Ethics In Research

Write a 5–7-page assessment in which you examine the controversy related to research and ethics in the field of social psychology.

It is essential to be able to critically analyze the research methods used in studies, in order to weigh the validity of the conclusions or recommendations.

Suggested Resources

The following optional resources are provided to support you in completing the assessment or to provide a helpful context. For additional resources, refer to the Research Resources and Supplemental Resources in the left navigation menu of your courseroom.

FMG Video

Click the following link to view a video purchased through Films Media Group for use in this Capella course. Any distribution of video content or associated links is prohibited.

• Pressure to Conform |  Transcript

Library Resources

The following e-books or articles from the Capella University Library are linked directly in this course. Note: Some of the articles listed are fairly old and are included here because they are considered seminal works in the field.

• Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63(3), 575–582.
• Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66(1), 3–11.
• Becker-Blease, K. A., & Freyd, J. J. (2006). Research participants telling the truth about their lives: The ethics of asking and not asking about abuse. American Psychologist, 61(3), 218–226.
• Benham, B. (2008). The ubiquity of deception and the ethics of deceptive research. Bioethics, 22(3), 147–156.
• Boynton, M. H., Portnoy, D. B., & Johnson, B. T. (2013). Exploring the ethics and psychological impact of deception in psychological research. IRB: Ethics & Human Research, 35(2), 7–13.Crano, W. D. (2000). Milestones in the psychological analysis of social influence. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4(1), 68–80.
• Buckle, J. L., Dwyer, S. C., & Jackson, M. (2010). Qualitative bereavement research: Incongruity between the perspectives of participants and research ethics boards. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 13(2), 111–125.
• Guadagno, R. E., Muscanell, N. L., Rice, L. M., & Roberts, N. (2013). Social influence online: The impact of social validation and likability on compliance. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 2(1), 51–60.
• Haney, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1998). The past and future of U.S. prison policy: Twenty-five years after the Stanford Prison Experiment. American Psychologist, 53(7), 709–727.
• Heerdink, M. W., van Kleef, G. A., Homan, A. C., & Fischer, A. H. (2013). On the social influence of emotions in groups: Interpersonal effects of anger and happiness on conformity versus deviance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(2), 262–284.
• Horcajo, J., Petty, R. E., & Briñol, P. (2010). The effects of majority versus minority source status on persuasion: A self-validation analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(3), 498–512.
• Juritzen, T. I., Grimen, H., & Heggen, K. (2011). Protecting vulnerable research participants: A Foucault-inspired analysis of ethics committees. Nursing Ethics, 18(5), 640–650.
• McDonald, K. E., Kidney, C. A., & Patka, M. (2013). "You need to let your voice be heard": Research participants' views on research. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 57(3), 216–225.
• Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371–378.
• Milgram, S. (1964). Group pressure and action against a person. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 69(2), 137–143.
• Milgram, S. (1965). Liberating effects of group pressure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(2), 127–134.
• Pascual-Leone, A., Singh, T., & Scoboria, A. (2010). Using deception ethically: Practical research guidelines for researchers and reviewers. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 51(4), 241–248.
• Zimbardo, P. G. (1974). On 'obedience to authority'. American Psychologist, 29(7), 566–567.
• Voisin, D., & Fointiat, V. (2013). Reduction in cognitive dissonance according to normative standards in the induced compliance paradigm. Social Psychology, 44(3), 191–195.
• Wilson, C. M., & Christensen, B. K. (2012). Ethical issues relevant to the assessment of suicide risk in nonclinical research settings. Crisis, 33(1), 54–59.

Assessment Instructions

To prepare for this assessment, locate scholarly articles on Milgram's studies on obedience to authority and Zimbardo's Stanford Prison experiment on the power of social roles. These two pivotal studies provide the basis for this assessment.

Examine the controversy related to research and ethics in the field of social psychology. Consider the information you located on Milgram's studies on obedience to authority and Zimbardo's Stanford Prison experiment on the power of social roles. Include the following in your assessment:

• Describe what these studies revealed about conformity and obedience to authority.
• Explain the benefits from these research studies. What knowledge or insight was gained?
• Describe the impact of the studies in terms of the effects on the human participants.
• Explain how these (and other) controversial research studies have shaped the principles and standards in the current APA Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Ethics.
• Develop evidence-based arguments both for and against these types of controversial research studies.
• Do you think that the information that was obtained was worth the risks to the human subjects? Explain and support your position.

Your submitted assessment should be 5–7 pages in length, excluding title page and reference page, and use references from at least three scholarly resources. Be sure to follow APA guidelines for format and style.

Additional Requirements

• Include a title page and reference page.
• At least three current scholarly or professional resources.
• APA format.
• Times New Roman font, 12 point.
• Double spaced.

Ethics in Research Scoring Guide

CRITERIA NON-PERFORMANCE BASIC PROFICIENT DISTINGUISHED Describe what controversial research studies revealed about conformity and obedience to authority.Does not describe what controversial research studies revealed about conformity and obedience to authority. Describes what controversial research studies revealed about conformity or obedience to authority but not both. Describes what controversial research studies revealed about conformity and obedience to authority. Analyzes what controversial research studies revealed about conformity and obedience to authority. Describe the impact of controversial research studies on the human participants.Does not describe the impact of controversial research studies on the human participants. Describes the results of controversial research studies but does not describe the impact of the studies on the human participants. Describes the impact of controversial research studies on the human participants. Analyzes the impact of controversial research studies on the human participants. Explain how controversial research studies contributed to the development of ethical standards in the field of psychology.Does not explain how controversial research studies contributed to the development of ethical standards in the field of psychology. Explains how controversial research studies contributed to the development of ethical standards in the field of psychology but omits key elements. Explains how controversial research studies contributed to the development of ethical standards in the field of psychology. Analyzes how controversial research studies contributed to the development of ethical standards in the field of psychology. Develop evidence-based arguments for and against controversial research studies in the field of social psychology.Does not develop evidence-based arguments for and against controversial research studies in the field of social psychology. Develops arguments for or against controversial research studies in the field of social psychology but not both, or does not develop evidence-based arguments. Develops evidence-based arguments for and against controversial research studies in the field of social psychology. Develops evidence-based arguments for and against controversial research studies in the field of social psychology, demonstrating insight and understanding of both sides of the issue. Determine whether knowledge gained justifies controversial research studies in the field of social psychology.Does not determine whether knowledge gained justifies controversial research studies in the field of social psychology. Describes the knowledge gained but does not determine if the knowledge gained justifies controversial research studies in the field of social psychology. Determines whether knowledge gained justifies controversial research studies in the field of social psychology. Determines whether knowledge gained justifies controversial research studies in the field of social psychology; demonstrates an understanding of the ramifications of controversial research studies. Use valid, scholarly research resources relevant to the field of social psychology.Does not use valid, scholarly research resources relevant to the field of social psychology. Uses research resources that are not valid, scholarly, or relevant to the field of social psychology such as Wikipedia or About.com. Uses valid, scholarly research resources relevant to the field of social psychology. Uses valid, scholarly research resources relevant to the field of social psychology and establishes the credibility of the research. Write coherently to support a central idea with correct grammar, usage, and mechanics as expected of a psychology professional.Writing does not support a central idea. Does not use correct grammar, usage, and mechanics as expected of a psychology professional. Writing supports an idea but is inconsistent and contains major errors of grammar, usage, and mechanics. Writing coherently supports a central idea with few errors of grammar, usage, and mechanics. Writing is coherent, using evidence to support a central idea with correct grammar, usage, and mechanics as expected of a psychology professional. Use APA format and style.Does not use APA format and style. Uses APA format and style but inconsistently and with errors. Uses APA format and style consistently and with few errors. Uses correct APA format and style consistently and with no errors.