Two arguments for 'covert methods' in social research

In some 'covert' participant-observation studies, social researchers defend their omission of informed consent on the basis of a need to protect subje cts from apprehension, nervousness, or even criminal prosecution. In other instances, researchers contend that deception is rampant in society, and th at their methods are no more immoral than the behaviour that ordinarily pre vails. These defenses of covert methods fail to appreciate the range of ris ks that may be involved, and in the latter case, fail to show that these me thods are in fact morally indistinguishable from the 'deception' that peopl e typically engage in. Ultimately, these proposed defenses of covert method s succeed only in arousing greater concern about informed consent in social research, and the researcher's privilege in bypassing it.