Watch This Short Video Regarding Correlation And Causation

Watch This Short Video Regarding Correlation And Causationhttpw

1. Watch this short video regarding correlation and causation: 2. Read the section of the APA ethics code that involves Research (Standard 8). 3. Read the following research article and the newspaper article involving Facebook.(copy and paste the links in your browser if they don't open). They are about the same study. The NYTimes article will help you understand what you are reading on the PNAS site. You need to read both of them. a. b. 4. Briefly summarize what the Facebook research study was about and what the findings/results were (This part of your post should only be a 2-3 sentences). 5. Using the information you learned about correlation and causation from your textbook readings and video determine if the results of the Facebook study demonstrate causation or correlation? If so, state whether it is correlation or causation and why. (please be careful not to confuse relationships with cause and effect). What other variables could account for the results? (Explain). 6. Using the information you learned from reading the APA Ethics code, answer the following: If the Facebook research was to be conducted by psychologists, were there any ethical issues/violations as a result of conducting the experiment? Explain and support your response. You may also include any other thoughts regarding the research. Initial post due 1/22 by 11:59pm response to classmate due: 1/26 by 11:59pm Remember to read the grading criteria carefully. Remember to cite all sources (including the ethics code and Facebook research article) in APA style. Please see APA style link for more information.

Paper For Above instruction

The Facebook emotional contagion study, conducted by researchers at Facebook and published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), aimed to examine whether the emotional content in users’ news feeds could influence their own emotions. By manipulating the emotional content shown to users—either reducing positive or negative posts—they observed changes in users' subsequent postings. The findings suggested that exposure to certain emotional content could influence users’ emotions, implying a potential for emotional contagion through social media.

Analyzing these findings through the lens of correlation and causation, it appears that the results demonstrate correlation rather than causation. While the study showed that emotional content in news feeds was associated with changes in users' mood expressed through their posts, it did not definitively prove that the exposure directly caused the emotional shift. External variables, such as users’ existing emotional states, offline circumstances, or prior mood, could have contributed to the observed effects, confounding the relationship. Therefore, the findings suggest a correlation between news feed content and emotional expression but do not establish a direct causal link.

Regarding ethical considerations, the APA Ethics Code Standard 8 emphasizes the importance of informed consent, privacy, and minimizing harm in research involving human subjects. In this Facebook study, researchers manipulated users' news feeds without their explicit informed consent, raising concerns about violating their privacy and autonomy. The lack of consent possibly infringed on ethical principles of respect for persons and informed participation. Moreover, the emotional manipulation could have caused distress, which conflicts with the ethical obligation to avoid or minimize harm. Therefore, if psychologists conducted similar research, careful adherence to ethical standards—such as obtaining explicit consent and providing debriefing—would be necessary to avoid violations. The study highlights the importance of balancing scientific inquiry with respect for participant rights and ethical integrity.

References

  • American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. https://www.apa.org/ethics/code
  • Kramer, A. D., Guillory, J. E., & Hancock, J. T. (2014). Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(24), 8788–8790. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320040111
  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
  • Fisher, C. B. (2017). Decoding the Ethics Code: A Practical Guide for Psychologists. SAGE Publications.
  • Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior, 32(2), 303–330.
  • Resnik, D. B. (2015). What is ethics in research & why is it important? National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/whatis/index.cfm
  • Hampton, K. N., Rainie, L., Lu, W., & Purcell, K. (2015). Social media and politics. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/10/08/social-media-and-politics/
  • Baethge, C., Heidel, P., & Frank, J. (2019). Research misconduct in the health sciences: a systematic review. Prof Dev Edu, 45(1), 101–116.
  • Turiel, E. (2015). Morality, social justice, and the development of ethical reasoning. Child Development Perspectives, 9(2), 124–130.
  • Rosen, L. D., et al. (2013). The impact of social media on youth mental health: A review. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 69(6), 517–526.

Related Assignments