Learn Before
Imagine you are designing a study that involves exposing participants to a mild physiological stressor (which exceeds minimal risk) to test a new anxiety-reduction technique. Apply the ethical justification rule for elevated-risk studies to explain how you would structure the design to ensure the benefits outweigh the risks.
Question: Imagine you are designing a study that involves exposing participants to a mild physiological stressor (which exceeds minimal risk) to test a new anxiety-reduction technique. Apply the ethical justification rule for elevated-risk studies to explain how you would structure the design to ensure the benefits outweigh the risks.
Sample answer: To justify the physiological stressor, I would rigorously design the experiment to compare the new technique against a control group, ensuring the study can clearly answer whether the technique works (a scientifically interesting question) and provide a validated method for anxiety reduction (a clear practical implication).
Key points:
- Applies a rigorous research design to a study involving elevated risk.
- Ensures the experiment answers a scientifically interesting question about the anxiety-reduction technique.
- Demonstrates a clear practical application (reducing anxiety) to outweigh the physiological stress.
Rubric: The answer should apply the justification rule by proposing a rigorous research design (e.g., using controls) aimed at either answering a scientifically interesting question about anxiety or providing a clear practical implication (the anxiety-reduction technique), showing how these benefits outweigh the physiological stress.
0
1
Tags
KPU
Research Methods in Psychology - 4th American Edition @ KPU
Related
A psychological research study that poses more than minimal risk to participants can be ethically justified if it is rigorously designed to offer benefits that outweigh those risks.
Which of the following best explains how a researcher can ethically justify a study that poses more than minimal risk to participants?
A researcher is planning a study using the 'Cyberball' task, where participants are intentionally ignored in a virtual game to induce feelings of social rejection. Because this causes temporary emotional distress, the researcher must justify the study ethically. Match each part of the researcher's plan with the specific ethical requirement it fulfills.
A researcher is planning a study that involves inducing temporary feelings of social rejection in participants to examine emotional coping. To ethically justify this 'greater than minimal risk' research, arrange the following steps of the ethical analysis in the correct logical sequence.
A research team is planning a study that involves inducing temporary feelings of social rejection in participants to investigate the cognitive triggers of clinical depression. Since this procedure involves greater than minimal risk, the team must construct an ethical justification statement. Which of the following statements most effectively synthesizes the required elements to justify this level of risk?
Match each component of ethical research design for studies involving elevated risk with its corresponding description or requirement.
In the ethical evaluation of a psychological study involving more than minimal risk, the research is considered _____ if the potential scientific or practical benefits are not demonstrated to be sufficiently large to outweigh the potential harm to participants.
A researcher designs a study that will temporarily cause participants significant emotional distress. Because the experimental design is highly flawed and unlikely to produce any scientifically interesting results or practical benefits, the study is still ethically justified as long as participants are fully debriefed afterward.
In studies that pose more than minimal risk to participants, researchers must ensure the study is rigorously designed to either answer a scientifically interesting question or provide clear _____ that outweigh the elevated risks.
Arrange the steps in the logical order a researcher must follow to ethically justify a study that involves greater than minimal risk to participants.
According to ethical standards in psychological research, what is required to justify a study that poses more than minimal risk, such as the potential to emotionally upset participants? State the relationship between risks and benefits, and the two specific design criteria that can satisfy this justification.
Explain why Dr. Aris's proposed study is ethically problematic under the guidelines for greater than minimal risk research, and identify the core change he must make to his study design to justify the emotional risks to the participants.
Imagine you are designing a study that involves exposing participants to a mild physiological stressor (which exceeds minimal risk) to test a new anxiety-reduction technique. Apply the ethical justification rule for elevated-risk studies to explain how you would structure the design to ensure the benefits outweigh the risks.