Code of Human Research Ethics - Essay Example

 Code of Human Research Ethics Questions 1. Identify which of the following are correct descriptors of this study: a. natural experiment b. experimental study c. longitudinal study d. cross-sectional study e. Observational study. Briefly explain your answer. (10 marks) The study carried out by Alex is an observational study. This study may be so called because the data collected by Alex was predominantly through observations of the children and their mothers. He did not use any standardised scales to collect data on popularity or extraversion / introversion of either the parents of the children. Nor did he interview any of the participants. Rather, he used his own observation and that of others to help categorize the children and mothers. Thus, because all the data used came from observation of the participants’ behaviours, it may be considered an observational study. 2. Name the independent variables(s) and the dependent variable(s) in the study. (5 marks) The study had two independent variables – the temperament of the child and the temperament of the parent. Alex operationally defined temperament in terms of the observed extraversion / introversion with two levels (Introverted and Extraverted) for both the child and the mother. Thus, each participant was categorised as being either extroverted or introverted based on Alex’s observation of them. The dependent variable in the study is the popularity if the child, which Alex defined in terms of whether the child was popular or unpopular. For one of the observations, Alex took the temperament of the mother as the independent variable and the temperament of the child as the dependent variable, as he thought that the mother’s temperament could help predict that of the child. 3. Are the variables ordinal or categorical? Briefly explain your answer. (5 marks) The variables have been measured using a nominal scale of measurement and are categorical in nature. This may be observed from the manner in which Alex organises the data. He assigns participants to different categories on the two variables based on his observations; but he does not order the categories into a ranked order. For data to be ordinal, it has to be ranked as well as categorised. Since this data is not ranked, it should be considered categorical data. 4. Are there any problems with the reliability of the measures that Alex used? How could the reliability of the measures be improved? (10 marks) Alex used his own and other’s ability to observe the participants in order to collect the data. But he only used his own opinions in the end, and so did not receive any support in his judgements from other observers. He also did not inform people about what he was trying to study, so the observations that were collected from others were less considered and more casual. If the judges had been asked to be fair and consider their judgement in advance, they may have been able to provide well considered responses. Alex lost the notes from discussions with other judges; and had to rely on his knowledge of the discussions carried out and of the children. Thus, it is likely that he may have remembered some events incorrectly, or may have a mistaken recall of how a particular child or parent was categorised. Re=collecting this data would have helped support his judgements. As the data was only collected in the environment of the nursery, it is difficult to evaluate how reliably the data describes the behaviours and traits of participants in different contexts. Thus, it would have been helpful to get data from different settings (school, home, etc.) to establish if the judgements about traits should be accepted as reliable demonstrations of actual traits. 5. Are there any problems with the validity of the measures that Alex used? How could the validity of the measures be improved? (10 marks) All the observers were people who worked with the children and interacted with the parents regularly; but only in the context of the nursery. It is thus possible that the personal biases of the observers for or against a particular parent of child may be playing a role in the way they rated the participant. Alex also was invested and involved with the participants, and could also be affected by biases. It would have helped to ask a few neutral judges to observe the participants and assign categories, as these persons would not have held biases through knowledge about the participants. The variable of temperament is not a true categorical variable, meaning that different children will exhibit different levels of extraversion and introversion. But when a categorical measurement is applied to such data, it is possible that children who are actually different from each other may be clubbed together simply because they have more similarities in the researcher’s mind than differences. This would mean that the dissimilarities between participants would not be considered, thus leading to errors in drawing conclusions about the relationships between variables. 6. Briefly explain whether Tables 1–5 show correlations or contingencies. How could the data in Tables 4 and 5 be interpreted? (15 marks) The data shown in Tables 1 – 5 are contingencies. A contingency table shows the observed frequencies of occurrences with respect to different levels of two variables. Correlation of the other hand demonstrates changes in one variable relative to changes in another variable. Correlations may be calculated with data hat is ordinal, or continuous, while analysis of contingencies provides a better understanding of how categorical variables affect the frequency of an event occurring. Alex was trying to predict and correlate variables, when he started the study; but due to the manner in which he collected the data, using contingency tables helped explore the phenomena better. Tables 4 and 5 reflected the trends separately for popular and unpopular children respectively. These tables present contingencies for the interaction of the temperament of the mothers and children. The data in these tables can help in evaluating if the two variables interact differently in the two conditions. 7. With respect to the first principle of the British Psychological Society’s Code of Human Research Ethics, how adequately does this study respect the autonomy and dignity of the participants? How could this principle be better addressed? (10 marks) This study does not really respect the autonomy and self-determination of participants, as it does not inform the participants that they would be observed. Although children may not be always deemed capable of making an informed choice about inclusion in the study; it is necessary to speak to their parents at the very least. Some parents may have chosen not be included in the study, and they were not offered this choice. This issue could have been addressed by communicating the intention of the study to the parents and through them to the children. Data could be collected from those participants who were interesting in being included, and then it would also have been possible to ensure that no extraneous variables were affecting the data being collected. The relevant demographic details about the participants (for example, the gender, the amount of time the child had been attending the nursery, and the age) have not been considered, not has their effect of the variables under study been examined. This does a disservice to the participants. There is also no indication that the participants were afforded any privacy and whether there were given confidentiality by Alex. If this was not done, it would be unethical on his part. This could have been rectified by providing the participants with information about the study, collecting relevant demographic information and removing any information that allowed the participants to be identified. 8. With respect to the second principle of the British Psychological Society’s Code of Human Research Ethics, how adequate is the scientific value of the study? Explain how any flaws could be corrected. (10 marks) This study has an interesting premise, but it is affected by a number of problems that reduce its value by affecting the reliability and validity of the findings. The first is that bias could have affected the categorisation by Alex and the other judges. He could have chosen to collect data using standardized instruments to reduce the chances of error. Secondly, all possible sources of error were not contained. For example, the father’s temperament has an equal chance of predicting the child’s temperament, but this data was not considered at all. Thus, the findings with respect to the mother’s temperament and that of her child would be suspect as all factors have not been accounted for. Thirdly, the only place the child was observed was at the nursery; and factors particular to the place may affect the child’s behaviour there. This was also not considered; and thus, data on both temperament and popularity of the child may only be valid in the particular context of the nursery. Thus, it necessary to understand that the data collected is specific to this particular context. 9. With respect to the fourth principle of the British Psychological Society’s Code of Human Research Ethics, has harm been minimised and benefit maximised in the study? How could this principle be better addressed? (10 marks) On the whole, there is very little chance of harm to either the parents or the children in this study, as the data collected was based on observation of already occurring events, and no individual was exposed to any situation simply as part of the study. The one concern that may be raised is that when the other judges were asked to consider what child was popular and what child was not popular; it may have led to the development of some biases in their mind with respect to some of the children. As these judges work with the children every day, the biases they may develop and the resulting expectations that they may have from the children could affect the experiences of the children. Results of such studies can only be helpful in teaching and caring for children, so that careers and teachers can be aware of how different children are perceived by their peers. But the participants were not made aware of the study, and if they were to find out in an indirect manner, it may affect them emotionally. Thus, it would have been better if Alex had informed the participants about the study and taken consent. Also, conducting this study is beneficial to the participants. It would be possible to reduce harm by informing the judges about the purpose of the study, and encouraging them to use their insights to actively help the children. Another possibility is to take ratings from impartial third-party observers who do not interact with the children again. 10. Discuss the benefits and weaknesses of using experimental versus non-experimental methods to research the issues that Alex has explored in this study. (15 marks) An experimental study allows the researcher to control events and observations so that only data that is relevant to the variables is collected, and data from confounding variables does not affect the analysis. In the present context, an experimental design would have helped identify any causal relationship shared by the variables. But experimental designs cannot be used in all studies. A true experimental design requires the possibility of assigning participants randomly to different categories. Temperament is a developed trait, and people cannot be assigned to being extraverted or introverted at the researcher’s choice. The other variable being studied is the popularity of the individual, this is a social variable, and cannot be controlled experimentally either. With variables like traits and popularity, the researcher is required to select participants based on the categories that they already belong to. When studying social or personality variable, it is also not possible to control all the factors that can affect the way a person behaves. A lot of factors affect the development of personality traits, and often it is difficult to identify them all, let alone control them. Thus, a quasi-experimental or a non-experimental design is better suited to studying such variables. References British Psychological Society. (2010). Code of Human Research Ethics, Leicester, British Psychological Society. Coyle, A. (1995) ‘Discourse Analysis’, in Breakwell, G. M., Hammond, S. and FifeSchaw, C. (eds) Research Methods in Psychology, pp. 243–58, London, Sage. Harris, P. (2002, 2nd edn) Designing and Reporting Experiments in Psychology, Maidenhead, Open University Press. Hogan, D. (2005) ‘Researching ‘‘the child’’ in developmental psychology’, in Greene, S. and Hogan, D. (eds) Researching Children’s Experience: approaches and methods, p. 22–41, London, Sage. Read More