This paper examines three interconnected topics in psychology: the ethical principles outlined in the American Psychological Association's (APA, 2017) code of conduct as they apply to both research and counseling contexts, the design of a true experimental study investigating student motivation through digital badge interventions, and appropriate research designs for measuring student perceptions of educational interventions. The paper compares ethical responsibilities across counseling and research settings, discusses informed consent, confidentiality, and the integrity of reporting results, and evaluates experimental validity, random assignment, double-blindness, and mixed-method approaches combining surveys and qualitative interviews.
Although ethical values and principles guide all of the American Psychological Association's (APA, 2017) ethical codes, there are different ways of interpreting and applying those ethical principles depending on the situation. Clinical and counseling psychologists have different ethical guidelines for their profession. For example, there are different ethical principles related to clients being treated by psychologists in counseling sessions versus the standards for conducting psychological research with human participants.
Both human subjects and clients in counseling should be guaranteed confidentiality and anonymity, and both clients and research participants should receive informed consent related to the terms of their relationship with the counselor or researcher. However, due to the unique circumstances surrounding the relationship between counselor and client, the APA (2017) offers much more extensive guidelines for sexual misconduct and other abuses of power in the client-counselor relationship. The ethical guidelines for research cover some issues that may not be relevant to counselors, such as the need to maintain ethical standards for publishing research and reporting results.
A future career as a research psychologist must take into account the APA's (2017) evolving code of ethics. Section 8 on research and publication covers issues related to informed consent of participants as well as honesty in reporting results. Whereas honesty is of course expected of counselors, there is a meaningful difference between the work that a researcher does and that of a counselor.
For example, Section 8.14 covers the ethical parameters of sharing research results. A researcher cannot withhold information simply because it might reflect poorly on their conclusions or invalidate their hypotheses. Research psychologists are responsible for maintaining the integrity of the profession by contributing to the growing body of knowledge, validating existing studies, and conducting studies using valid and ethical methodologies.
In the scenario described in Unit 2, the null hypothesis would be that students' motivation level — measured by the number of responses to an online forum — would neither increase nor decrease as a result of any of the different interventions. Research hypothesis A would be that the experimental group receiving digital badges for contributing posts of three or more lines would yield more overall posts to the forums than participants in the control group.
Using a true experimental design as Skidmore (2008) describes it, there would be a control group and an experimental group as suggested by the case study. Random assignment and double-blindness would also need to be present, meaning that neither the researchers nor the participants would know who had been assigned to which group. Unfortunately, in the experiment described in the case study, the researchers chose not to achieve double-blindness, creating threats to internal validity. It would be preferable to employ true random assignment and double-blindness.
To achieve random assignment and double-blindness, the researchers would enter each student's name into a database and then assign a numerical value to each name. Deleting all names would ensure anonymity. After that, the researchers would ask the software to randomly assign each participant to either the control or experimental group. If more than one intervention is being tested — such as digital badges as well as instructional changes — the same random assignment objectives can be met.
"Strategies for anonymity and long-term study reliability"
To truly maximize the validity and reliability of the experiment, the study would need to be conducted over a longer period of time using a greater number of students drawn from different classrooms and different schools.
Appropriate research designs maximize the validity of the study. In Unit 3's scenario, the instructors' additional questions related to student perceptions of the intervention and its efficacy inside and outside of the classroom would best be addressed using a survey. A survey can become a useful and valuable quantitative tool when it is designed well, particularly if it relies on previously established survey instruments. Unfortunately, the instructors in this case will not be able to use a previously designed survey instrument because they are measuring unique variables.
Therefore, they can use a combination of research methods including both a survey and an interview. An interview is a qualitative research method with a substantial degree of relevance in this context. Using open-ended or semi-structured interview questions allows the researchers to avoid potential biases stemming from anticipating what students might say, instead allowing students to express their opinions more authentically.
"Informed consent, anonymity, and interviewer bias in schools"
You’re 75% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.