Module 1 Introduction and Method, Ethical Standards PDF

C-PSYM415 Research in Psychology II Module 1: Review of IM and Research Ethics Topic 1: Review of Introduction and Method The Introduction Section The Introduction section outlines the problem/topic being investigated. Past research and theories relevant to the problem are described in detail. Th...

C-PSYM415 Research in Psychology II Module 1: Review of IM and Research Ethics Topic 1: Review of Introduction and Method The Introduction Section The Introduction section outlines the problem/topic being investigated. Past research and theories relevant to the problem are described in detail. The specific expectations of the researcher are noted, often as formal hypotheses. In other words, the investigator introduces the research in a logical format that shows how past research and theory are connected to the current research problem and the expected results. Here are the common parts of an introduction: 1. General Introduction In a few sentences or paragraphs, the researcher describes the topic and why this problem is important and deserves new research. 2. RRL/Relevant literature Only sources that are directly relevant to the research question are required, and only the relevant sections of these sources are discussed. The researcher is expected to identify and cite the important points along the way, but overly detailed descriptions are discouraged. The literature review should not be an article-by-article description of one study after another; instead, the articles should be presented in an integrated manner. The literature review should provide a rationale for the study. It takes one’s readers down a logical path that leads to the research question. 3. Specific problem, hypothesis, or question The researcher is expected to state the problem or purpose of the study and clearly define the relevant variables. 4. Research strategy The researcher is to explain the strategy that was used to evaluate the hypothesis or to obtain an answer to the research question. Afterwards, the researcher should outline the methodology used for the study (the details of which are provided in the next section of the report, the method section). At this point, the researcher should simply provide a snapshot of how the study was conducted so that readers are prepared for the upcoming details. The researcher must also explain how the research strategy provides the information necessary to address your hypothesis or research question The Method Section The method section provides a relatively detailed description of exactly how the variables were defined and measured and how the research study was conducted. Other researchers should be able to read your method section and obtain enough information to determine whether the research strategy adequately addresses the research question. It also allows other researchers to duplicate all of the essential elements of the study. The method section is divided into subsections, with the number of subsections determined by the author and dependent on the complexity of the research design. Here are the main parts of the method section: 1. Design Sometimes, the first subsection presents an overview of the design to prepare the reader for the material that follows. 2. Participants It is customary to report (1) the number of participants, (2) eligibility and exclusion criteria, (3) basic demographic characteristics of the group, including age, gender and ethnicity, and (4) any other characteristics relevant to the study (for example, IQ or psychopathology diagnosis). Were they male or female, or were both sexes used? What was the average age? How many participants were included? If the study used human participants, some mention of how participants were recruited for the study would be needed. 3. Procedure The procedure subsection provides a description of the step-by-step process used to complete the study. The details expected in this subsection include but are not limited to the following: (1) a description of selection procedures, (2) the settings and locations in which data were collected, (3) any payments made to participants, (4) ethical standards met and safety-monitoring procedures, (5) any methods used to divide or assign participants into groups or conditions, (6) a description of instructions given to participants, (7) any experimental manipulation or intervention, and (8) any apparatus or materials that were used. Topic 2: Research Ethics Research Ethics concerns the responsibility of researchers to be honest and respectful to all individuals who are affected by their research studies or their reports of the studies’ results. Researchers are usually governed by a set of ethical guidelines that assist them to make proper decisions and choose proper actions. In psychological research, the American Psychological Association (APA) maintains a set of ethical principles for research (APA, 2002). In research, ethical issues must be considered at each step in the research process. Ethical principles dictate (1) what measurement techniques may be used for certain individuals and certain behaviors, (2) how researchers select individuals to participate in studies, (3) which research strategies may be used with certain populations and behaviors, (4) which research designs may be used with certain populations and behaviors, (5) how studies may be carried out with individuals, (6) how data are analyzed, and, finally, (7) how results are reported. The issue of ethics is an overriding one and must be kept in mind at each step of the research process when you make decisions. Scientists’ exploration is bounded by ethical constraints. The Basic Categories of Ethical Responsibility Researchers have two basic categories of ethical responsibility: (1) responsibility to ensure the welfare and dignity of the individuals, both human and non- human, who participate in their research studies, and (2) responsibility to ensure that public reports of their research are accurate and honest. APA Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct Ethical Guidelines for the Use and Treatment of Human Participants in Research Take note: The principle of informed consent requires the investigator to provide all available information about a study so that an individual can make a rational, informed decision to participate in the study. A consent form contains a statement of all the elements of informed consent and a line for the participant’s and/or guardian’s signature. The form is provided before the study so that the potential participants have all the information they need to make an informed decision regarding participation. Consent forms vary according to the specifics of the study but typically contain some common elements. Take note: Deception occurs when a researcher purposefully withholds information or misleads participants with regard to information about a study. There are two forms of deception: passive and active. Passive deception (or omission) is the withholding or omitting of information; the researcher intentionally does not tell participants some information about the study. Active deception (or commission) is the presenting of misinformation about the study to participants. The most common form of active deception is misleading participants about the specific purpose of the study. A debriefing is a post-experimental explanation of the purpose of a study that is given to a participant, especially if deception was used. Confidentiality is the practice of keeping strictly secret and private the information or measurements obtained from an individual during a research study. Anonymity is the practice of ensuring that an individual’s name is not directly associated with the information or measurements obtained from that individual. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) is a committee that examines all proposed research with respect to its treatment of human participants. IRB approval must be obtained before any research is conducted with human participants. The Use of Animals in Research Ethical Issues and Scientific Integrity To make the research public, the investigator prepares a report describing what was done, what was found, and how the findings were interpreted. Two ethical issues that can arise from this point, fraud and plagiarism. APA ethical standards relate to these issues: 8.10 Reporting of Research a. Psychologists do not fabricate data. (See also Standard 5.01, Avoidance of False or Deceptive Statements—Psychologists do not make false, deceptive, or fraudulent statements concerning their publications or research findings.) b. If psychologists discover significant errors in their published data, they take reasonable steps to correct such errors in a correction, retraction, erratum, or other appropriate publication means. 8.11 Plagiarism a. Psychologists do not present portions of another’s work or data as their own, even if the other work or data source is cited occasionally. Correction A correction may also be called an erratum. This process involves making changes to one’s published article/study to ensure that it is free of errors. Corrections to minor typographical errors in the digital copy of an article do not require a correction notice. However, a correction notice is required for major errors, such as rearranging the order of authorship, adding information to the author note, replacing an entry in the reference list, and altering data or results. The first step in correcting an article is to inform the editor and the publisher, who will determine whether a formal correction is needed. The author of the article is responsible for writing the correction notice, which should indicate what the error was, what the correct information is, and whether some or all versions of the original article have been corrected. Afterwards, the correction notice is created using the journal’s template, and it is posted online. Retraction Retraction refers to the act of removing an article from the scientific record after its publication. In this case, the retraction notice will be posted. A retraction notice will be issued if a major error invalidates the conclusions in the article or if research misconduct or publication misconduct has taken place. Retraction will be required in these cases: Honest errors (e.g., unintentional use of incorrect data or unintentional duplicate publication) Ethical misconduct (e.g., fraudulent data and plagiarism) Authorship issues (e.g., listing an author without their consent) Peer review fraud (e.g., submission of fraudulent highly positive peer review reports) Copyright issues Non-disclosure of conflicts of interests Ethics violations Fraud in Science Error Versus Fraud An error is an honest mistake that occurs in the research process. There are, unfortunately, many opportunities for errors to be made in research; for example, in collecting data, scoring measures, entering data into the computer, or in publication typesetting. Researchers are only human, and humans make mistakes. However, it is the investigator’s responsibility to check and double-check the data to minimize the risk of errors. Fraud, on the other hand, is an explicit effort to falsify or misrepresent data. If a researcher makes up or changes data to make it support the hypothesis, this constitutes fraud. Why Is Fraud in Science Committed? The primary cause of fraud is the competitive nature of an academic career. You have probably heard the saying, “Publish or perish.” There is strong pressure on researchers to have their research published. Another possible motivator is a researcher’s exceedingly high need for success and the admiration that comes along with it. Safeguards Against Fraud First, researchers know that other scientists are going to read their reports and conduct further studies, including replications. The process of repeating a previous study, step by step, allows a researcher to verify the results. A second safeguard against fraud is peer review, which takes place when a researcher submits a research article for publication. In a typical peer review process, the editor of the journal and a few experts in the field review the paper in extreme detail. The consequences of being found guilty of fraud probably keep many researchers honest. If it is concluded that a researcher’s data are fraudulent, a number of penalties can result, including suspension or firing from a job, removal of a degree granted, cancellation of funding for research, and forced return of monies paid from grants. Plagiarism To present someone else’s ideas or words as your own is to commit plagiarism. Plagiarism, like fraud, is a serious breach of ethics. Reference citations (giving others credit when credit is due) must be included in your paper whenever someone else’s ideas or work has influenced your thinking and writing. Whenever you use direct quotations or even paraphrase someone else’s work, you need to give them credit. If an idea or information you include in a paper is not originally yours, you must cite the source. For students, the penalties for plagiarism may include receipt of a failing grade on the paper or in the course, and expulsion from the institution. The following guidelines can help prevent you from plagiarizing (Myers & Hansen, 2012). 1. Take complete notes, including complete citation of the source. (For articles, include author’s name, year of publication, title of the article, journal name, volume number, and page numbers. For books, also include the publisher’s name and city.)  2. Within your paper, identify the source of any ideas, words, or information that are not your own. 3. Identify any direct quotes by quotation marks at the beginning and end of the quotes, and indicate where you got them. 4. Be careful about paraphrasing (restating someone else’s words). It is greatly tempting to lift whole phrases or catchy words from another source. Use your own words instead, or use direct quotes. Be sure to give credit to your sources. 5. Include a complete list of references at the end of the paper. References should include all the information listed in Item 1. 6. If in doubt about whether a citation is necessary, cite the source. You will do no harm by being especially cautious. Take note: Fraud is the explicit effort of a researcher to falsify or misrepresent data. Replication is repetition of a research study using the same basic procedures used in the original. Either the replication supports the original study by duplicating the original results, or it casts doubt on the original study by demonstrating that the original result is not easily repeated. Plagiarism is the representation of someone else’s ideas or words as one’s own, and it is unethical. The Role of DLSU-D University Research Office The URO is a service unit that coordinates the research activities of the university. The office primarily provides the support environment for educational research projects and research skills development. Among the tasks of the URO is to keep the faculty and students on trac in meeting the institutional strategic goals in terms of producing relevant and publishable research that is groundbreaking and useful to the community and society as a whole. IMPT: Institutional approval to conduct research from the URO thru the Ethics Research Committee headed by Mr. Rolando B. Barrameda (CSD) as the Chair, DLSU-D Ethics Review Committee (DERC). Forms to secure and accomplish to get the approval of the ERC: 1. Assessment Checklist for Initial Ethics Review by CRC https://dlsudphl- my.sharepoint.com/:b:/g/personal/ddmerais_dlsud_edu_ph/EfFLo- AFFM1CqSKK3FZdkdUB5XTwMajgQZtk5Sm0Q76GXg?e=v1cru3  2. Informed Consent Application Form (ICAF) For primary investigator https://dlsudphl- my.sharepoint.com/:w:/g/personal/ddmerais_dlsud_edu_ph/EQkts1xWtu1Igq8_ nHd7p0gBsFTf6_22PAta1kMvatOiWA?e=MBlpkS 3. Informed Consent Form (English) https://dlsudphl- my.sharepoint.com/:w:/g/personal/ddmerais_dlsud_edu_ph/EfaMZbfS9eVOoin _AYyxdzsBWUmyq51nP7Nr0a6ziclKPw?e=vIBgCS 4. Informed Consent Form (Tagalog) https://dlsudphl- my.sharepoint.com/:w:/g/personal/ddmerais_dlsud_edu_ph/ERTTJY5CoutKgdKB HrBhnocBphybuDyCbYKTTx4P3bQIUw?e=idRjKH Forms can also be secured at: DLSU-D Ethics Review Application Form https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScKPxKBMpo1fPN0PFAnFuI8gjXSrePU4R7i2Vnta 9L__OVvrw/viewform?fbclid=IwAR2iV-UzGIb6rk7o4JZuOvxQK0JK- vYQTmSUE5XUriOdITroDM9Gmkp1ytk8 References: American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. https://www.apa.org/ethics/code Corrections, retractions, and updates after publication: Taylor & Francis journal article correction and retraction policy. (n.d.). Author Services Supporting Taylor & Francis authors. https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/publishing-your- research/after-publication/corrections-to-published-articles/ Charlesworth Author Services. (2020, September 16). All about article retraction in academic publishing. https://www.cwauthors.com/article/What-is-article- retraction-in-academic- publishing#:~:text=Retraction%20is%20removing%20an%20article,which%20occu rs%20prior%20to%20publication. Cozby, P. C., & Bates, S. C. (2015). Methods in behavioral research (12th ed. International edition. [McGraw-Hill international edition. International student edition]). McGraw- Hill Education. Gravetter, F. J., & Forzano L.B. (2018). Understanding research methods for the behavioral sciences (6th ed.). Cengage Learning Asia. Myers, A., & Hansen, C. (2012). Experimental psychology (7th ed.). Cengage Learning Asia. Prepared by: Dan Albert D. Merais Roslin M. De Ala Professor, Psychology Department Research in Psychology II, Second Semester S