Chat with AIExam 20: Social Responsibility and Ethics in Social Research
Provide examples of two situations that would call for a thorough IRB review. Explain why a full IRB review would be necessary for these examples.
(31) 
Answered by Examlex AI Copilot1) Clinical trial involving vulnerable populations: If a research study involves vulnerable populations such as children, prisoners, or individuals with cognitive impairments, a thorough IRB review would be necessary. This is because these populations may not have the capacity to fully understand the risks and benefits of participating in the study, and may be at a higher risk of exploitation or harm. A full IRB review would ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place to protect the rights and welfare of these participants.
2) Research involving invasive procedures or high-risk interventions: If a study involves invasive procedures or high-risk interventions, such as surgical procedures, experimental drug treatments, or gene therapy, a thorough IRB review would be necessary. This is because these interventions carry a higher risk of harm to participants, and it is important to ensure that the potential benefits outweigh the risks. A full IRB review would involve a detailed assessment of the study protocol, the qualifications of the research team, and the measures in place to minimize risks and ensure participant safety.
In both of these examples, a full IRB review is necessary to ensure that the research meets ethical standards, protects the rights and welfare of participants, and minimizes potential risks. The IRB review process involves a comprehensive evaluation of the study protocol, informed consent process, participant recruitment and selection, and data safety monitoring, among other factors. This thorough review is essential for ensuring the ethical conduct of research and the protection of human subjects.
(a) Provide two research situation examples where a debriefing would be extremely necessary, and two examples where a debriefing is likely unnecessary - be sure to explain why a debriefing would be necessary or unnecessary for each of the four examples. (b) Is debriefing ever a bad idea? Explain why or why not.
(34) Answered by Examlex AI Copilot(a) Two research situations where a debriefing would be extremely necessary are:
1. Psychological research involving deception: If a study involves deceiving participants in any way, such as providing false information or manipulating their perceptions, a debriefing is essential to inform participants of the true nature of the study and to address any potential negative effects of the deception on their well-being.
2. Medical research involving experimental treatments: In a clinical trial or medical study involving experimental treatments, a debriefing is crucial to ensure that participants fully understand the potential risks and benefits of the treatment they received, as well as to provide them with any necessary follow-up care or support.
Two research situations where a debriefing is likely unnecessary are:
1. Survey research on non-sensitive topics: In a survey or questionnaire study that does not involve any form of deception or potential harm to participants, a debriefing may be unnecessary as there are no ethical concerns or potential negative effects that would require further explanation or support.
2. Observational research in public settings: In observational studies conducted in public settings where participants are not directly involved or affected by the research, a debriefing may not be necessary as there are no specific ethical or psychological implications that would require further explanation or support.
(b) Debriefing is not inherently a bad idea, as it serves an important ethical and psychological purpose in research. However, there are potential drawbacks to debriefing if it is not conducted properly. For example, if a debriefing is rushed or insincere, it may not effectively address any potential negative effects of the research on participants. Additionally, if a debriefing is overly intrusive or invasive, it could potentially cause further distress to participants. Therefore, while debriefing is generally a good practice in research, it is important for researchers to approach it with sensitivity and consideration for the well-being of participants.
"Enlightenment effects" refer to the idea that people may respond or behave differently after learning about psychological concepts, effects, or procedures (i.e., after they become "enlightened" about their behavior or someone else's behavior). (a) How is this related to deception? (b) When might enlightenment effects pose a major threat to the reliability and validity of scientific research?
(34) Answered by Examlex AI Copilot(a) Enlightenment effects are related to deception in several ways. When individuals learn about psychological concepts and the ways in which they or others might be influenced or manipulated, they may become more skeptical of situations where deception could be present. For instance, if participants in a study learn about the concept of demand characteristics (where participants form an interpretation of the experiment's purpose and subconsciously change their behavior to fit that interpretation), they might become more vigilant and try to guess the true purpose of the study, potentially altering their behavior in response to their guesses rather than to the experimental manipulation itself.
Moreover, if participants are aware of common deception techniques used in psychological experiments, such as being told a cover story to mask the true nature of the study, they might be less trusting and more likely to question the veracity of what the researchers tell them. This could lead to a change in their behavior, as they might either resist the deception or attempt to behave in a way that aligns with what they believe the researchers are looking for, rather than responding naturally.
(b) Enlightenment effects pose a major threat to the reliability and validity of scientific research when they influence participants' responses to the extent that the data no longer accurately reflect the natural behaviors or reactions that the study aims to investigate. This can occur in several scenarios:
1. Repeated Measures Designs: If participants are involved in a study over multiple sessions or in multiple studies over time, they may become more aware of common research practices and the potential aims of experiments. This could lead to changes in their behavior in later sessions or studies, which would threaten the internal validity of the research.
2. Educational Settings: In educational settings where students are often participants in research studies as part of their coursework, they may become more enlightened about psychological research methods and more adept at identifying the true purpose of a study. This could lead to biased responses and threaten the external validity of the research, as the results may not generalize to a less informed population.
3. Longitudinal Studies: In longitudinal research, where the same participants are studied over an extended period, enlightenment effects can occur as participants reflect on their experiences or discuss them with others, potentially leading to changes in their behavior that are not due to the experimental manipulation but rather to their increased understanding of the study.
4. Publicly Available Information: With the increasing availability of information about psychological research on the internet and in popular media, participants may come into studies with preconceived notions about what researchers are looking for or how they should behave. This can compromise the study's findings by introducing bias that is difficult to control for.
To mitigate the impact of enlightenment effects, researchers can use strategies such as thorough debriefing, where the true nature of the study is explained after participation, or employing more sophisticated deception that is less likely to be detected. Additionally, researchers can design studies that are less susceptible to participant guesses about the research aims, such as using double-blind procedures where neither the participants nor the experimenters know who is receiving a particular treatment.
The Association of Psychological Science (APS) has implemented new data disclosure rules for all manuscript submissions, including: (a) that all excluded observations and the reasons for exclusion be reported; (b) that all independent variables or manipulations, as well as dependent variables used in the study, be reported; and (c) that information on how the final sample size was obtained be reported. Explain the ethical justifications for these guidelines, and how these guidelines have broader implications for how scientists conduct research.
(37) You conducted a longitudinal study of teenagers' alcohol and substance use behaviors, including data regarding their use of illicit drugs. In the informed consent form, you acknowledged (both in writing and verbally to each participant) that there is always a remote possibility that the information they provide could be seen, intentionally or unintentionally, by people who are not involved with the research project; e.g., if there was a fire in the laboratory building, and rather than burn up all of participants' responses, all of your paper-and-pencil data was strewn across the grounds outside of the building. Because it was a longitudinal study, you had a record of participants' names and their corresponding ID numbers, but kept that record in a separate locked file cabinet in a different part of the lab relative to participants' data. However, after the fire, the document with participants' names and ID numbers fell in the same place as participants' data. Then, before you could collect all of the documents, some were stolen, including the document with the names and IDs, along with some participants' data. Should you contact those participants to tell them what happened? Should you just hope that there are no catastrophic consequences for those participants? What else could or should you do? What are your ethical obligations to participants?
(32) Some participants may require more than a basic explanation of the deception they were exposed to in a study. What are two techniques or strategies that can be used to help alleviate or address their concerns?
(33) What are two arguments for the use of deception in scientific research, and two arguments against deception, of any kind, in research?
(37) Provide one scientific (i.e., pertaining to the methodology of a study, or to the reliability and validity of results) and one ethical reason for why ensuring participants' confidentiality is important. Be sure to explain why they are scientific and ethical reasons for ensuring confidentiality.
(33) Discuss the practice of "debriefing" human participants. Is it always required? Is it always a good thing?
(41) Were the "obedience studies" of Stanley Milgram ethically justifiable? Why?
(30) Besides the blatantly obvious examples of ethical violations, what are some of the "routine" practices that scientists engage in that might be considered ethically dubious if information about these practices is omitted in publications? (a) Provide two examples where "routine" practices are ethically questionable when scientists do not mention that they used those practices. (b) Explain why failing to mention some research practices could be considered scientifically or ethically questionable?
(32) (a) What is one argument in favor of IRBs reviewing the methodological quality of a research endeavor, beyond basic assessments of participant protection, justification for the project, and qualifications of the experimenters involved? (b) What is one argument against IRBs reviewing the methodological quality of research proposals?
(30) Why have some scientists argued that racial or ethnic differences should be off-limits from scientific research (or at least reporting ethnic/racial differences should be off-limits)? Provide one argument in favor of this proposal, and one argument against this proposal. (b) Provide one example for when publishing findings on racial or ethnic differences may be irresponsible or ethically questionable, and one example for when not publishing findings of these differences may be irresponsible or ethically questionable.
(39) The Internet offers many new opportunities to conduct observational research (that may not require informed consent). However, not all online studies or experiments are excused from obtaining informed consent from participants prior to their participation. Provide two examples of online studies where consent would not be required, and two examples of online studies where participants' consent would be required. Be sure to explain why those examples would or would not require participants' consent.
(40) Why is outside funding (e.g., from a private cooperation or organization) a concern for the ethics of scientific research? What sort of conflicts may be introduced when science is funded by private organizations?
(42) If federal guidelines dictate that participants provide informed consent before participating, how do we accomplish this with observational field research (where participants may not even know they are "participating?" In other words, under what conditions is it currently appropriate to not obtain informed consent from participants? Explain your reasoning, and provide two examples where consent might not be necessary to obtain.
(25) (a) What is an Institutional Review Board, (b) what is it composed of, and (c) what is its purpose?
(31) Currently, some countries do not require IRB approval before you can conduct research with human participants, nor do these countries have any sort of review entities that are equivalent to an Institutional Review Board. At a recent conference, a fellow researcher suggested you consider conducting research in one such country (i.e., Methodia [a fictional country used for the sake of argument]), to avoid the overly burdensome and excessive red tape of your institution's IRB. Technically, this would not violate federal guidelines for participant protections if you did not represent yourself as a member of your home institution - so you decide to do it. What are the ethical implications of such a practice? Is what you are doing ethical - why or why not? How might this impact the process and integrity of conducting research in the US and at your home institution, both for yourself and for other researchers?
(27) 
Filters
- Essay(0)
- Multiple Choice(0)
- Short Answer(0)
- True False(0)
- Matching(0)