, Gordon NE. Improving informed consent and enhancing recruitment for research by understanding economic behavior. JAMA. 2005;293:609–12.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Reiser SJ. Research compensation and the monetarization of medicine. JAMA. 2005;293:613–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Emanuel EJ. Undue inducement: nonsense on stilts? Am J Bioethics. 2005;5:9–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Grady C. Payment of clinical research subjects. J Clin Invest. 2005;115:1681–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Dickert N, Emanuel E, Grady C. Paying research subjects: an analysis of current policies. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:368–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Beauchamp TL, Jennings B, Kinney ED, Levine RJ. Pharmaceutical research involving the homeless. J Med Philos. 2002;27:547–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Pace C, Miller FG, Danis M. Enrolling the uninsured in clinical trials: an ethical perspective. Crit Care Med (Suppl.). 2003;31:S121–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Emanuel EJ. Ending concerns about undue inducement. J Law Med Ethics. 2004;32:100–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dickert N, Grady C. What’s the price of a research subject? Approaches to payment for research participation. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:198–203.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Hughes JJ. Paying injection drug users to educate and recruit their peers: why participant-driven interventions are an ethical public health model. Qual Manag Health Care. 1999;7:4–12.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Buchanan D, Khoshnood K, Stopka T, Shaw S, Santelices C, Singer M. Ethical dilemmas created by the criminalization of status behaviors: Case examples from ethnographic field research with injection drug users. Health Educ Behav. 2002;29:30–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Festinger DS, Marlowe DB, Croft JR, et al. Do research payments precipitate drug use or coerce participation? Drug Alcohol Depend. 2005;78:275–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Williams ML, Timpson S, Klovdal A, Bowen AM, Ross, MW, Keel B. HIV risk among a sample of drug using male sex workers. AIDS. 2003;17:1402–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Halpern SD, Karlawish JHT, Casarett D, Berlin JA, Asch DA. Empirical assessment of whether moderate payments are undue or unjust inducements for participation in clinical trials. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:801–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bentley JP, Thacker PG. The influence of risk and monetary payment on the research participation decision making process. J Med Ethics. 2004;30:293–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Russell ML, Morelejo DG, Burgess ED. Paying research subjects: participants’ perspectives. J Med Ethics. 2000;26:126–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Casarett D, Karlawish J, Asch DA. Paying hypertension research subjects. Fair compensation or undue inducement? J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17:651–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Casarett D, Karlawish J, Sankar P, Hirschman KB, Asch DA. Obtaining informed consent for clinical pain research: patients’ concerns and information needs. Pain. 2001;92:71–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Vosvick M, Gore-Felton C, Ashton E, et al. Sleep disturbances among HIV-positive adults: The role of pain, stress, and social support. J Psychosom Res. 2004;57:459–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Coletti AS, Heagerty P, Sheon AR, et al. Randomized, controlled evaluation of a prototype informed consent process for HIV vaccine efficacy trials. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr: JAIDS. 2003;32:161–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Patton MQ. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods 2nd ed. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15:1277–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sandelowski M. The problem of rigor in qualitative research. Adv Nurs Sci. 1986;8:27–37.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Becker HS. Problems of inference and proof in participant observation. Am Sociol Rev. 1958;23:652–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Creswell JW, Miller DL. Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Pract. 2000;39:124–30.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Barbour RS. Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ. 2001;322:1115–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Wright S, Klee H, Reid P. Interviewing illicit drug users: observations from the field. Addict Res. 1998;6:517–35.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Agre P, Rapkin B, Dougherty J, Wilson R. Barriers encountered conducting informed consent research. IRB: Ethics and Human Research. 2002;24:1–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Sachs GA, Hougham GW, Sugarman J, et al. Conducting empirical research on informed consent: challenges and questions. IRB: Ethics and Human Research Supplement. 2003;25:S4–10.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Narotzky S. New Directions in Economic Anthropology. London: Pluto Press; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Anderson E. Code of the Street. New York: W.W Norton & Company, Inc.; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Bourgois P. In search of Horatio Alger. Culture and ideology in the crack economy. In: Reinarman C, Levine HG, eds. Crack in America: Demon Drugs and Social Justice. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1997;57–76.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Partial support was provided by the National Institute on Drug Abuse. We are grateful to the staff at the Montrose field site for their assistance in facilitating our interviews. We thank our participants for sharing their views with us.

Authors’ Conflicts of Interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, 7000 Fannin, Houston, TX, 77030, USA

    Jacquelyn Slomka PhD, Sheryl McCurdy PhD, Eric A. Ratliff PhD, Sandra Timpson PhD & Mark L. Williams PhD

Authors
  1. Jacquelyn Slomka PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sheryl McCurdy PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eric A. Ratliff PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sandra Timpson PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mark L. Williams PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jacquelyn Slomka PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Slomka, J., McCurdy, S., Ratliff, E.A. et al. Perceptions of Financial Payment for Research Participation among African-American Drug Users in HIV Studies. J GEN INTERN MED 22, 1403–1409 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-007-0319-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-007-0319-9

KEY WORDS

Search

Navigation