You be the IRB In this post, I’d like you to act as an IRB member while reading over the followin ...
You be the IRB In this post, I’d like you to act as an IRB member while reading over the following research studies. Then answer these questions for EACH scenario: What are the key considerations that you should take into account (e.g., what should the researchers do or what should the IRB look for)? Informed Consent Debriefing Deception Risk/benefit ratio Would you approve the study? Why or why not? Scenario 1: A growing number of studies have found that writing about trauma contributes to physical well-being. In a typical experiment, participants write about a traumatic event for an hour a day, three to four days in a row. Topics have included rape, incest, deaths of loved ones, etc. The actual writing process is very stressful for participants; about half cry. The author obtained access to the students’ medical records and found that participants who write about the trauma experience fewer subsequent visits to the health center relative to control participants. (Pennebaker, 1997) Scenario 2: In this study, a men’s lavatory was set up so that confederates could invade a participant’s personal space. In the restroom, there were three urinals. In the close distance condition, a confederate appearing to urinate was stationed at the middle urinal, and a “Don’t use” sign accompanied by a bucket and a sponge was placed on the rightmost urinal. In the moderate distance condition, the confederate stood at the rightmost urinal and the bucket and sign were placed in front of the middle urinal. In the control condition, there was no confederate in the lavatory. The researchers were interested in the time it took to initiate urination, as well as how long the participants would urinate. An observer was hidden in one of the toilet stalls. The observer used a “periscope” embedded in some books on the floor to check on urination. The periscope allowed the observer to see the stream of urine. The observer started two stopwatches when a participant stepped up to the urinal, stopped one when urination began, and stopped the other when urination was terminated. The results showed that when a confederate was close, participants took longer to urinate and urinated for less time compared to participants in the other conditions. (Middlemist, Knowles, & Matter, 1976) For clarity, please list your responses using the list option in eLearning (click on the bullet points icon arrow). To earn full credit, your discussion post should be error free, formatted correctly, comprehensive (i.e., answers all the questions), and insightful.
