Ethical Considerations in Psychological Research Paper

Ethical Considerations in Psychological Research Paper

Ethical Considerations in Psychological Research Paper

            Ethics can be described as the correct rule of conduct crucial when carrying out a study. The researcher has the moral responsibility of ensuring that all the study participants are protected from harm. Some of the key ethical principles that must be observed when conducting psychological research studies include informed consent, confidentiality, deception, respect for participants, withdrawal, and debriefing (Ross et al., 2018). Ethical considerations during psychological research can further be categorized into three main areas, such as planning the study, the welfare and status of participants, and interpretation of study findings. In this discussion, the ethical concerns of three diverse psychological research studies have been analyzed.

BUY A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE ON; Ethical Considerations in Psychological Research Paper

            In the first article, Haslam & Reicher (2012), reports on the psychology of tyranny, promoting the readers’ understanding of the concept based on classic studies conducted and published from the 1960s to 1970s. In this article, the authors have ensured to provide a list of references acknowledging their source of information, hence observing ethical principles of integrity. The article is also plagiarism free showing the originality of the work, with no data falsification. No direct participants were utilized in this study, which explains the lack of informed consent.

            In the second article, Larsen (1974), tries to replicate the Asch experiment which was focused on demonstrating the tendency of study participants to conform when subjected to the social pressure of an undisputed majority. The original experiment was conducted in the 1950s and is considered a classical experiment in social psychology. It was ethically necessary for the researcher to acknowledge the actual results of the previous study, before comparing them to the present study results, without plagiarism or data falsification. Consequently, since the study utilized 24 participants, written informed consent for all the participants was signed before the experiment started. The participants were adequately informed about the study and its impact before they were allowed to decide whether or not to take part in the research. The participants were also assigned into random groups, and their identity blinded to uphold their privacy and confidentiality rights. Participants were also free to withdraw from the experiment at any time, for as long as they inform the research team leader.

            In the final article, Mischel et al. (2010) reviewed the main findings reported from longitudinal studies and earlier delay-of-gratification studies that were focused on evaluating the attention control and cognitive appraisal strategies that underlie their ability to delay gratification. The researchers have mentioned all the tests that were previously conducted and acknowledged the names of the researchers responsible for the reported results. A list of references of all the studies that contributed to knowledge development has also been provided at the end of the article. Since this study mainly affects the interpretation of the results of previous studies, the researchers needed to ensure that there were no incidences of data falsification or plagiarism noted.

Conclusion/Summary

            In all three articles that were analyzed, it was evident that the researchers adhered to ethical principles, hence ensuring that the welfare, dignity, and rights of the study participants were protected. However, the ethical considerations are quite different depending on the type of methodology being used. For instance, principles of informed consent and debriefing were only seen in the experimental study, while plagiarism and data falsification were considered in the other studies that focused on past experiments. Generally, researchers are required to provide original work, while observing all the ethical principles to determine the validity of the study.

References

Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, Stephen. D. (2012). Contesting the “Nature” Of Conformity: What Milgram and Zimbardo’s Studies Really Show. PLoS Biology, 10(11), e1001426. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001426

‌Larsen, K. S. (1974). Conformity in the Asch Experiment. The Journal of Social Psychology, 94(2), 303–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1974.9923224

Mischel, W., Ayduk, O., Berman, M. G., Casey, B. J., Gotlib, I. H., Jonides, J., Kross, E., Teslovich, T., Wilson, N. L., Zayas, V., & Shoda, Y. (2010). “Willpower” over the life span: decomposing self-regulation. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 6(2), 252–256. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsq081

Ross, M. W., Iguchi, M. Y., & Panicker, S. (2018). Ethical aspects of data sharing and research participant protections. American Psychologist, 73(2), 138–145. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000240

BUY A CUSTOM PAPER HERE ON; Ethical Considerations in Psychological Research Paper

Researchers must protect participants and be aware of appropriate methods for obtaining information. What ethical considerations are important to research? In about 2 pages, write an analysis of the ethical concerns in the 3 diverse psychological research studies below. Be sure to include a paragraph of overall ethical consideration.

This paper should be 2-3 pages in length and use APA formatting (cover page, paper body formatting, citations, and references: see Rasmussen’s APA guide in the Resources tab, or by clicking here. Prior to submitting your paper, be sure you proofread your work to check your spelling and grammar. If you use any outside sources, please cite those sources in APA citation format.

Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. D. (2012). Contesting the ‘nature’ of conformity: What Milgram and Zimbardo’s studies really show. Plos Biology, 10(11), doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001426

Larsen, K. S. (1974). Conformity in the Asch experiment. The Journal Of Social Psychology, 94(2), 303-304. doi:10.1080/00224545.1974.9923224

Mischel, W., Ayduk, O., Berman, M. G., Casey, B. J., Gotlib, I. H., Jonides, J., & … Shoda, Y. (2011). ‘Willpower’ over the life span: Decomposing self-regulation. Social Cognitive And Affective Neuroscience, 6(2), 252-256. doi:10.1093/scan/nsq081