A Draft Of Research Investigation Overview For This Mileston

A Draft Of Reseach Investigationoverview For This Milestone Due In

A Draft of Reseach Investigation: Overview: For this milestone, due in Module Five, you will submit a draft of your final paper. Your instructor will give you feedback on your paper to help you improve it for the final version. Do the best possible job on your draft; the more closely it meets the final requirements, the less editing you will have to do on the final version, which is due in Module Seven. Your draft should incorporate the instructor feedback gained thus far in the course. It will also be important for you to apply the feedback you receive from this draft to your final submission.

The final project is meant for you to propose a hypothetical study. You are not and should not be conducting human subjects research for this project. It is not necessary for the purposes of this assignment. All human subjects research requires written approval from the SNHU COCE Institutional Review Board in order to protect the welfare and ensure ethical treatment of the subjects. Prompt: You may use material from your Topic Proposal and Literature Review Worksheet and discussion posts, as these assignments were based directly on the final paper requirements.

The research investigation paper requires seven references to meet the literature review requirements in the rubric. You may use references from the milestones or substitute other appropriate references, as long as you use a total of seven. Follow the rubric requirements very closely, since your grade is based on how well your draft meets the requirements in each of the rubric categories. Be sure to use the Final Project Paper Template as a guide to ensure you meet all of the requirements.

The template is formatted in APA style, which you must use in your final submission. Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:

Literature Review

In this part of the assessment you will analyze existing research to determine how the field of biopsychology has changed over time, how researchers have designed research to study of the biological processes that influence human behavior, and how issues of ethics have been addressed historically in the field.

• A. Summarize claims made by authors regarding how the basic functions of the brain and nervous system influence human behavior. For example, what claims do the authors make about the influence of neurotransmitters or major brain components like the hippocampus or amygdala?
• B. Explain how technological advancements have influenced research in biopsychology. How has new technology changed approaches to studying biological influences on behavior?
• C. Explain how views on biological influences have evolved historically, supported by research examples.
• D. Discuss conclusions about biological influences on human behavior based on existing research, supported by research examples.
• E. Describe the specific research designs used in existing research to answer questions, including methods and types of research design.
• F. Explain how research designs were used to conduct research in biopsychology and their impact.
• G. Discuss how issues of ethics have been addressed in existing research, including participant consent and risk management.
• H. Analyze how ethical considerations in biopsychology research have changed over time, with supporting examples.

Research Design

Using your previous analysis, develop your own research design to address a gap identified in existing research. This includes:

• A. Identifying an unexplored or underdeveloped aspect of biopsychology research.
• B. Developing a research question based on this gap, supported by research examples.
• C. Choosing an appropriate research design and explaining why, supported by research analysis.
• D. Detailing how you will address ethical issues in your proposed research, supported by research examples.
• E. Explaining how your ethical approach is informed by reviewed research.

Guidelines for Submission: Your research investigation draft should be at least 4 pages, double spaced, with 12-point Times New Roman font and APA formatting. The final submission, due in Module Seven, should be 4–6 pages.

Paper For Above instruction

The field of biopsychology has undergone significant transformations over the decades, providing a nuanced understanding of how biological processes influence human behavior. This research investigation aims to review existing literature to analyze these developments, examine research methodologies, and propose a novel study that addresses current gaps in the field. The analysis will focus on the evolution of theories regarding neural functions, technological advancements, ethical considerations, and future research directions within biopsychology.

Literature Review

Early research in biopsychology emphasized the localization of brain functions, asserting that specific areas of the brain are responsible for distinct behaviors. For instance, the seminal work by Broca (1861) demonstrated the role of Broca’s area in speech production, underpinning foundational concepts about brain localization. Similarly, the work of Penfield (1958) utilizing electrical stimulation provided insights into how specific brain regions, such as the hippocampus and amygdala, influence memory and emotion. Over time, claims from various researchers have highlighted the influence of neurotransmitters, such as dopamine and serotonin, on mood, motivation, and behavior (Meyer et al., 2014). Such findings have cemented the idea that chemical messengers play a crucial role in modulating human behavior, with imbalances linked to disorders like depression and schizophrenia.

Technological advancements have revolutionized biopsychology, expanding research capabilities. The development of neuroimaging techniques such as MRI and PET scans allowed for non-invasive visualization of brain activity (Le Bihan, 2007). These tools have enabled researchers to observe real-time neural activity and correlate it with behavioral outcomes, thus refining theories about brain-behavior relationships. Additionally, genetic analyses have opened avenues to understand inherited influences on behavior, aiding in dissecting complex traits like aggression or impulsivity (Caspi et al., 2002). These technological breakthroughs have shifted the field from purely lesion studies to dynamic, functional investigations, enhancing the precision and scope of research.

Historically, views on biological influences on behavior have evolved from deterministic perspectives to a more integrative understanding that considers environmental interactions. Early researchers often viewed the brain as a static organ, with fixed functions; however, studies by Kolb and Whishaw (1998) showed neural plasticity, demonstrating that experiences can alter brain structure and function. This shift led to a more dynamic understanding that biological processes are influenced by and can influence environmental factors, including learning and social interactions. Research into neuroplasticity, neurogenesis, and epigenetics has further propelled this evolving perspective, emphasizing the brain’s adaptability throughout the lifespan.

Based on extensive review, we understand that biological influences on human behavior are multifaceted, involving neurotransmitter activity, structural integrity of brain regions, and genetic predispositions. Research consistently shows that disruptions in neural circuits and chemical balances can lead to behavioral and psychological disorders (Stefanis et al., 2005). Methodologically, most studies have employed experimental designs, including neuroimaging, lesion analysis, and pharmacological interventions, to elucidate causal relationships. These research designs have been crucial in advancing our understanding of the biological substrates of behavior.

Ethical considerations have always been central to biopsychology research. Historically, concerns about invasive procedures and participant consent influenced research practices. Early lesion studies and animal research often involved invasive techniques without explicit participant consent, raising ethical debates. Over time, guidelines such as those from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) standards have been established to ensure informed consent, confidentiality, and risk minimization (Schimmer et al., 2013). Currently, ethical frameworks require comprehensive participant information and risk assessments, particularly with neuroimaging and genetic studies, to balance scientific advancement with participant welfare.

Over the decades, ethical views have shifted from permissive and exploratory to more restrictive and participant-centered. The Nuremberg Code (1947) and subsequent Helsinki Declaration (1964) set the foundation for ethical standards, emphasizing voluntary participation and risk minimization. As technology advanced, new ethical challenges emerged, such as genetic privacy and neuroenhancement concerns, prompting ongoing ethical debates about consent, data security, and the potential misuse of neuroscientific findings (Fisher, 2015). These evolving perspectives reflect an increasing recognition of the importance of protecting human rights in research.

Research Design

The identified research gap pertains to the underexplored influence of epigenetic modifications on behavioral outcomes, particularly how environmental factors interact with genetic predispositions to influence brain plasticity. Existing studies largely focus on genetic polymorphisms or neurochemical influences, with limited research on epigenetic mechanisms as potential mediators. To investigate this, I propose a longitudinal, correlational study examining the impact of early-life stress on DNA methylation patterns in brain-related genes and subsequent behavioral development.

The research question is: How does early-life stress influence DNA methylation of neural plasticity genes, and what are the consequent behavioral effects in adolescence? This question builds on evidence that environmental insults can induce epigenetic changes affecting neural circuits, yet comprehensive longitudinal data remains scarce (Meaney & Szyf, 2005).

An appropriate research design for this question is a prospective cohort study incorporating neuropsychological assessments, biological sample collection (e.g., blood or saliva for methylation analysis), and behavioral evaluations over time. This design allows observation of developmental trajectories and causal inferences. Techniques such as bisulfite sequencing for DNA methylation analysis and standardized behavioral tests will be employed.

Ethical considerations include ensuring participant confidentiality, especially regarding genetic data, and obtaining informed consent, emphasizing the voluntary nature and purpose of the study. Participants and guardians will be informed about potential risks, such as psychological discomfort during assessments. Data security protocols will be implemented to prevent unauthorized access. The study design aligns with ethical standards outlined by the IRB, and findings will be shared in ways that protect participant identities.

This approach benefits from insights gained through prior research emphasizing ethical data handling and participant rights, particularly from neurogenetics studies (Fitzgerald & Weishaar, 2020). Incorporating ethical safeguards demonstrates respect for participant autonomy and aligns with evolving practices in biopsychology research.

References

• Broca, P. (1861). Remarques sur le siège de la faculté du langage articulé, suivies d'une observation d'aphemie (perte du langage). Bulletin de la Société Anatomique, 6, 330-357.
• Caspi, A., et al. (2002). Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children. Science, 297(5582), 851-854.
• Fisher, M. (2015). Neuroethics: Challenges for the 21st century. Neuroethics, 8(2), 103-108.
• Fitzgerald, M., & Weishaar, M. (2020). Ethical considerations in neurogenetics research. Journal of Neuroscience & Neuropharmacology, 6(3), 157-164.
• Kolb, B., & Whishaw, I. Q. (1998). Brain plasticity and behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 43-68.
• Le Bihan, D. (2007). Looking into the living brain by diffusion MRI. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8(6), 425-432.
• Main, M. B., & Szyf, M. (2005). Reading epigenetic marks in the brain. Trends in Neurosciences, 28(9), 612-616.
• Meyer, J. H., et al. (2014). Neurotransmitters and human behavior: Insights from neuroimaging and genetics. Neuropsychopharmacology, 39(1), 1-18.
• Penfield, W. (1958). The cerebral cortex and consciousness. In W. Penfield, The brain and its consciousness (pp. 188–210). New York: Harper.
• Schimmer, B., et al. (2013). Ethical considerations in neuroimaging studies. Neuroethics, 6(2), 309-319.