SCS 100 Learning Block 2 Short Answer Rubric Response

Scs 100 Learning Block 2 2 Short Answer Rubricprompt Respond To The F

Respond To The F

Review the three sample research proposals and provide brief feedback regarding any ethical concerns you identify, based on social science ethical codes and expectations.

Proposal 1 describes a study examining the link between biological race and violent criminal activity, asserting a causal relationship and suggesting race as the strongest indicator. Ethical concerns include potential reinforcement of racial stereotypes, discrimination, and the scientific validity of linking race to criminal propensity, which could perpetuate social biases and stereotypes. Additionally, the study’s premise and framing may violate principles of respect and beneficence by risking stigmatization.

Proposal 2 involves administering electroshock therapy to preteens and adolescents as a disciplinary measure to assess its effectiveness in controlling undesirable behavior. Ethical issues primarily involve the potential for harm to participants, lack of informed consent (particularly with minors), and the use of aversive techniques that are widely considered unethical and harmful. This proposal violates the principles of non-maleficence, informed consent, and respect for persons, as it involves invasive procedures without clear evidence of safety or necessity.

Proposal 3 seeks to examine the relationship between health problems, diet, and socioeconomic status, with the intention to publish results highlighting risks associated with low-cost, low-quality foods. Ethical considerations include ensuring confidentiality and privacy of participants’ health and socioeconomic data, obtaining informed consent, and responsibly communicating findings without stigmatizing socioeconomic groups. Care must be taken to avoid reinforcing stereotypes or implying blame for health disparities, aligning with principles of beneficence and justice.

Paper For Above instruction

As a lead social science researcher, it is crucial to scrutinize proposed studies for ethical compliance and potential harm to participants, society, and the integrity of research. Ethical considerations serve to protect participants, uphold scientific integrity, and promote societal trust in research activities. Analyzing each proposal reveals specific concerns that align with codes from institutions such as the American Psychological Association (APA) Ethical Principles and the Declaration of Helsinki.

Proposal 1: Racial Predisposition and Violent Crime

The first proposal aims to establish a direct link between biological race and violent criminal activity, claiming that race is a significant predictor. Such research raises profound ethical issues. Firstly, it risks reinforcing racial stereotypes and biases, which can perpetuate discrimination and social inequalities. The premise that race could be a biological determinant of criminal behavior echoes historical pseudoscience, such as eugenics and racial determinism, which have been discredited and condemned (Appiah, 2006). Ethical research must avoid producing findings that can be misused to justify racial profiling, discrimination, or social marginalization.

Furthermore, the validity of linking race directly to violent tendencies is scientifically controversial. Race, as understood in social sciences, is primarily a social construct rather than a biological determinant. Any attempt to biologically attribute differences to race must contend with the risk of genetic essentialism and the misuse of science to support racist ideologies (Fuller Torrey et al., 2020). Consequently, this proposal violates ethical standards requiring research to be scientifically valid, socially responsible, and respectful of human dignity. The researchers must consider whether the potential societal harm outweighs any scientific benefits, and if the study can be conducted without perpetuating stereotypes (American Psychological Association, 2017).

Proposal 2: Electroshock Therapy for Behavioral Control

The second proposal involves administering electroshock therapy (EST) to minors as a disciplinary tool, aiming to assess its effectiveness in managing undesirable behaviors. This raises significant ethical red flags. Firstly, electroshock treatment, historically associated with punishment and abuse, is widely regarded as inhumane and unethical when used as a disciplinary measure, especially on children and adolescents (Lifton, 1986). The potential for harm, both physical and psychological, is considerable, and the principle of non-maleficence—do no harm—must guide research involving invasive procedures. The mere proposition of forcibly subjecting minors to electrical shocks violates this fundamental ethical standard.

Additionally, informed consent is a critical concern. Since minors cannot give fully informed consent, parental or guardian consent is required, but ethical oversight must also ensure that the risks are minimized and justified by potential benefits (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2014). In this case, administering electroshocks for discipline appears unjustified given current evidence condemning such practices. Alternatives such as behavioral therapy or positive reinforcement should be considered instead.

Finally, using electroshock therapy as a research intervention without a well-established therapeutic benefit and rigorous safety evaluations contravenes ethical guidelines established by the Declaration of Helsinki, which emphasizes beneficence and risk management in clinical research (World Medical Association, 2013). Overall, this proposal demonstrates a disregard for participant safety and ethical standards in human subjects research.

Proposal 3: Socioeconomic Status, Diet, and Health Outcomes

The third study investigates correlations among diet, health issues like diabetes, heart disease, obesity, and socioeconomic status, with plans to publish findings highlighting the dangers of inexpensive, low-quality foods. Here, ethical issues primarily revolve around data privacy, informed consent, and societal implications of the research outcomes. Protecting participant confidentiality is paramount. Participants’ personal health, dietary habits, and socioeconomic data are sensitive information that must be securely stored and anonymized to prevent stigmatization or discrimination.

Informed consent involves adequately informing participants about the scope of data collection, potential risks, and the purpose of the research. Researchers must also ensure that participants understand that their data will be used in publications that may influence public perceptions about socioeconomic groups. Careful framing of the findings is essential to avoid implying blame on individuals or specific communities for health disparities, which could perpetuate societal stereotypes (Gamble, 2011).

Moreover, the research aligns with principles of beneficence and justice, provided that the benefits—such as informing public health policies—are balanced against potential risks to vulnerable populations. The dissemination of results should emphasize systemic factors contributing to health disparities rather than individual blame. Transparency, cultural sensitivity, and adherence to ethical standards in handling and communicating data are vital.

In conclusion, each proposal presents unique ethical challenges that require careful consideration. Studies must be designed and conducted in accordance with ethical guidelines to safeguard participants, prevent societal harm, and contribute responsibly to scientific knowledge.

References

• American Academy of Pediatrics. (2014). Ethics in pediatric research. Pediatrics, 134(2), e415-e425.
• American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington, DC: APA.
• Appiah, K. A. (2006). The ethics of identity. Princeton University Press.
• Fuller Torrey, E., Levine, S., McGuire, P., & Moore, M. (2020). Racial differences in mental health research. Psychiatric Services, 71(8), 763-769.
• Lifton, R. J. (1986). The Nazi doctors: Medical killing and the psychology of evil. Basic Books.
• Gamble, V. N. (2011). A legacy of distrust: African Americans and medical research. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 40(3 Suppl 2), S36–S41.
• World Medical Association. (2013). Declaration of Helsinki — Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA, 310(20), 2191-2194.