Laud Humphrey’s “Tearoom Sex” study is an example of unethical research.  This study was conducted between 1969 and 1970 and examined homosexual relationships between men in causal settings.  Laud Humphrey felt that public law enforcement authorities were stereotyping men who participated in these types of encounters and chose to study men who were having “impersonal” sex in public restrooms.

After gaining the trust of these men, Humphrey disclosed to them that he was a researcher and offered to stand guard outside the restrooms in which these acts occurred.  After gaining the trust of some of these participants, Humphrey was able to get some information about their lifestyles.  In order to avoid bias be also followed some of the men who he was not able to speak further with in attempt to gain insight into their lifestyles as well.  This study becomes particularly unethical when a year later, Humphrey showed up at these men’s house, disguised as a health-service researcher to ask questions about their race, relationship status, jobs, etc.  Humphrey used the information he received in these home meetings, which he did not gain consent for, to connect and determine what types of men were participating in these “causal” sexual acts.

Through conducting this research, Humphrey was able to disprove many of the stereotypes about these types of men.  He found that many of them were not only heterosexual, but also married and religious, specifically Christian.   This study was able to change the way many law enforcement officials viewed and profiled the men who committed these acts.  Furthermore, this study provided an outlet for the homosexual community.  Many of the members of the gay community were being profiled for these types of acts and this study halted some of that behavior.

Although Humphrey disclosed to many of the men during their first encounters that he was a researcher, the fact that he would later study them without their knowledge, and within their own homes was not disclosed.  It is important to note that simply because a researcher discloses a portion of their motives, this does not mean that they need not explain the rest of their research.  Understanding what went wrong with this study can provide an example for researchers to decide what is and what is not ethical.  Although the participants were not engaged in the “controversial” behavior at the time Humphrey re-entered their home’s they were still known by the researcher to have committed these acts.  Humphrey provides an important example of why gaining a participant’s trust at one point in the study can later lead to unethical research.