资料来源: 实验室的加里 · 斯基、 戴夫 Strohmetz 和娜塔莉 Ciarocco — — 蒙茅斯大学
当一位研究者发现一个有趣的话题,例如侵略研究时,目标往往是要研究它是真实生活尽可能的方式。然而,研究人员必须以道德的方式行事。 要做到这一点,他们必须平衡他们的研究目标与参与者的最佳利益。道德常常进入规划过程时研究人员查明所有他们可以操纵或测量的变量,但然后作出最后决定基于他们应该如何操作或测量变量的方法。
收到后可怜的等级测试或纸上,一个大学生可能出现用它去 (即,以激进的方式向法) 他们被平均或急了,尖叫着,乱扔东西,或甚至成为身体暴力的室友。侵略是一种重要的人类行为,学习和理解由于它对人际暴力的影响。然而,出于安全方面的考虑,研究不能公开参加严重类型的暴力行为提出了风险。因此,研究人员必须找出类似但良性的行为,可以帮助我们理解更具侵略性的行为不损害参与者。
这个视频使用两组实验看到是否人们真的采取发泄在别人即使别人不是原始的问题负责。具体而言,它检查是否导致侵略时考虑到对与会者,成本与效益,知情同意,危害关键伦理问题和述职的负面反馈。
心理研究经常在其他科学中使用高比研究的样本量。大量的参与者,有助于更好地确保人口正在研究更好地为代表,即,伴随着研究人类行为的误差范围是充分地说明。在本视频中,我们演示使用只是两个参与者,其中之一是,计算器这个实验。然而,所代表的结果,我们可以使用共 245 人参加得出的实验结论的情况。
1.在研究界定道德行为。
2.定义关键变量。
3.进行研究
4.汇报: 为进一步伦理方面的原因,有必要汇报仔细的性质实验的参与者。
敏感的话题,在研究中需要仔细的规划,维护道德的行为-指导决策的道德标准。
以道德的方式设计研究需要研究和成本的好处或参与者造成危害的风险之间的平衡。
这一决策过程称为成本效益分析,这项研究的意图胜过高成本或风险对那些涉及危害。
通过应用伦理原则,该视频演示如何设计、 执行、 分析和解释有关人际侵略一个实验。重要的是,研究人员研究对待他人而不是诉诸人身伤害纳入更良性形式的攻击行为的愤怒。
对于这个实验,考虑两个敏感的话题,负面的反馈和侵略,需要成本效益分析,以证明道德法规遵从性。
负反馈对参与者可能带来几种不同的形式,包括: 表明疾病的医疗结果、 诊断测试指示低智商,犀利的评论,对物理外观或书面工作的严厉批评。
侵略可能涉及大量的行为,如出言不逊对参与者、 身体推参与者,给参与者,管理电击或给参与者难闻的喝。
在这里,实验将会专注于提供严厉的批评,对参与者的书面工作。
所有参加者使用两组设计,都写一段关于在海滩的一天。一组收到负面的反馈形式的负面评论,而第二组接收中性的反馈或未提出任何意见。
收到后批评,参与者被要求为其款计算器的朋友选择一种饮料。饮料选择关联到侵略显示由参赛者的水平。
实验的假设是负反馈诱导会就另一种个人的侵略。
因此,那些接受负面评论预计报复和选择更加令人反感的饮料选择比那些接受没有评论。
若要进行实验,收集知情同意和期末述职报告、 一支黑色的钢笔和一张空白的纸。在不同的房间里,你将需要: 骰子、 红笔、 索引卡、 5 杯水,托盘或盘子上和部分糖、 柠檬汁、 醋、 辣酱。
若要开始实验,满足参与者在实验室里。指导所有参与者通过同意过程和讨论会议的总体计划。
同坐在一张桌子的参与者,让他们写一段简短的描述在海滩的一天。参与者完成后,通知他们,另一位研究者将在接下来的 5 分钟评价这一段。
一次在另一个房间,掷骰子随机确定哪一种的参与者收到的反馈。指派为偶数,负反馈和用红笔写段的评论。如果骰子滚结果在奇数,分配中性的反馈,并在页面上不做任何标记。
提供反馈后, 回到参与者的段落。建议他们读的言论,当你离开房间布置下一阶段的实验。
参与者,等待,准备五个不同的饮料,范围从愉快到令人不快的口味: 高度糖水水、 柠檬水,平原水,在水里,醋和辣酱在水中的。
然后,与另一边的编号和另一方面说明标签五个不同的索引卡。安排每一对放在盘子。
安排这一大盘之后, 把它带到房间与参与者。解释每个饮料所包含的内容。指导他们选择一个计算器的朋友,另一个房间里喝饮料。记录与空房饮料有关的号码。
在实验结束时,参与者会汇报和解释为什么欺骗是必要的实验。
分析如何攻击性行为反馈后表示,平均数字录得空房饮料中的每个条件。
数据然后被曲线图绘制中的每个条件的平均数字。在这个实验中,参与者收到负面反馈进行报复和为中性组相比,计算器的朋友没有收到任何反馈选择更加令人反感的饮料。
现在,您熟悉如何心理学家研究敏感话题以道德的方式,让我们看看如何其他研究者们铭记促进安全的替代品研究令人不安和不良行为的道德标准。
最近一项研究发现,视频游戏玩家输掉比赛,他们更有可能采取积极行动,由”垃圾话”。研究者认为设计所涉伦理问题,因为垃圾话是风险低于物理侵略。
本研究采用可靠地诱使参与者应激反应的社会试验。
通过简单的监测设备和唾液样本,生理措施,如皮肤电导、 心率和应激激素水平,非侵入性的方法获得。
因此,本实验提供了痛苦的物理压力,像跑步或冷加压试验伦理替代。
面对众多的道德关切,动物研究人员使用: 组内设计,以减少不必要的科目,行为的任务获得动物行为的反应,和管理药物制剂以减轻疼痛和痛苦。
你刚看了朱庇特的简介心理学研究中的伦理。现在你应该已经很好地理解如何设计和进行实验,以及分析结果的和适用这一现象。
谢谢观赏 !
收集资料,从 245 参与者。回想起那段侵略规模被计算数量分配给每个不同等级的令人讨厌的味道的饮料。运行独立的手段的 t 检验进行比较以确定它们如何影响侵略的负面和中立的反馈条件。结果表明,一般收到负面反馈的参与者选择更有毒饮料,无辜的人在另一个房间 (计算器的朋友),这表明侵略 (图 1)。
图 1.量的反馈条件下的侵略。
这两组实验表明如何研究人员可以研究敏感话题,伦理的方式减少伤害给参与者,同时仍然允许参与者从事侵略性的行为。
当他们研究人类行为,心理学家经常试图分析不良和令人不安的行为。例如最近在大众媒体文化心理学的研究发现,当视频游戏玩家输掉比赛,他们是更有可能采取大刀阔斧的垃圾话。1虽然具侵略性,这种行为是风险低于物理侵略和是常见的这表明研究者认为他们的研究的伦理含义。
伦理之外研究申请。当考虑在日常生活中的伦理困境,经常有不清晰的正确或者错误的答案。我们应该测试化妆品的动物吗?应该 Facebook 被允许更改如何信息出现在用户的页面,看看是否它改变用户的行为?问题是复杂的但它是必须研究人员考虑这些问题,并找出如何回答他们研究的问题,以保护参与者的方式。
Sensitive topics in research require careful planning to uphold ethical behavior- the moral standards that guide decision-making.
Designing studies in an ethical manner requires a balancing act between the benefits of the research and the costs or risk of harm to participants.
This decision process is referred to as a cost-benefit analysis, in which the study’s intent outweighs the high costs or risks of harm for those involved.
By applying ethical principles, this video demonstrates how to design, perform, analyze, and interpret an experiment about interpersonal aggression. Importantly, researchers study anger towards others without resorting to physical harm by incorporating more benign forms of aggressive behavior.
For this experiment, consider two sensitive topics, negative feedback and aggression, that require cost-benefit analyses to demonstrate ethical compliance.
Negative feedback towards participants might entail a number of different forms, including: medical results that indicate disease, a diagnostic test that indicates low IQ, harsh commentary on physical appearance, or severe criticism on written work.
Aggression could involve a number of behaviors, such as being verbally abusive to the participant, physically pushing the participant, administering an electrical shock to the participant, or giving the participant a foul-tasting drink.
Here, the experiment will focus on providing severe criticism on participant’s written work.
Using a two-group design, all participants write a paragraph about a day at the beach. One group receives negative feedback in the form of negative comments, whereas the second group receives neutral feedback, or no comments.
After receiving criticism, participants are asked to choose a beverage for their paragraph evaluator’s friend. The beverage choice correlates to the level of aggression displayed by the participant.
The hypothesis of the experiment is negative feedback induces aggression that would be taken out on another individual.
Thus, those who receive negative comments are expected to retaliate and choose more distasteful drink choices than those who receive no comments.
To conduct the experiment, gather the informed consent and final debriefing papers, a black pen, and a blank piece of paper. In a different room, you will need: dice, a red pen, index cards, 5 cups of water, a tray or platter, and portions of sugar, lemon juice, vinegar, and hot sauce.
To begin the experiment, meet the participant in the lab. Guide all participants through the consent process and discuss the overall plan for the session.
With the participant sitting at a desk, ask them to write a brief paragraph that describes a day at the beach. After the participant finishes, inform them that another researcher will evaluate the paragraph over the next 5 min.
Once in another room, roll dice to randomly determine the kind of feedback the participant receives. Assign negative feedback for an even number, and write comments on the paragraph with a red pen. If the dice roll results in an odd number, assign neutral feedback, and do not make any marks on the page.
After providing feedback, return the paragraph to the participant. Suggest that they read over the comments when you leave the room to set-up the next phase of the experiment.
While the participant waits, prepare five different beverages that range from pleasant to unpleasant tastes: highly sugared water, lemon water, plain water, vinegar in water, and hot sauce in water.
Then, label five different index cards with a number on one side and description on the other. Arrange each pair on a platter.
After arranging the platter, carry it into the room with the participant. Explain what each beverage contains. Instruct them to choose one beverage for the evaluator’s friend to drink in the other room. Record the number associated with the chosen beverage.
At the conclusion of the experiment, debrief participants and explain why deception was necessary for the experiment.
To analyze how aggressive behavior is expressed after feedback, average the numbers recorded for the chosen beverages in each condition.
The data are then graphed by plotting the mean number in each condition. In this experiment, participants who received negative feedback retaliated and chose a more distasteful beverage for the evaluator’s friend than those in the neutral group who did not receive any feedback.
Now that you are familiar with how psychologists study sensitive topics in an ethical way, let’s take a look at how other researchers are mindful of moral standards that promote safe alternatives for studying troubling and undesirable behaviors.
A recent study found that when video game players lost a game, they were more likely to act aggressively by “trash-talking.” The researcher considered the ethical implications of the design because trash-talking is less risky than physical aggression.
This study uses a social test that reliably induces a stress response in participants.
Physiological measures, such as skin conductance, heart rate and stress hormone levels, are obtained non-invasively through simple monitoring equipment and saliva samples.
Thus, this experiment provides an ethical alternative to painful physical stressors like treadmill running or cold pressor test.
Facing numerous ethical concerns, animal researchers use: within-group designs to reduce the number of unnecessary subjects, behavioral tasks to obtain ethological responses, and administer pharmaceutical agents to minimize pain and suffering.
You’ve just watched JoVE’s introduction to Ethics in Psychological Research. Now you should have a good understanding of how to design and perform the experiment, as well as analyze results and apply the phenomenon.
Thanks for watching!
Related Videos
Experimental Psychology
18.2K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
29.1K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
8.2K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
5.6K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
10.3K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
13.0K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
72.1K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
22.7K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
22.8K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
73.1K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
11.8K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
8.4K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
11.6K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
8.5K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
17.8K 浏览