Instructions:
Read the published article carefully and then you will take the knowledge gleaned from the article to complete the IRB application Part 1 and the IRB Application Part 2 AS IF you were the Principal Investigator applying for approval to conduct the study.
For some of the questions included on the applications, you may need to “stretch” your knowledge a bit. For example, the published article may say that college students were given extra credit for participation, but may not go into a lot of detail regarding the process used to recruit those students. In such a situation, you may need to use your imagination to fill in some blanks.
In addition, please remember that the goal here is to put yourself in the principal investigator’s shoes at the time that he/she conducted the experiment. If the experiment was conducted in the 1970s, for example, remember that the standards for human experimentation were different back then. Answer the questions as the investigator WOULD have answered them (based upon what you read about the experiment), not as they SHOULD have answered them based upon today’s ethical standards.
Assignment Instructions (Please complete both #1 and #2 below)
1. After carefully reading your article ( Arbitrary Social Norms Influence Sex Differences in Romantic Selectivity) – (Attached), please complete the attached documents. The attached documents are editable, so please place your responses directly into the document. Be sure to save the documents on your hard drive and then upload it into the slot for the assignment.
2. After completing the Mock IRB Assignments- Part 1 and Part 2, please answer the following questions in a 3-page Word Document (.docx format) and upload as an attachment to the slot for the assignment.
a. What was the most challenging section of the Mock IRB Application-Part 2 to complete? Why was it challenging?
b. Were there any sections of the Mock IRB Application-Part 2 that you felt the authors of your article did not adequately address (either in terms of not doing it or not addressing it in their write-up of their Method/Procedure)?
c. If you were actually the Principal Investigator of this study, what might you do differently in order to adequately address all the questions asked on Part 2 of this Mock IRB Application?
d. How do you think ethical standards have changed (if at all) since the Principal Investigator of your chosen study filled out his/her own IRB Application?
Answer preview
- What was the most challenging section of the Mock IRB Application-Part 2 to complete? Why was it challenging?
There are indeed some sections that proved to be a hard nut to crack for me. To start with, part I which risks to subjects presented a considerable challenge in answering the three questions. Ideally, the study steps up is in such a way that the consent of the participant is highly recommended. Not giving informed consent to the participant for whatever reasons seems to be not only unethical but something that makes a fool out of the participants. For whatever reasons, I believe I believe informed consent is mandatory and should be given a priority even before anything else is concerning the study addressed. Therefore also through psychological risks rank high as the potential risk…
900 words
