PSYC 226 Ch 4, 2.6.12

PSYC 226 Ch 4, 2.6.12 - Research Ethics Chapter 4 Chapter 4...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Research Ethics Chapter 4 Chapter 4 PSYC 226 Institutional Review Board (IRB) Institutional Required at every institution or agency where Research is conducted Government funding is received IRB IRB Committee of scientists and non­scientists Review study proposal Approve Revise Reject IRB IRB Basic review criteria 1. Minimal risk to participants 2. Reasonable risk in relation to benefits IRB might require PI to justify risky parts of procedure, or use different procedures Benefits to participants Benefits to society Benefits to scientific community 3. Equitable selection Study does not discriminate against people or exploit people IRB IRB Basic Review Criteria 4. Informed consent 5. Documentation of informed consent IRB decides if written consent is needed 6. Data monitoring Everyday language Readability Statement about withdrawal without penalty Keeping track of data to see if unexpected harm or risks develop 7. Privacy and confidentiality Protecting the privacy of participants’ information IRB IRB 3 types of reviews: Exempt: research with no potential risks to adult participants Expedited: research with minimal risk to participants Exempt from informed consent, reviewed by IRB chair Verbal consent required, reviewed by several IRB members Full review: research with greater risk potential Requires PI to appear before the board Reviewed by full IRB Research that includes special populations, a new treatment or intervention, deception, etc. Ethics and Non-human subjects Ethics Debate over use of animals in research Reasons for use of these subjects: Understanding different animals Understanding humans via animal testing Conducting research we cannot conduct with humans Guidelines for Research with Non-human Subjects Non-human Regulated by federal government (Public Health Service or PHS) IACUC: Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee U.S. Dept. of Agriculture State agency guidelines Discipline guidelines E.g. APA guidelines for psychological research APA Guidelines for Research with Non-human Subjects Non-human Comply with relevant federal, state, and local laws, as well as professional standards, when acquiring, using, caring for, and disposing of animal subjects Trained psychologists supervise treatment of animals and ensure health and humane treatment of all animal subjects Psychologists ensure that all supervisees are properly trained to care for and handle the animal subjects APA Guidelines for Research with Non-human Subjects Non-human Minimize discomfort, illness, infection, and pain of all animal subjects Using procedures that cause pain, stress, or privation occurs only when another procedure is unavailable and the goal is justified by some scientific, applied, or educational value Surgical procedures on animal subjects are performed using appropriate anesthesia, and techniques are used to minimize infection and pain during and after surgery When an animal subject’s must be terminated, psychologists work quickly, minimize pain, and use accepted procedures Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and Non­human subjects version of IRB Purpose: to protect subjects and ensure adherence to ethical codes Researchers submit proposals and must receive approval from IACUC before conducting research Committee must include at least 1 veterinarian 1 scientist experienced in animal research 1 member of the public not tied to the research institution Ethical Issues and Scientific Integrity Scientific 2 main issues 1. Fraud 2. Plagiarism Fraud Fraud APA standards Psychologists do not fabricate data If psychologists notice errors in their published data, they take appropriate steps to correct it in print Fraud Fraud Note the difference between an error and fraud Error: an honest mistake Fraud: an explicit effort to falsify or misrepresent data Why do scientists commit research fraud? Competitive nature of science and academic careers Significant findings make publication more likely Desire for recognition or admiration Fraud Fraud Safeguards Replication of results Peer review process for publications Consequences of getting caught Suspension/firing from job Loss of grant funding Giving back grant funding Your personal and professional reputations may never recover Plagiarism Plagiarism APA standards Psychologists do not present others’ work or data as their own Even if the work is cited from time to time Plagiarism Plagiarism Any time an idea or thought is not your own, you must cite it! Applies to students and researchers Can have serious consequences Failing grade on assignment or for class Consequences similar to those for fraud Plagiarism Plagiarism Range of behaviors included “Recycling” your own work Using someone else’s concepts without realizing it and citing the work Taking someone else’s entire paper and presenting it as your own Plagiarism Plagiarism Preventing plagiarism Take notes as you read articles and include the citation In your paper, cite any ideas or information that are not your own Use “” for direct quotes Not used frequently When paraphrasing, be careful to not to lift direct quotes from the original work Include an accurate reference list If you are not sure about what to do, cite! ...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 02/20/2012 for the course PYSC 226 taught by Professor Levens during the Spring '09 term at South Carolina.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online