Https www youtube com watch v yr5cjyokvus

• 2nd Research Example

• Quiz #1 Debrief

• Research Ethics

• Practice

• Workplace Productivity – You are interested in the factors that influence and have relationships with employee’s productivity in the workplace.

Questions: 1. What are one (1) directional & one (1) non-directional

research hypothesis? 2. What are the IV and DV in this scenario?

a. What might be an operational definition for these variables?

3. Is this research being done experimentally or non- experimentally? a. How can you tell?

4. Is this a qualitative or quantitative research study? a. How can you tell?

Research Scenario Example #2

Conceptual Math Achievement

Trust (Workplace)

Depression

Anger

Operational Score on PSSA Math

Score on the ITA (International Trust Assessment)

Hamilton Depression Rating Scale

Yelling, hitting, etc.

Variable Definition (IV or DV)

Quiz 1

• How’d it go?

• Questions / Concerns?

• 1 Hour?

• Let’s take a look.

Types of Variables

Continuous and discrete variables

• Continuous: Measured along a continuum at any place beyond the decimal point, meaning that it can be measured in whole units or fractional units

• E.g. Olympic sprinters are timed to the nearest hundredths place (in seconds), but if the Olympic judges wanted to clock them to the nearest millionths place, they could

Types of Variables

Continuous and discrete variables

• Discrete: Measured in whole units or categories that are not distributed along a continuum

• E.g. Number of brothers and sisters you have, socioeconomic class (working class, middle class, upper class)

Recap So Far

• Empirical Research

• Experimental vs. Non-Experimental

• Quantitative vs. Qualitative

• Hypothesis vs. Research Question

• Directional

• Independent Variable vs. Dependent Variable

• Variable Definitions

• Conceptual vs. Operational

• Investigator is liable; must ensure…

– Protection from harm

– Experiments? Survey?

– Informed consent

– Privacy

– Knowledge of results

– Potential benefit

– Debriefing

• For sponsored work, University is also liable

– Institutional Review Board (IRB)

– Offering Inducements?

– Anonymity vs. Confidentiality

Ethics in Human Subject Research

IRB Approval

Ethical Use of Deception Deception in research • Can be active (deliberately untruthful) or passive

(omission of key information about a study)

• For IRB to approve the use of deception:

• The deception is necessary, and the use of nondeceptive alternatives is not feasible

• There is no reasonable expectation for causing physical pain or severe emotional distress to participants

• Participants are informed of the deception as early as possible, but no later than at the end of data collection

• Use of Placebo

• Difficult to study topics

How did we get here?

• Who?

• Prisoners, Minorities, Children, Poor, Mental Disease, Cognitive Disabilities

• What?

• Nuremberg Code

• Study of Disease Progression

• Syphilis, Plague, STD’s

• Tuskegee Alabama – US Public Health Dept.

• Jonas Salk – Infected with Influenza

• Radiation Poisoning

• Efficacy of Torture and Interrogation techniques

• Holmseburg Prison (1962 – 1965)

Ethics in Human Subject Research

Tuskegee Syphilis

• 3 Stages – 3rd Stage debilitating / disfiguring / fatal

• There was a stigma (sin) based on sexual transmission

• Oslo Study – 1920’s

• Withheld treatment for 2,000 from white patients

• 70% proceed to latent stage – Noncontagious

• 30% proceed deadly tertiary stage

• Findings – Unethical to withhold treatment

• US 1929 – Mass Syphilis treatment was viable

• 1932 (Taliaferro Clark)– Tuskegee Institute – Macon County GA

• Observe Black Men 25-60

• Underlying Racist Rationale – “Black men won’t follow instructions, So …”

• White doctors correspondance – laced with racist stereotypes

Tuskegee Syphilis

• Many men has already seen a doctor • All wanted to participate to get treatment

• Doctors Deception • Said they had been misdiagnosed with “Bad Blood” • Given other / fake treatment • Told they were being treated • Signed over rites to autopsy • Got other doctors to lie

DID NOT GIVE THEM SYPHILIS • Later added a control group

• 390 Test • 200 Control Group

• Other Benefits • Rides into Tuskegee Institute • Free Meal • Ride back • Burial Expenses

Tuskegee Syphilis

• Not a secret

• 15 different papers published between 1935 - 1957

• 1960’s – Concerns were raised by several health officials

• 1972 – Broke story in Washington Star & NY Times

• US paid 9 Million in class action lawsuit from NAACP

• 1997 – US officially apologizes

• Some got treatment – Penicillin

• Moved away

• Covert from some staff

Impact

• Increase in mistrust of Medical community

• Increase mortality in African American population

Tuskegee Syphilis

Social / Psychological Phenomena

– Wendell Johnson 1939 – “Monster Experiment”

– Create Stuttering in orphans

– Stanley Milgrim –

– Obedience Experiment 1961

– https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOYLCy5PVgM

– https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yr5cjyokVUs

– “Experimenter” Movie

– https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nYVFO5zZiM

– Philip Zimbardo

– Stanford Prison Experiment – August 1971

– https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_LKzEqlPto

– Movie

– https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XN2X72jrFk

– Abu Ghraib

Ethics in Human Subject Research

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOYLCy5PVgM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yr5cjyokVUs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nYVFO5zZiM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_LKzEqlPto
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XN2X72jrFk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XN2X72jrFk
Stanley Milgrim

1. What are the IV and DV in this scenario?

Research Scenario - Cheating

Independent

Personality

-Risk Taking - Desperation

Dependent

Incorrect Scoring

• MC Exam

• Essay Exam

Cheating

a. What might be an operational definition for these variables?

Research Scenario - Cheating

Conceptual Personality

• Risk Taking

• Desperation

Cheating

• MC Exam

• Essay Exam

Operational

Score on Myers-Briggs Personality Test

Exam not scored accurately

• MC Exam

• Essay Exam

2. Is this research being done experimentally or

non-experimentally? a. How can you tell?

Non-Experimental

3. Is this a qualitative or quantitative research

study? a. How can you tell?

Quantitative

Research Scenario - Cheating

Relational Causal

Non- directional

• Certain personality attributes are related to classroom cheating.

• Risk taking is related to incidence of cheating.

• Causal hypotheses must be directional.

Directional

• High risk taking levels are positively correlated with classroom cheating.

• Personality attributes are positively correlated with incorrect self scoring.

• High risk taking levels will lead to an increased chance of classroom cheating.

• Certain personality traits predict the likelihood of classroom cheating.

What are one (1) directional & one (1)

non-directional research hypothesis?

5. How are the following relevant in this proposal?

a. Informed consent a. Students did not consent to participate in research

b. Deception a. Information is withheld from participants

c. Confidentiality / Anonymity a. The research is not anonymous and students who cheat will be

identified

d. Risks a. Students are placed in a potentially stressful classroom situation in

which other students are cheating, and they themselves may struggle with the decision to cheat. If they do cheat, they may be labeled by instructors and other students as cheaters

e. Benefits a. It is important in society to understand the factors that promote

cheating

Research Scenario - Cheating

6. What are the possible consequences (risks and

benefits) of this research for: a. The participants

b. The instructor/researcher

c. Other students who do not participate

d. Other instructors

e. Society

Research Scenario - Cheating

Participant • Risks

• Stressful cheating situations, • Risk of being discovered as a cheater • The distress that follows when deception is revealed. • Academic consequences for those who are caught cheating • Cheaters may do better on the make-up test because of additional time spent studying.

The risks of the research should not be greater than what an individual might experience in the course of everyday life. In the present situation, taking exams, and the opportunity and occurrence of cheating are likely to be part of students' regular experiences.

• Benefits • Learning about factors that influence whether a person decides to cheat

• The satisfaction derived from participating in psychological research.

Instructor/researcher • Risks

• Being identified as an instructor who is not honest with students.

• Benefits • Learning about factors that influence whether students cheat in the most natural situation possible - the classroom.

• Ability to publish the results of the study in a scientific journal, which will enhance his or her prestige.

Risks & Benefits

Other Students who do not participate • Risks • Creation of an academic environment in which cheating seems to be easy and perhaps necessary in

order to achieve good grades.

• Benefits • Gaining information about the factors that influence cheating so that universities can take steps to

prevent cheating.

Other instructors in the university • Risks

• Environment will be created in which students do not trust instructors and students believe that cheating is easy and necessary.

• Benefit • They will learn about the factors that influence cheating so that they can take steps to decrease

cheating in their own classrooms.

Society • Risks

• Researchers develop the reputation of being dishonest and covert in their attempts to study behavior.

• Mistrust of science, particularly psychological science.

• Benefit • Greater understanding of cheating behavior in real-life settings, which may lead to possible

methods to lessen the incidence of cheating.

Risks & Benefits

7. What alternative methods exist for conducting this

research? • What are the ethical consequences of these methods (see

Step 2)?

• What are the ethical consequences of not doing this

research?

• Modify this research • Consent

• In a Laboratory

• Without deception?

• Naturalistic Research – unobtrusive observation

• Self Report Survey of cheating?

Alternate Approaches

Practice –Groups of 3-4 You want to study the relationship between THC and cognitive performance • What is the IV & DV?

• Operational Definitions?

• How could you study Experimentally? • How could you study Non-Experimentally? • Which “Method” is the only way to establish causation. • Ethical concerns with either of these methods?

You want to study whether

1. Listening to classical music improves memory 2. Wearing name tags makes people happier with their work 3. Exposure to public television improves their reading skills • What is the IV & DV? • What is Non Directional Hypothesis? • What is a Directional Hypothesis?

You want to study how employees with a learning disability feel at your company. • Why is qualitative research a better fit?

Practice –Groups of 3-4

You want to study the relationship between THC and cognitive performance

• What is the IV & DV? • Operational Definitions?

• THC – How much? How Often?

• Cognitive Performance – 10 item Problem solving test

• How could you study Experimentally? • One group is receiving THC and another Oregano. They'll be given

the same list of words to study while smoking. Recall is tested one hour later.

• How could you study Non-Experimentally? • Ask participants about THC consumption / Marijuana use

• Causation?

Practice –Groups of 3-4 You want to study whether

1. Listening to classical music improves memory • IV – Music DV – Memory

• Listening to classical music effects Memory

• Listening to classical music improves memory

2. Wearing name tags makes people happier with their work • IV – Name Tags DV – Happiness

• Wearing name tags and employee happiness are related

• Employees wearing name tags are happier

3. Exposure to public television improves their reading skills • IV – Public TV DV – Reading Skills

• Watching public TV and impacts reading skills

• Watching public TV lowers reading skills

Listening to Music Educational Benefits

• 1993 – College students improved spatial - temporal reasoning (picturing spatial pattern & fitting in space) tasks with Mozart

• Improved for 10 minutes and gone in 1 hour

• “Mozart Effect” Farce – Improves IQ

• Since – Meta Analysis

• Improvement Statistically insignificant

• Other studies suggest improvement in spatial & temporal reasoning tasks

• 2010 – Surgeons improve alertness, concentration, performance with background music

• Repeated with manual tasks

• The kind of music matters

• Could distract and interfere with cognitive performance

Practice –Groups of 3-4 You want to study how employees with a learning disability feel at your company.

• Why is qualitative research a better fit?

• Small N (# of participants)

• Purposeful sample (not random)

• Flexible measurement tools – Survey, interview, etc.

• Unsure of outcome, relationships, meaningful independent variables

• You are not interested in testing a specific hypothesis

• You aren’t interested in generalizing to other environments

Assignments

• Research Proposal Assignment

• Due by 5:30 PM on 9/21

• See .pdf on BB

Talk to me before you leave tonight if you are stuck

• Quiz #2 – Ch.2 & 3

• Due Week 5 – 9/28