Case Study

Based on the ethical guidelines for research involving student participants, explain why Dr. Aris's recruitment design violates the requirement for voluntary participation, and describe how she should modify the alternative option to make it ethical.

Case context: Dr. Aris is conducting a study on memory and wants to recruit participants from her undergraduate introductory psychology course. She makes participation in her 1-hour laboratory study a course requirement. To accommodate students who do not wish to participate, she offers them the alternative of writing a 10-page research paper on a memory-related topic.

Question: Based on the ethical guidelines for research involving student participants, explain why Dr. Aris's recruitment design violates the requirement for voluntary participation, and describe how she should modify the alternative option to make it ethical.

Sample answer: Dr. Aris's design violates the requirement because writing a 10-page research paper is not an equitable alternative to a 1-hour laboratory study. This imbalance creates a coercive environment where students are pressured to participate in the study to avoid a disproportionately difficult task. To make it ethical, she must offer an alternative activity that requires comparable time and effort, such as reading a short research article and writing a brief summary.

Key points:

  • Identification of the alternative (10-page paper) as inequitable to the 1-hour study.
  • Explanation that inequitable alternatives compromise the voluntary nature of participation (coercion).
  • Proposal of a modified alternative that is equitable in terms of time, effort, or educational value.

Rubric: Score 3/3: Correctly identifies that a 10-page paper is not an equitable alternative to a 1-hour study, explains how this compromises voluntary participation, and proposes a truly equitable alternative (e.g., comparable time/effort). Score 2/3: Identifies the lack of equity but provides a weak explanation or an alternative that is still not comparable in terms of effort or time. Score 1/3: States that the setup is unethical but fails to explain why in terms of equitability or voluntary participation. Score 0/3: Incomplete or incorrect answer.

0

1

Updated 2026-05-26

Contributors are:

Who are from:

Tags

KPU

Research Methods in Psychology - 4th American Edition @ KPU

Related