HELP AND HINTS FOR CHAPTER 2 EXERCISES

1. Hints: If you look at the answer to Question 2 (see below), you should be able to answer these questions. Table 2.1 is also a good resource for answering this question.

    If you want online help,

 

2.  The professor asks a student, “Do you have any questions?” The student says, “No.” Consider the following conclusions that the professor might make from the student’s response.

a. If the professor concludes that the student understood the lecture perfectly, which validity (construct, internal, or external) should be questioned?

b. If the professor concludes that therefore none of the students would have a question, which validity (construct, internal, or external) should be questioned?

c. If the professor concludes that the student is saying “no” because of the new way the professor explained a concept, which validity (construct, internal, or external) should be questioned?

3. By looking at the answers to #4 (below), you should be able to figure this question out. Table 2.1 is also
an excellent resource for answering this question. If you need more help, do
this interactive quiz
 

4. Match the threat to the type of validity.

__c__ construct validity

__b___ external validity

__a___ internal validity

5.
a. What type of study is needed for internal validity? Is this that kind of
study? Both of these questions can be answered by referring to the table on
page 49. For more information, you could also look at main points 2, 3, and 4.
 

b. See table 2.1 on p.40, figure 2.5 on p. 55, and main point #15. In
this case, there is the additional problem that because it has not been established
that the treatment has helped anyone, it is hard to argue that it will help
everyone.

6. Is it ethical to treat a patient with a method that has not been scientifically tested?

You could argue that it is unethical to give patients an unproven treatment.

Why or why not?

People are coming to (and paying) the therapist for help. If the therapist's “help” has not been tested, it may produce real harm—or prevent the patient from getting treatment that has been proven to be effective. Some would argue that if you are using an unproven treatment, you should at least tell clients that the treatment is unproven and you should not charge them for such treatments.

You could argue that it is ethical to withhold a treatment that is believed to work because you do not yet know if it works or not. That is, you should not give the treatment until you are sure that it does indeed work.

 

7a: Refer to the definition of informed consent (p. 58) and see main point #10.

7b:  Refer to the definition of debriefing (p. 59) and consider the implications of telling someone that they behaved in a racist manner.

 

8. For most of these shows, it seems that the following principles have been violated (for a list of these principles, see Box 2.1, p. 59).

a. Participants should know the risks of participating and they should know about any unpleasant events that might occur because knowing about those events might cause them to choose not to participate.

b. Participants should know that they can quit the study at any point without penalty.

c. Participants have the right to confidentiality.

d. Investigators should try to anticipate all possible risks to participants and take steps to prevent these potential problems from occurring. (In some televised shows,  an injury seemed to occur or a person divulged information that might cause that person to lose a friend or a job).

e. Participants should be debriefed. Investigators should explain the purpose of the study (difficult to do because there is no purpose except to get high enough ratings to stay on the air) and answer any questions participants may have.

 

9. a. This is  an opinion question. You can argue that we need to do research to find out what will happen or that the unanticipated consequence of doing research make it to dangerous to use. Use the results of either the Milgram or Zimbardo experiment to support your position.

    b. Use the implications of either the Milgram or Zimbardo experiment to support your answer. Refer to our ethics "formula": potential benefits must be greater than potential costs.

    c. Refer to Box 2.1 on p. 59. Hint: Principles 2, 3, and 9 appear to be problems with this study.

    d. Refer to Box 2.1 on p. 59. Hint: Principles 3 and 5 may be problems with this study.

 

10. As explained below, none of these are legitimate excuses.

a. You are responsible for your own behavior. You should know and obey the APA ethical code.

    1. According to the APA ethical standards, you are responsible for your assistant’s behavior.
    2. It is your job to find out whether the participant is upset. During debriefing, you should search for signs of harm and try to undo that harm.
    3. You were supposed to let participants know about any unpleasant events that they might experience in the study before they agreed to participate. They might not have volunteered to be in your study if they had known they were going to get electrical shocks.
    4. You are supposed to anticipate possible risks to participants. If a loved one has committed suicide, asking questions about suicide could be upsetting.
    5. You are supposed to anticipate possible risks and devise a plan to deal with problems. At the very least, you could have taken the participant to the counseling center.
    6. Under the APA ethical code, both human and animal participants have rights.