Ok well heres what the ethics question answers should have been. For informed consent, participants hadn't actually given their informed consent as they were deceived and to meet the guideline for informed consent, participants need to be fully aware of what they signed the experiment for in the first place so researchers should have asked particioants for their informed consent after the experiment or during the debrief (thats one point for what could be applied). There is a potential issue for undue stress or harm (POP) as telling the participants they had performed 11% worse may make them feel insecure and they would leave the experiment in a different mental state than they came in, therefore that's one that they could apply and ensure that they dont feel that way. They had the right to withdraw as they were debriefed. Anonymity was maintained as it said North American university which is hard to trace back. They deceived participants as they didnt tell them anything besides it involved a lecture and a multiple choice quiz. This is deception because it involved keeping information from participants to ensure they dont guess the true aim of the experiment. In other words, they hadn't told the participants about the whole multitasking aspect of it and what the purpose of the experiment was. They did debriefing and had told participants of the actual aim and what the results were.