Intro to Research Chapter 4 Week 6
Intro to Research Chapter 4 Week 6
Popular in Intro to Research Methods
Popular in Department
This 6 page Class Notes was uploaded by Kim Notetaker on Monday October 3, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to at Armstrong State University taught by in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 23 views.
Reviews for Intro to Research Chapter 4 Week 6
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 10/03/16
Chapter 4 The Belmont Report Belmont Report of 1976: a broad set of principles to guide research with human subjects. Motivated by the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. o 3 principles: Respect for persons: informed consent, particularly for groups with reduced autonomy. Benefice: protect participants from harm, and ensure well-being. Justice: fair balance of benefits and costs associated with research participants. APA Ethical Principles and Standards The American Psychological Association provides enforceable standards for psychology research. o Key issues: Institutional Review Boards (IRB). Coercion and undue influence. Informed consent. Deception. Debriefing. Research misconduct. Animal research. Institutional Review Boards (IRB) IRB: committee that reviews research at universities and schools to ensure ethical conduct. o They review research before it is conducted. o Must balance the welfare of participants with the researcher’s goal of contributing to the general body of knowledge. Coercion and undue influence Coercion: the explicit or implicit suggestion that someone who chooses not to participate will suffer negative consequences. Undue influence: offering an incentive too attractive to refuse. Informed consent Informed consent: must provide the participants with information about the study, particularly risks and benefits so they can decide if they want to participate. o Brief description of the procedures. o Potential risks and benefits. o Confidentiality. o Right to withdraw. o Contact information. Why wouldn’t you want to get informed consent? o People won’t behave naturally. o Some people can’t give consent. o Consent may be impractical or impossible to obtain. When can you possibly skip informed consent? o Behavior is fully public. o No more than minimal risk of harm (an amount of harm that would occur in everyday life). Deception Deception: researchers withhold some details about the study either though omission or commission. 2 o Examples are: Withholding true purpose if the study (common). Confederates: an actor playing a specific role for the study. Fake feedback. Contrived situations. Objections to deception: o Moral argument. o Pragmatic concerns. How do participants feel about deception? o Participants may actually prefer deceptive studies IF conducted with courtesy and given a thorough debriefing. Debriefing Debriefing: informing participants about all aspects of the study after the study is over. o Essential for deceptive studies, but always a good idea and required for our psychology subject pool. General guideline: leave participants in a better state than when they arrived. Research misconduct Ethical principles relevant to the publishing stage. 3 primary “sins” to avoid: 3 o Plagiarism: misrepresenting the ideas or words of others as one’s own. o Data fabrication: inventing data. o Data falsification: inappropriately messing with data An example: selectively deleting certain data. Animal research APA has specific guidelines for animal research (only about 7-8% of psych research). The 3 R’s: o Replacement: find alternatives when possible. o Refinement: minimize or eliminate animals’ distress. o Reduction: use as few animals as possible. Monitored by IACUC: Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. Arguments in favor: o Benefits for humans and animals. o All efforts are made to avoid and minimize suffering. o Extent or cruelty is exaggerated. Arguments against it: o No creature should suffer. o Violated the principles of justice. Publication process When research is written up: o Manuscript is sent to one journal for consideration. o Editor assigns paper to associate editor. 4 o Associate editor identifies 2-4 reviewers. o Experts in the field. o Remain anonymous to author. o May or may not know author’s identity. o Write review and decide publish ability. Associate editor rakes reviews and makes the final decision about publication. o Accept as is. o Accept with minor revision. o Revise and resubmit. o Reject. Often takes 3-6 months until author receives reviews and publication decision. Patience and persistence is key. Criteria for publication What do reviewers and editors look for? o Significance of the question. o Interestingness. o Methods high in construct, internal and external validity. o Appropriate analyses and interpretation of data. o Good writing. A note about grant funding Most common sources of funding: o NIH: National Institution of Health. o NSF: National Science Foundation. Similar criteria as for publication, but the studies are planned and not completed. 5 Criteria can differ widely depending on funding agency or source. o NIH vs. NSF o Templeton Foundation vs other private sources. 6