Ethical research & Norms: a critical review

Ethical research & Norms: a critical review

Subject: Discussion Question_M03_week_03 Institution: Online University of Liverpool Programme: Master of Mental Health & Clinical Psychology Date: January 2016 Place: Kilifi, Kenya

Robert Mutsaers Abstract Whilst public trust remains an integral part of code-of-conduct practices within social psychology, professionals continue to struggle with misinterpretations of ethical obligations that undermine authority of scientific expertise, its objectivity and integrity within scientific research. Although good research seeks to create ethical balance between a moral dilemma and the possibility of improving lives of a chosen target group, underdeveloped proposals impede desired research outcomes. Through observation of both APA- and BPS standards, this discussion post seeks to evaluate sound ethical practice of research proposal #2: Examining the role of perceived gender on adolescents’ ratings (Laureate Education, 2014). Rationale: Concept & scope The submitted proposal concerns an experimental research that applies qualitative interventions in order to improve the living standards of children by further understanding impacts & nature of gender-labeling by parents. Although the research question is solid, it falls short of descriptive elaboration of the problem, exhibits research goals beyond the scope of intervention and seeks to apply conflicting methods of data acquisition. Description: The proposal does not address a specific problem that impedes the health of children through gender labeling (Laureate Education, 2014). Research question: Its single qualitative study with neutral stimulants is not clearly defined and does not cover a comparative evaluation of other research that is suggested: the title is misleading in reference to the basis of the ambitious hypotheses examination (Laureate Education, 2014). Research goal: The study is limited by qualitative method analysis and therefore, gender dependent influences on predictions and perceptions by observer cannot be measured: the study suggests to extract explanatory value from subjective interpretations and blends qualitative- and quantitative methods (Laureate Education, 2014). Research results: The study proposes to utilize a research tool (infant-image) that conflicts with gender specific-cues that are characteristic for infants: fragile; underdeveloped; uncoordinated; delicate;soft. The envisioned results do not address the research goal as to how and why adolescents allocate gender-specific-cues to a subject and how this relates to parents behavior (Laureate Education, 2014). Method & corrections Descriptive label: Male and female names of the research tools should be more distinctive and a more neutral description for “this infant” should be accommodated (APA, 2010; BPS, 2010). Duration of study: In order to secure quality of data, all interviews should be conducted on the same day or a non-disclosure agreement should be signed by participants (APA, 2010; BPS, 2010). Research rationale for participants: The rationale should be redefined since the study does not investigate how infant’s traits are detected; it studies the outcomes of assigned traits that are determined by neutral stimulants (APA, 2010; BPS, 2010).

Robert Mutsaers, Social Psychology and science, Module 02 (Week 01-04), Master Mental Health & Clinical Psychology

Incentives: The researcher’s goal should focus on motivation of participation and not on consent (APA, 2010; BPS, 2010). Conclusion The proposal requires improvement on the following aspects: (1) better and more comprehensive descriptive narrative of the problem, (2) more logical- and sound predictive outcomes and goals, (3) develop a nature and cause of behavior of gender-labeling, and (4) address the specific health issues of children that are affected by gender-stereotyping. References

American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Codes of Conduct. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/principles.pdf British Psychological Society. (2010). Code of Human Research Ethics. Retrieved from http://www.bps.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/code_of_human_research_ethics.pdf Laureate Education. (2014). Research Proposal #2: Examining the Role of Perceived Gender on Adolescent’s Ratings. Classroom Handout.

Robert Mutsaers, Social Psychology and science, Module 02 (Week 01-04), Master Mental Health & Clinical Psychology