Week 2 Ethical Issues In Social Work Research Resources Read

Week 2ethical Issues In Social Work Researchresourcesreadingsyegidis

Review the guidelines outlined in Walden University's Institutional Review Board (IRB) document, "Research Ethics FAQs for Doctoral Students in the Clinical/Intervention Fields: Practical Tips for Avoiding Delays and Problems in the Research Approval Process." Describe two ways these guidelines may impact the selection of a research population, research setting, and/or research design. Support your answer with insights from the provided resources and readings, including Chapter 2 of Yegidis et al. (2018), the IRB document, and relevant ethical principles discussed in the literature.

Paper For Above instruction

Ethical considerations are central to conducting social work research, especially in clinical and intervention fields where vulnerable populations and sensitive settings are involved. Walden University's IRB guidelines serve as a vital framework that guides researchers to uphold ethical standards, protect research participants, and ensure the integrity of the research process. In particular, these guidelines impact various aspects of research design, such as the selection of participants and settings, to prevent potential harm and promote ethical compliance.

One significant way the IRB guidelines influence research is through the requirement for detailed risk assessment during the participant selection process. According to the IRB document, researchers must evaluate whether their intended research procedures pose physical, emotional, or social risks to participants. For example, when selecting a vulnerable population like children or individuals with mental health challenges, the IRB mandates additional safeguards to minimize harm. This impacts the research design by necessitating the development of consent procedures that are understandable and voluntary, and may even restrict access to certain populations if the risks outweigh the benefits (Walden University, n.d.). Consequently, researchers might defer from including highly vulnerable groups or alter the methods to reduce potential distress, such as replacing invasive procedures with less intrusive approaches. This ethical imperative aims to protect participants from exploitation and harm, aligning with the principles of beneficence and respect for persons outlined in the Belmont Report (National Institutes of Health, n.d.).

Secondly, the IRB guidelines significantly influence the choice of research setting, especially regarding confidentiality and privacy considerations. The ethical standards outlined in the IRB documentation emphasize the importance of safeguarding participant data and securing an environment that promotes confidentiality. For instance, in research involving sensitive topics like domestic violence or substance abuse, conducting studies in settings that maintain participant privacy becomes a priority. The IRB may require researchers to identify and mitigate potential risks of privacy breaches, which in turn can restrict the selection of certain settings unless adequate protections are in place. This impacts the research design by prompting researchers to implement strict data management protocols, such as anonymizing data or utilizing secure storage systems, and selecting environments that ensure participant comfort and confidentiality (Yegidis et al., 2018). These restrictions not only uphold ethical standards but also foster trust between researchers and participants, which is essential for obtaining authentic responses and valid data.

Furthermore, adherence to IRB guidelines influences the overall research methodology by encouraging transparency and accountability. Ethical review processes demand comprehensive proposals that justify the choice of population and setting, ensuring that risks are minimized and benefits maximized. This emphasis on ethical rigor can lead to modifications in research design, such as incorporating debriefing sessions, providing counseling resources, or tailoring interventions to suit specific populations' needs. Such adaptations reflect the core ethical principles discussed in scholarly literature, highlighting respect for autonomy, beneficence, and justice, which collectively safeguard human rights in research (Ries, 2007; Nicotera & Walls, 2010).

In conclusion, Walden University's IRB guidelines play a crucial role in shaping ethical research practices by impacting the selection of research populations and settings. These guidelines require careful risk assessment to protect vulnerable groups and enforce confidentiality measures to safeguard participant privacy. By aligning research design with these ethical standards, social work researchers can uphold integrity and protect participants from potential harms, ultimately advancing social justice and human welfare in research endeavors.

References

• National Institutes of Health. (n.d.). Ethical principles for human subjects research. Retrieved from https://www.nih.gov/health-information/nih-standard-terms/ethical-principles-human-subjects-research
• Nicotera, N., & Walls, N. E. (2010). Challenging perceptions of academic research as bias free: Promoting a social justice framework in social work research methods courses. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 30(3), 334–350.
• Ries, N. M. (2007). Growing up as a research subject: Ethical and legal issues in birth cohort studies involving genetic research. Health Law Journal, 15, 1–41.
• Yegidis, B. L., Weinbach, R. W., & Myers, L. L. (2018). Research methods for social workers (8th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
• Walden University. (n.d.). Research Ethics & Compliance: Welcome from the IRB. Retrieved September 12, 2016, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/researchcenter/IRB
• Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen, S. (Eds.). (2014). Sessions: Case histories. Baltimore, MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing.
• Labott, S. M., & Johnson, T. P. (2004). Psychological and social risks of behavioral research. IRB: Ethics & Human Research, 26(3), 11–15.
• Research Ethics FAQs for Doctoral Students in the Clinical/Intervention Fields. (n.d.). Walden University.
• Endicott, L. (2010). Institutional review board (IRB): Frequently asked questions [Online tutorial].
• Additional scholarly sources on research ethics and IRB impact on study design can be integrated as necessary to enrich the discussion.