Research Methods in Psychology International 9Th Edition By David G. Elmes – Test Bank

 

Instant Download – Complete Test Bank With Answers

 

 

Sample Questions Are Posted Below

 

CHAPTER 4

CONDUCTING ETHICAL RESEARCH

 

Synopsis

This chapter examines various ethical issues in human and animal research, and also considers the special problems associated with drug research. In each case the ethical principles of the American Psychological Association are enumerated.

Ethical issues with human participants are presented in the context of an experiment in which a mild, temporary depression was induced in the college-student participants. As the principles of informed consent, removal of harm, etc. are examined, relevant ethical dilemmas also are presented and discussed. For example, trying to minimize harm may lead to the violation of other ethical principles.

The discussion of animal research emphasizes humane treatment of the animal subjects. The claim is made that animal life is different from human life, which means that some studies that would be unethical to do on humans are ethical when done humanely with animals. Finally, there is a brief discussion of fraud and of monitoring ethical practices.

 

Outline

RESEARCH WITH HUMAN PARTICIPANTS

Informed Consent and Deception

Freedom to Withdraw

Protection from Harm and Debriefing

Removing Harmful Consequences

Confidentiality

APPLICATION: Ethical Research Projects

ETHICS IN RESEARCH WITH ANIMALS

Arguments against Research with Animals

Arguments for Research with Animals

Guidelines for the Use of Animals in Research

SCIENTIFIC FRAUD

MONITORING ETHICAL PRACTICES

SUMMARY

KEY CONCEPTS

EXERCISES

SUGGESTED RESOURCES

WEB RESOURCE

PSYCHOLOGY IN ACTION: Understanding and Remembering Consent Forms

 

New to This Edition

• Chapter Organization: This chapter was Chapter 12 of the preceding edition. The sample IRB proposal and accompanying laboratory resource from Langston have been deleted.

 

 

 

 

• Updated Examples: More recent examples on animal research have been added in four different places. In the application, the language on sexual preference has been changed to avoid bias. A paragraph summarizing ethical principles 8.10-8.15 has been added (copied from the newest edition of Experimental Psychology), as well as a paragraph presenting some critiques of IRBs in the section on “Monitoring Ethical Practices”.

 

• Updated & Additional References: References to APA (2004) and Swazey, Anderson, & Lewis (1993) were deleted from this edition. This edition has been updated to reflect new APA ethics reports with the addition of APA (2009). The expanded examples of animal research include references to Karkowski & Alyesh (2007), Vazire & Gosling (2003), Gosling, Kwan, & John (2003), Gosling (2008), Jones (2005), and Capitanio, Mendoza, & Baroncelli (1999). For the new section that offers some critiques of IRBs, Keith-Spiegel & Koocher (2005), Ceci & Bruck (2009), and Kim & De Vries (2009) have been inserted as references.

 

Definitions of Key Concepts

Confidentiality is an ethical responsibility of researchers (in the absence of the participant’s consent) to neither disclose personal information nor share individual data in a way that can be connected to the participant.

 

Debriefing is an ethically required process where the researcher explains the nature and purpose of his/her research to the participants.

 

Deception is a technique to control reactivity in which participants are misled about the purpose of the research. Its use can be unethical if the participants would not otherwise be willing to be involved in the study or if it can have a negative impact on the participants.

 

Fraud refers to deliberate bias by researchers, including the fabrication and selective reporting of data, and plagiarism.

 

Freedom to withdraw is the term used to indicate that the participant can discontinue their involvement in an ethical research project at any time and for any reason.

 

Informed consent refers to the ethical requirement that individuals indicate their willingness to participate only after they understand the nature of what they will be asked to do and potential risks associated with their participation.

 

An institutional review board, or IRB, is a group of individuals that insures that proposed research within their organization adheres to ethical guidelines by overseeing the protection and care of human and non-human participants.

 

Plagiarism refers to the fraudulent act of taking credit for other people’s ideas, data, or words.

 

 

Protection from harm refers to the ethical principle that a researcher will minimize the risk to participants in their studies, including, if needed, follow-up contact to resolve potential negative consequences associated with their participation.

 

Removing harmful consequences is an ethical responsibility of researchers to eliminate any known negative effects of their research on participants.

 

Replication refers to the repetition of research to verify (initially reported) findings. It represents one method for detecting fraudulent research.

 

Speciesism is a term used to refer to the devaluing of non-human animals by neglecting their rights and interests for the benefit of humans.

 

Answers to Exercises

1. Agreement or disagreement with the adjudication of the ethics committee will vary across the individual student reviewers, as well as with the selected cases from APA’s (2002) Ethics in Plain English: An Illustrative Casebook for Psychologists (2^nd Edition). Formalized answers to the exercise therefore cannot be provided here.

 

2. Student treatment of ethical issues pertaining to each study will vary. If reviewed according to current ethical guidelines, both studies represent likely violations of principles to protect participants from harm and to remove them from harmful consequences. Discussion of the Milgram obedience study (part A) also should focus on the unethical use of deception, including an evaluation of the necessity for deception in research and the requirement of researchers to minimize the risk to participants. Discussion of the Stanford Prison Experiment (part B) additionally should include the importance of a participant’s freedom to withdraw, as well as insuring the participant’s awareness of rights by taking additional steps to guarantee informed consent.

 

3. The final exercise simply instructs students to gather and review materials for protocol submission to their school’s IRB. Mention is made of looking into an online ethics class if certification completing such a class is required by the institution. A link to one online class is provided below in the section entitled Suggested Web Sites.

 

Suggestions for Discussion

Motivating Discussions through the Literature. Instructors should consider assigning several of the articles listed in the suggested readings. These provide excellent fodder for discussion of ethical issues, and they also help answer one of the exercises for this chapter. They aptly illustrate that reasonable scientists can argue over the ethicality of a piece of research.

Three additional articles that are worth assigning have several virtues; they are short, they are funny (perhaps, for the wrong reasons), and they confront important ethical issues. They are:

[1]  Koocher, G. P. (1977). Bathroom behavior and human dignity. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 35,  120-121.

 

[2]  Middlemist, R. D., Knowles, E. S., & Matter, C. F. (1976). Personal space invasions

in the lavatory:  Suggestive evidence for arousal. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 33, 541-546.

[3]  Middlemist, R. D., Knowles, E. S., & Matter, C. F. (1977). What to do and what to

report:  A reply to Koocher. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 122-124.

 

Animal Research. The authors’ position on animal experimentation may be too strong for you or your students. Although they do not come out and say it, it should be obvious that they believe that it is necessary to make a distinction between human and animal life. They try to show that to assume otherwise entails a radical restructuring of one’s beliefs and lifestyle. Perhaps you would find it worthwhile to argue against this position that human life is qualitatively different from animal life. Certainly, you could play devil’s advocate and generate a lively debate. One way to produce such a lively debate is to divide the class into two groups of students and have one group argue to abolish animal research (an animal rights position) and the other to argue in support of animal research (an animal welfare position). Assignment of students to a position will result in a few individuals arguing against their own beliefs. After being placed in such a position, many students indicate a greater appreciation for another point of view. The debate will work with any size class, but with larger classes it will be necessary to have each group choose one student to list and report the critical determinations of the group. Also, some initial time will be needed to allow each group to formulate their arguments.

Alternatively, if you strongly agree with the position of the authors, you might find it valuable to quote from several of Ann Landers’ columns (spring and fall, 1984, as well as in 1990), in which she argues for using animals in various kinds of research. The Taub affair covered in the APA Monitor for most of 1983 is another source of ideas for provocative discussions. Whatever your position, it is important to be compassionate towards the feelings of the students. Many will have strong animal rights views, and it is important to hear them out. It is also important that the students hear your side of the story as well.

 

Application: Ethical Research Projects. The application section provides several examples of projects/tasks to be evaluated with respect to adherence to ethical guidelines. Instructors could generate other examples with varying levels of risk to participants and provide the examples for cost-benefit analysis by the students. One effective way to do this in smaller, seminar formats is to instruct the students to behave as an IRB would and discuss their evaluations. In that discussion projects that do not obtain approval could require recommendations on how (or if) the protocol could be altered to become acceptable (e.g., through additional safeguards or avoidance of deception). Examples should be designed to vary with respect to the relevant ethical considerations. Alternatively, in courses with either a laboratory or a major writing component students could be asked to generate IRB protocols, perhaps for an original project they are developing, and the resulting examples could be reviewed (without names) by the class.

 

 

 

 

Psychology in Action: Understanding and Remembering Consent Forms. The Psychology in Action section points out the difficulties in obtaining truly informed consent despite having participant signatures on consent forms. This point can be reinforced by asking students to provide ways in which experimenters can further insure that participants know their rights (e.g., ask and answer questions before signing consent forms, or incorporate additional information in the consent forms). Classroom discussion on the major elements of informed consent also can be motivated by providing example consent forms that omit different pieces of critical information (e.g., project description, freedom to withdraw, debriefing, anonymity) for the class to detect.

 

Additionally, in smaller classes it may be useful to include an assignment where the students individually generate a consent form based upon a project that is defined by the instructor.

 

Experimental Dilemma

A researcher interested in the kinds of self-attributions people make about their own behavior and how those attributions govern behavior proposed the following experiment. College students will be brought into a small seminar room for testing. The experimenter will tell them that they will receive several intelligence tests–the better they do the greater the amount of credit they will receive for participation. Although the questions on the test will be extremely difficult, half the participants will be told not to worry about the difficulty because the questions were devised for potential members of Mensa (an elite group of high IQ people). The other half of the students will be told that the test is a new version of a test to be used for admission to college. When students fail on most of the questions, the researcher will assess how the participants’ attribute their failure. A second aspect of the proposed study will be to videotape the participants surreptitiously as they are completing the test. Participants will be aware that the scoring manual for the test is in a book case in the testing room, and the experimenter wants to see how many students in each group cheats. Suppose you are on a committee that reviews the ethicality of research proposals. What would you say about the ethical aspects of this research?

Answer: The student should address the issues of deception and informed consent. Many aspects of the procedure involve deception, and the researcher has not made any provision for withdrawal, protection, or debriefing. Having a videotape of a student cheating indicates that some provision for confidentiality must be undertaken.

 

Suggested Readings

Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour, & Animal Behavior Society (Ethical and

Animal Care Committees). (2002). Animal Behaviour, 63(1), 195-199.

This article from two major animal research organizations provides ethical guidelines that go beyond existing APA principles and that should aid cost-benefit analyses of research. Included are alternatives to animal research, species considerations, and legislation issues, as well as new recommendations for acquisition, care, and disposal.

 

 

 

 

 

Sales, B. D., & Folkman, S., (Eds.). (2000). Ethics in research with human participants.

Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

This text is an updated form of the commonly used APA book Ethical Principles in the Conduct of Research with Human Participants, and represents a powerful resource to current and future researchers. It summarizes the response of a 1994 APA task force to recent changes not only in research contexts, but also normative views on ethical issues. The book provides many examples of ethical problems along with recommended solutions. It also covers research management issues (e.g., special populations, IRB protocols, and authorship decisions).

 

Suggested Web Sites

http://cme.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/learning/humanparticipant-protections.asp

This site from the National Cancer Institute of the U.S. National Institutes of Health is entitled Human Participant Protections Education for Research Teams. It is a brief web tutorial on ethics that is intended for researchers. Seven modules are included in the tutorial with careful attention paid to the historical basis of ethical guidelines and concerns for disclosure, confidentiality, and informed consent. Four of these modules end in a brief quiz, and completion of all modules results in certification of course completion that can be submitted with IRB protocols. The course also represents an effective homework assignment for Methods students. (Credit could be awarded upon receiving a copy of the completion certificate). Free registration is required.

 

www.apa.org/ethics

Although the text lists this site from the APA Ethics Office as a web resource, it merits highlighting here since it includes links to several important documents that students should students. While the text does a good job of summarizing the major APA ethical guidelines for research with human and animal participants, it is often more revealing to review the original sources. Complete sets of guidelines for research involving human and animal participants that became effective June 1, 2003 are included as links in multiple formats.

 

http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb02/toc.html

This link is to the table of contents for the online version of the February 2002 (vol. 33, no. 2) issue of the APA publication Monitor on Psychology. Included on the page are links to two brief, but relevant articles by Beth Azar. Ethics at the cost of research? summarizes current tensions between IRB’s and psychologists, including recent changes in review guidelines and variability in informed consent forms for different reviewing organizations. The article also indicates APA plans to better educate IRB’s about the minimal risks to participants that typify most psychological research projects. Regulations on research with humans in flux further discusses ongoing efforts to change the operation of IRB’s. It includes not only the APA initiatives to better educate review boards, but also indicates a congressional bill under consideration entitled the “Human Research Subject Protections Act”, which would result in more strict monitoring of research practices. Also discussed are recommendations for unified review standards for publicly and privately funded research, as well as IRB accreditation.

 

 

 

http://www.wadsworth.com/psychology_d/templates/student_resources/workshops/resch_wrk.html

Two workshop links at Wadsworth’s Statistics and Research Methods Workshops site are particularly relevant to information covered in the chapter. The workshop on Ethical Issues begins by giving students an opportunity to recognize for themselves ways in which research can insure the benefits of research. Students are informed of investigator responsibilities, and the importance of assessing risks to participants (including practice with a provided research example). Issues pertaining to the use of deception are briefly reviewed, and students are asked to assert their own opinion on the appropriateness of deception. Students also are provided an opportunity to recognize how to reduce/minimize harm in a research example, as well as to practice in knowing what information to include during the informed consent process.  Also presented is a review of the basic elements of consent forms, general privacy issues in research, and how to ethically summarize results.

The workshop labeled Effective Debriefing covers the disclosure of deception during the debriefing process, as well as when and what to generally disclose. Brief mention is made of the fact that researchers can effectively ask some additional questions during debriefing to gather more information that is pertinent to their study. The workshop also discusses the importance of having a script to guarantee coverage of the necessary topics during debriefing and affords students valuable practice in generating a debriefing script from a sample study.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TESTBANK

 

MULTIPLE CHOICE

 

1. Induction of a depressive mood in participants:

a.	is unethical and should never be done.
b.	is frequently offset by subsequent induction of a happy mood
c.	does not pose a concern for researchers after participants give consent
d.	is sufficiently temporary that it should not concern the researcher

 

 

ANS:  B                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

2. According to the current APA ethical guidelines, which statement below about informed consent is true?

a.	If voice recordings are acquired without a participant’s awareness, informed consent can be obtained after the fact.
b.	Participants do not always need to be told about possible risks in advance of their participation.
c.	Participants do not need to be told how their confidentiality will be maintained.
d.	Researchers always have to obtain informed consent.

 

 

ANS:  A                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

3. One important principle advocated by the American Psychological Association is the right of informed consent, which states that the experimenter has a clear obligation to:

a.	obtain approval from a committee that judges the ethics of the proposed research before performing an experiment involving human participants
b.	balance the potential worth of the research against the potential harm to the participants prior to doing the experiment
c.	explain to the participants all salient features of the research before the experiment is done so the participants have the opportunity to decline to participate
d.	inform the participants of the results of the research prior to publication of a journal article

 

 

ANS:  C                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

MSC:  WWW

 

4. Assume that you will be participating in a study within your methods class in partial fulfillment of course requirements. Of the following, what action should you expect the researcher/instructor to do?

a.	penalize students who fail to participate
b.	offer alternative means to meet the course requirements
c.	only make participation count for “extra” credit
d.	restrict the study to one that has no risks to participants

 

 

ANS:  B                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

 

 

 

5. All of the following are consistent with current APA ethical guidelines for research with human participants except the notion that:

a.	informed consent should be obtained if the research setting is not benign
b.	the researcher should be a trained expert in the topic area
c.	confidentiality concerning the participant’s results will be maintained
d.	the researcher is obligated to undo any potential harm that comes to the participant during the study

 

 

ANS:  B                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

6. Which behavior below is the most questionable in terms of the APA ethical guidelines for research with human participants?

a.	Not obtaining informed consent for a study with minimal chance for harm, a guarantee of maintained confidentiality, and an absence of legal liability
b.	Delaying debriefing of participants until the data collection phase of a project is complete
c.	Failing to indicate deception to the participant at the time of consent
d.	Offering very large incentives in exchange for participation

 

 

ANS:  D                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

7. Experiments involving deception:

a.	probably should not be done on ethical grounds
b.	should be carefully considered, since aftercare of the participant would be impossible to obtain
c.	obligates the researcher to explain the true nature of the experiment after the participant has been tested
d.	should only be conducted with infrahuman subjects

 

 

ANS:  C                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

8. Which of the following is inconsistent with current ethical principles for research with human participants?

a.	Information about the nature of the experiment must be disclosed to participants.
b.	Each participant can withdraw from research at any time for any reason.
c.	Deception is always acceptable if it is explained to the participant later.
d.	Participant records will remain confidential even if their data is published.
e.	Researchers will protect participants from harmful conditions.

 

 

ANS:  C                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

MSC:  WWW

 

9. Choose the rarest circumstance below.

a.	Participants are given complete information about what they will be asked to do.
b.	A cover story is provided to control the reactivity of participants.
c.	Information is omitted about an important aspect of the test.
d.	Participants are told that they can end their participation without consequences.

 

 

ANS:  C                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

10. A participant who elects to withdraw from a study in progress:

a.	need not receive any compensation for their time
b.	represents a violation of their signed consent
c.	should not do so unless there is a concern for his/her own well-being
d.	can choose to do so for any reason whatsoever

 

 

ANS:  D                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

11. Of the choices below, the best example of a “willing” participant is:

a.	a prisoner given extra privileges in exchange for their participation
b.	a person enlisted in the Army who is directed to participate by a superior officer
c.	a student who is participating in partial fulfillment of course requirements
d.	a person who is responding to an advertisement for paid participation

 

 

ANS:  D                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

12. Which statement below is true regarding the removal of research participants from harmful consequences?

a.	Researchers are required to resolve potential resentment by participants.
b.	Participants must leave the lab with neither overly positive nor negative feelings.
c.	Researchers are only required to have participants sign a form saying that they feel alright to leave the laboratory.
d.	It is acceptable to detain a participant longer than scheduled to ensure safety.

 

 

ANS:  D                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

13. Which statement below is true regarding ethical practices in psychological research?

a.	Breaches of confidentiality cannot be justified.
b.	The responsibility for ethical practice belongs not only to the researcher, but also the IRB, and even the journal editor(s).
c.	Ethical decisions should never be based on practicality.
d.	Ethical violations have traditionally been a mark of good research.

 

 

ANS:  B                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

14. The view that animal research is somehow necessary for human progress has been called:

a.	racism
b.	stupidity
c.	speciesism
d.	bigotry

 

 

ANS:  C                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

MSC:  WWW

 

 

 

 

 

15. Which of the following perspectives is least likely to be endorsed by an animal-rights supporter?

a.	Animal research neglects the natural rights of other species.
b.	Animal research is dehumanizing to the scientist.
c.	Animals feel pain, as do humans, and the research inflicts suffering on animals
d.	It may be acceptable to conduct animal research if that is the only option and the outcomes of the research are expected to be extremely helpful to both humans and the animals

 

 

ANS:  D                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

 

16. Pain stimuli are used in animal research:

a.	whenever they can potentially result in a theoretical contribution to the literature
b.	in the majority of conducted studies
c.	only after substantial deliberation by both the researcher(s) and the IRB
d.	only when potential benefits at least equal the harm caused to the animal

 

 

ANS:  C                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

 

17. One particularly strong counter-argument to claims of speciesism is the fact that:

a.	harm against animal participants does not occur without IRB approval
b.	many animal rights supporters use leather goods and/or eat meat
c.	a lot of animal research directly benefits animals
d.	equal protection is generally afforded both rats and primates that participate

 

 

ANS:  C                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

 

18. Surveys and reviews of common rationales for animal research, including the extent of use of animal participants, reveal that there:

a.	is a sharp decline in professional support for animal work
b.	are decreasing numbers of animals used in research
c.	is a disagreement between APA members and undergraduate majors on the appropriateness of animal research
d.	is a majority in support of different standards of federal protection for primates and “lower” animals, such as rats

 

 

ANS:  B                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

 

19. Animal research has directly led to the development of human treatments for:

a.	depression
b.	eating disorders
c.	phobias
d.	drug addiction
e.	all of the above areas

 

 

ANS:  E                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

 

 

 

20. A researcher using animal subjects has an obligation to:

a.	engage in speciesism
b.	avoid the use of deception
c.	use only innocuous independent variables
d.	use humane treatment

 

 

ANS:  D                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

 

21. All of the following represent major APA ethical guidelines for research conducted with animals except:

a.	the guarantee to protect and remove the animal from harmful consequences.
b.	the need for a trained supervisor.
c.	the guarantee that euthanasia will be rapid and painless, if it is required.
d.	the fact that acquisition, care, and disposal of animals must be handled within the law.

 

 

ANS:  A                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

 

22. Current APA ethical guidelines concerning euthanasia of animal participants:

a.	prohibit its use
b.	do not require additional training in the employed euthanasia method
c.	require that the animal’s pain be minimized
d.	make no stipulation about the methods that can be used

 

 

ANS:  C                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

 

23. According to current APA ethical guidelines for research involving animal participants, pain and discomfort can ethically occur only in the absence of an alternative procedure and if there is a justification for the research in terms of its value on ____ grounds.

a.	scientific
b.	educational
c.	Applied
d.	all of the above

 

 

ANS:  D                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

 

24. Scientific fraud:

a.	generally does not occur with enough frequency to warrant much concern
b.	is committed each time an error is reported in the literature
c.	is a type of deliberate bias by the scientist
d.	cannot be detected by replication work

 

 

ANS:  C                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Scientific Fraud

MSC:  WWW

 

 

 

 

 

 

25. Which of the following can most accurately be described as an example of “cooking” data?

a.	a researcher repeats a previous study as closely as possible
b.	a researcher changes a few numbers to be more consistent with hypotheses
c.	a researcher “borrows” an idea from another colleague for his/her study
d.	a researcher copies the results section of an old paper into a current submission

 

 

ANS:  B                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Scientific Fraud

 

26. The case of Sir Cyril Burt, where identical correlations were obtained across studies, is discussed in your textbook as a likely example of:

a.	data fudging
b.	deliberately choosing not to report data that is incompatible with the researcher’s theoretical perspective
c.	idea plagiarism
d.	exclusion of scientific fraud via replication

 

 

ANS:  A                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Scientific Fraud

 

27. The textbook depicts the “Piltdown Man”, which was based on a 1912 report of a humanoid-like skull with an apelike jawbone (and thus, a potential find of the “missing link”), as a likely case of ____.

a.	plagiarism
b.	idea plagiarism
c.	forging data
d.	replication

 

 

ANS:  C                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Scientific Fraud

 

28. A researcher decides to do a study that closely follows a design that is suggested by a colleague, but does not include the colleague as a co-author or cite him/her for the suggestion. This situation can most accurately be described as a case of:

a.	replication
b.	idea plagiarism
c.	“cooking” data
d.	ethical behavior

 

 

ANS:  B                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Scientific Fraud

 

29. The responsibility to determine and prevent scientific fraud lies with:

a.	the individual researcher
b.	the Institutional Review Board (IRB)
c.	the granting agency
d.	all of the above

 

 

ANS:  D                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Scientific Fraud

 

 

 

 

30. Which statement below about an Institutional Review Board (IRB) is false?

a.	One member of the IRB must be from a nonscientific area.
b.	One member of the IRB must not be affiliated with the institution.
c.	Cost-benefit analyses by the IRB are not the same for studies deemed to be of minimal risk.
d.	All members of the IRB must have expertise that concerns special populations since they are often the target of research projects.

 

 

ANS:  D                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Monitoring Ethical Practices

MSC:  WWW

 

TRUE/FALSE

 

1. The ethical investigator respects the participant’s right to decline to serve in the study or to withdraw at any time, as long as the purposes of the research are not undermined.

 

ANS:  F                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

2. In some instances it is necessary and appropriate for the researcher to withhold relevant information about an experiment when obtaining consent from the participant.

 

ANS:  T                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

3. It is reasonable and standard practice to share with a participant his/her individual results during debriefing.

 

ANS:  F                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

4. One of the major goals of debriefing is simply to inform the participant about the study.

 

ANS:  T                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

5. It is critical that confidentiality regarding a participant’s performance always be maintained, even when it may conflict with another ethical principle.

 

ANS:  F                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

6. Adherence to one ethical principle rarely leads to the violation of another.

 

ANS:  F                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Research with Human Participants

 

7. One argument against using animals in research is that it is dehumanizing to the human scientist.

 

ANS:  T                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

 

 

 

 

8. The animal rights position on the sanctity of animal life is not a testable hypothesis.

 

ANS:  T                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

 

9. Animal welfare supporters want to end animal research.

 

ANS:  F                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

 

10. Pain stimuli can be ethically administered to animal research participants as long as the pain is minimized, there are no adequate alternative stimuli available, and the project has been deemed scientifically justified by the IRB.

 

ANS:  T                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Ethics in Research with Animals

 

11. Fraud is another example of inadvertent researcher bias.

 

ANS:  F                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Scientific Fraud

 

12. Scientific fraud is often detected by means of attempting to replicate the research in question.

 

ANS:  T                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Scientific Fraud

 

13. The APA annually reviews, and then publishes the resulting evaluation of, ethical complaints.

 

ANS:  T                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Scientific Fraud

 

14. Institutional review boards are an optional way that most universities use to monitor ethical practices.

 

ANS:  F                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Monitoring Ethical Practices

 

15. Most universities have special boards that judge the ethicality of proposed research.

 

ANS:  T                    PTS:   1                    REF:   Monitoring Ethical Practices

 

SHORT ANSWER

 

1. Under what circumstances might an Institutional Review Board allow an investigator to violate the principle of informed consent?

 

ANS:

Answer not provided.

 

PTS:   1

 

 

 

2. Consider the following three events: eating a radish, performing experimental surgery on a rat, and testing a new powerful drug on human babies. How do these events differ? What are the implications of differences among these for your ethical beliefs?

 

ANS:

Answer not provided.

 

PTS:   1

 

3. Provide three arguments that a researcher might use in support of animal research (in order to counter the arguments made by groups opposed to animal research).

 

ANS:

Answer not provided.

 

PTS:   1

 

4. Under what conditions is it ethically acceptable to cause an animal research participant pain or harm (including euthanasia)?

 

ANS:

Answer not provided.

 

PTS:   1

 

5. List four ethical considerations (based on APA guidelines) for the use and care on animals in psychological research.

 

ANS:

Answer not provided.

 

PTS:   1