Learn Before
Justifying Greater Than Minimal Risk Research
When a study poses more than minimal risk, such as having the potential to emotionally upset participants, it requires correspondingly greater benefits to be ethically justified. In such cases, it is crucial that the research is rigorously designed to either answer a scientifically interesting question or provide clear practical implications that outweigh the elevated risks.
0
1
Tags
KPU
Research Methods in Psychology - 4th American Edition @ KPU
Related
Justifying Greater Than Minimal Risk Research
What is the primary characteristic that classifies a study as 'greater than minimal risk' research?
What type of Institutional Review Board (IRB) review is required for a research study that exposes participants to risks exceeding those encountered in daily life?
In psychological research, a study is categorized as 'greater than minimal risk' if the potential for participant harm is no higher than the risks typically encountered in daily life or during routine examinations.
Psychological research studies must be categorized according to the potential level of risk to participants. Match each of the following research scenarios to the most appropriate description of its risk status and review requirement.
A researcher proposes a study where participants are told they have a serious, undiagnosed personality disorder to observe their reaction to distressing medical information. Arrange the logical steps in the correct order to analyze why this study is categorized as 'greater than minimal risk' and how it must be reviewed.
Suppose you are tasked with designing a psychological study to investigate the impact of extreme social isolation. Which of the following research protocols would you construct if your specific objective is to develop 'Greater Than Minimal Risk Research' that necessitates a rigorous, full-board review by the Institutional Review Board (IRB)?
Research protocols classified as 'greater than minimal risk' are eligible for expedited review by a single Institutional Review Board (IRB) member.
In psychological research, studies are classified based on their risk level to protect human participants. Match each core characteristic of a study categorized as 'greater than minimal risk' with its correct description.
In the process of evaluating a research proposal that involves deceiving participants into believing they have failed a high-stakes competency exam, the Institutional Review Board (IRB) concludes that the potential for psychological harm is more significant than the risks encountered in a typical day. By making this judgment, the IRB categorizes the study as _____ than minimal risk research.
An IRB evaluates a study simulating severe public embarrassment to see if the scientific benefits justify the risks. Since the potential psychological distress is more than minor and temporary, they judge the protocol as greater than minimal risk, meaning it must undergo a comprehensive review by the _____.
Define 'greater than minimal risk research' and explain the specific administrative process its protocol must undergo for IRB approval compared to exempt or expedited reviews.
Based on the rules governing research risk, explain why Dr. Aris's request for an expedited review must be denied, and explain the administrative pathway this protocol must follow instead.
A psychology department plans to run a study where participants are exposed to loud, unpleasant noises to test their physiological stress responses, which exceeds the sensory experiences of their typical day. Applying risk-level standards, what category of risk does this study fall under, and what level of IRB review is required?
Learn After
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.