Peer Review, Pilot Studies, Case Studies and Ethical Issues (RM III)

?
  • Created by: asusre
  • Created on: 06-04-21 22:04
What is peer review?
Peer review is a process of quality control which ensures that research is of high quality before it is published in a scientific journal.
1 of 59
What does peer review guard against?
Peer review prevents unwarranted claims, unacceptable interpretations of the data impacted by personal opinions and deliberate fraud from being published.
2 of 59
How does peer review maintain standards?
Peer review maintains standards by improving the objectivity of research, and making sure that research is novel, interesting and relevant.
3 of 59
In what ways can research be fraudulent?
Fraudulent research can include data which has been fabricated, falsified or plagiarised.
4 of 59
Explain the process of peer review.
The report is sent to an editor, who sends it to a peer reviewer who is an expert in the field. The peer reviewer comments on whether the report is adequate and its conclusions are justified and recommends to the editor whether it should be published. If
5 of 59
What are the strengths of peer review?
Peer review maintains standards which allows university science departments to be judged by their quality. Peer review ensures that published research adds to current knowledge.
6 of 59
How can the process of peer review act as a conservative force?
Peer review can maintain the status quo as it is biased towards research that confirms existing knowledge.
7 of 59
Give an example of peer review maintaining the status quo.
Garcia and Koelling (1966) was rejected several times as its findings contradicted a principle of classical conditioning, until other researchers began to find the same effect.
8 of 59
How can psychologists' personal values bias research?
Peer review can be biased based on differences in theoretical perspectives, gender bias and institution bias.
9 of 59
Give an example of psychologists' personal values biasing research.
Bowlby's research on maternal deprivation emphasises the role of 'mothers' rather than 'parents'.
10 of 59
How is peer review biased based on research findings?
Peer review favours research where the results are positive (the null hypothesis is rejected), which ignores research where no differences are found.
11 of 59
Give one alternative to peer review and why it can be seen as superior.
Open access publishing makes research freely avaliable online, which can be seen as superior to peer review as it is a very slow process.
12 of 59
What is a pilot study?
A pilot study is a small-scale trial run of an investigation which takes place before the investigation is conducted.
13 of 59
What are the aims of piloting?
The aim of pilot studies is to allow the researcher to identify any potential issues and modify the procedure accordingly, saving time and money.
14 of 59
What is a case study?
A case study is an in-depth investigation, description or analysis of a single individual, group, institution or event.
15 of 59
Give an example of a case study of an individual.
Griffiths (1993) studied fruit machine addiction by interviewing 'David' and his mother.
16 of 59
Give an example of a case study of a group.
Imperato-McGinley et al. (1974) studied the Batista family from the Dominican Republic. 37 children in the family were born with vaginas and XY chromosomes. At puberty, their testosterone levels increased, leading to belated masculinisation and developmen
17 of 59
Give an example of a case study of an event.
A case study was conducted on the People’s Temple Full Gospel Church, a death cult from the 1970s with 900 followers, led by Reverend Tim Jones. It analysed the group behaviour and the effect of leaders (conformity and obedience).
18 of 59
What are the practical advantages of case studies?
Case studies produce uniquely rich and detailed data.
Case studies allow the researcher to investigate how a combination of factors affect an individual/group.
19 of 59
What are the practical disadvantages of case studies?
Case studies have low population validity as they have very small sample sizes.
Researchers build relationships with the subjects of their case studies, which threatens objectivity.
20 of 59
What is a ethical advantage of case studies?
Case studies allow research on rare experiences which would be unethical to recreate experimentally.
21 of 59
Give an example of a case study where it would be unethical to reproduce its conditions.
Rymer (1993) studied Genie who had been locked in a cupboard throughout childhood.
22 of 59
What are the ethical disadvantages of case studies?
Confidentiality - unique cases are easily identifiable.
Many individuals studied are not able/asked to give informed consent.
Psychological harm may be caused when an individual is tested repeatedly over years.
23 of 59
Give an example of case studies where informed consent was an issue.
Informed consent was an issue in the cases of Little Hans and HM.
24 of 59
Give an example of case studies where psychological harm was an issue.
HM was caused harm by decades of study.
David Reimer tragically committed suicide after years of study.
25 of 59
What is the BPS code of ethics?
The BPS code of ethics is a quasi-legal document produced by the British Psychological Society that instructs psychologists in the UK about what behaviour is and is not acceptable when dealing with participants.
26 of 59
What four principles are the British Psychologic Society's code of ethics based on?
The BPS code of ethics is built around four major principles: respect, competence, responsibility, and integrity.
27 of 59
How are ethical guidelines implemented?
Guidelines are implemented by ethics committees in research institutions who often use a cost-benefit approach to determine whether research proposals are ethically acceptable.
28 of 59
How will psychologists be punished for breaking ethical guidelines?
Psychologists who fail to follow ethical guidlines could be punished by losing their job or being barred from psychological research or practice.
29 of 59
Evaluate ethical guidelines.
Guidelines may absolve researchers of responsibility for borderline unethical practices: “I followed the rules so my research is acceptable.”
30 of 59
What is a cost-benefit analysis?
Cost-benefit analyses involve weighing the costs of doing the research against the benefits.
31 of 59
From which points of view can costs and benefits be judged?
Costs and benefits can be judged from the points of view of participants, a group the participant belongs to, or society as a whole.
32 of 59
Evaluate cost-benefit analysis.
It is difficult to predict costs/benefits before or even after a study. How are cost and benefits quantified and what does personal distress cost? This means they are subjective judgements.
Cost-benefit analysis may legitimise unethical practices.
33 of 59
Which study argues that cost-benefit analysis could legitimise unethical practices?
According to Baumrind (1959), cost-benefit analysis could legitimise unethical practices by judging them as acceptable, as long as the benefits are high enough.
34 of 59
What are the ethical issues?
Informed consent, deception, right to withdraw, protection from harm, privacy and confidentiality.
35 of 59
What is informed consent?
Informed consent means that participants must be given comprehensive information concerning the study’s procedures, purposes and aims, as well as their rights and their role in it, so they can make an informed decision about whether to participate.
36 of 59
How do you deal with informed consent?
Participants should be asked to sign a document/consent letter. Under 16s need to provide parental consent.
Researchers should also offer the right to withdraw.
37 of 59
What are some alternatives ways to gain consent?
Other ways of gaining consent include presumptive consent and retrospective consent.
38 of 59
What is presumptive consent?
Presumptive consent involves asking a group of people who are similar to the participants whether they would agree to take part in a study. If they agree that the study is acceptable, it is presumed that the participants would also consent.
39 of 59
What is retrospective consent?
Retrospective consent involves asking participants for their consent during debriefing, having already taken part in the study.
40 of 59
Evaluate dealing with informed consent.
Participants knowing the study’s aims may invalidate the purpose of the study.
41 of 59
Evaluate presumptive consent.
Presumptive consent may not be an informed decision as people’s expectations are different from their real experience of it.
42 of 59
What is deception?
Deception is when a participant is not told the true aims of the study (and what participation will involve) and thus cannot give truly informed consent.
43 of 59
How do you deal with deception?
The use of deception must be approved by an ethics committee using cost-benefit analysis.
Participants should be fully debriefed.
Participants should be reminded of their right to withhold data – a form of retrospective informed consent.
44 of 59
What is a debrief?
Debriefs are post-research interviews which inform participants of the true nature of the study and restore them to the state they were in at the start of the study. It can also be used to gain useful feedback about the study’s procedures.
45 of 59
Evaluate cost-benefit analyses
Cost-benefit analyses are flawed because they are subjective judgements, and the costs and benefits of a study are not always apparent.
46 of 59
Evaluate debriefs.
Debriefing cannot undo embarrassment suffered by participants.
47 of 59
What is protection from harm?
Protection from harm means that participants should not experience negative physical or psychological effects, such as physical injury, lowered self-esteem or feelings of inadequacy or embarrassment.
48 of 59
How do you deal with protection from harm?
Researchers must avoid exposing participants to risks greater than experienced in everyday life and must stop the study if harm is suspected.
Participants should be debriefed and reassured that their behaviour was typical or normal, and reminded of their
49 of 59
Evaluate dealing with protection from harm.
Harm may not be apparent at the time of the study and may be judged later with hindsight.
50 of 59
What is the right to withdraw?
Right to withdraw means that participants can stop participating in the study if they are uncomfortable in any way. They also have the right to refuse permission for the researcher to use any data they produced.
51 of 59
How do you deal with the right to withdraw?
Participants should be informed at the beginning of the study of their right to withdraw.
52 of 59
Evaluate dealing with the right to withdraw.
Participants feel pressure not to withdraw for fear of spoiling the study.
Payment at the end of study makes participants feel as though they cannot withdraw.
53 of 59
What is privacy?
Privacy means that participants have the right to control information about themselves.
54 of 59
How do you deal with privacy?
Researchers should only study people without their informed consent in public places, engaging in public behaviour.
55 of 59
Evaluate dealing with privacy.
There is no universal agreement on what constitutes a public place.
56 of 59
What is confidentiality?
Confidentiality means that participants have the right to have any personal data protected.
57 of 59
How do you deal with confidentiality?
Researchers should maintain the anonymity of the participants by not recording their names (use numbers or fake names instead) or any personal details.
During the debrief, participants should be reminded that their data will be protected.
58 of 59
Evaluate dealing with confidentiality.
It is sometimes possible to identify participants from the information provided e.g., location of a school, which means confidentiality may not be possible.
59 of 59

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

What does peer review guard against?

Back

Peer review prevents unwarranted claims, unacceptable interpretations of the data impacted by personal opinions and deliberate fraud from being published.

Card 3

Front

How does peer review maintain standards?

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

In what ways can research be fraudulent?

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

Explain the process of peer review.

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Research methods and techniques resources »