Instructions
Your proposal must focus on a topic within the database and knowledge management domain. Your proposal must be in APA format, contain at least ten scholarly peer-reviewed resources academic references, and be of the quality expected of doctoral-level work. The proposal may be an extension of a previous submission in the course. This proposal should intrigue your audience and be research worthy. It could include a completely new topic derived from the readings and research. If in doubt, please share your idea with your professor and request feedback. Write a ten-page research proposal (not including the title page, table of contents, and reference list) that contains the elements listed below:

Title Page
Title: The title of your work should be concise and describe what your research will entail.
Student Name
Course Name and ID
University
Date
Table of Contents
Background
This section should provide enough information so that the reader understands the general context, settings, and basis for the proposed research. A non-expert may read the proposal, so ensure there is sufficient framing and discussion of the underlying concepts.
Problem Statement
This section should focus on the presentation of a literature-supported open research question or problem that must be addressed. Additional areas should include detailed discussions of its scope, nature, what the problem is, how it developed or evolved into a problem, why it is a problem, and a brief discussion as to the other works that establish it as a problem within the literature.
Goal
This section provides a concise definition of the goal of the study, what it will accomplish, and how it will be measured. That is, how you will define success and failure of the study (if applicable)?
Relevance and Significance
This section provides additional support for the problem statement and goal by discussing why the problem exists, who is affected by it, and the impact of the problem. Additionally, discuss the studys significance and how its outcomes will address the stated problem.
Literature Review
This section will focus on clearly identifying the major areas that the research will focus on to establish a foundation of the study within the body of knowledge. The presentation of literature is an expansion of an annotated bibliography that justifies the problem, hypothesis, impact, and significance of the study.
Approach
A detailed explanation of how the study will be undertaken and how the goal will be achieved. This should take the form of a discussion of the methodology used, each step and milestone, with an explanation of each. Ensure that the approach is supported by the literature, as it cannot be based solely on opinion or experience.
References
Support your paper with scholarly and industry resources. In addition to these specified resources, other appropriate scholarly resources, including seminal articles, may be included. There should be a total of at least ten external scholarly references.

Length: 10 pages, not including title, table of contents, and reference pages

Resources: A minimum of 10 scholarly resources.

MOCK IRB APPLICATION EXERCISE-PT. 2
Psychological experiments that are conducted on human or animal subjects must go through a review by an administrative body known as an Institutional Review Board (IRB). Approval must be gained by an IRB before a study can be funded or conducted. Researchers, whether they are faculty, students, or other affiliated personnel, must complete a detailed application that is presented to the IRB for its review.
APUS has an IRB, much like that of any research-producing university or institution. Attached you will find an amended version of the actual application that researchers must submit to the IRB in advance of conducting psychological research. ***This is a mock version of the application. You are not actually submitting anything to the real APUS IRB while conducting this exercise.
For Part 2 of this exercise, you will use the same readings and information that you used in Part 1 earlier in the semester. These are experiments that have already been conducted and published. Several are “classic” experiments in social psychology of which you should already be aware. You will read the published information carefully and then you will take the knowledge gleaned from the readings to complete the IRB application AS IF you were the Principal Investigator applying for approval to conduct the study.
For some of the questions included on the application, you may need to “stretch” your knowledge a bit. For example, the published readings may say that college students were given extra credit for participation, but may not go into a lot of detail regarding the process used to recruit those students. In such a situation, you may need to use your imagination to fill in some blanks.
In addition, please remember that the goal here is to put yourself in the principal investigator’s shoes at the time that he/she conducted the experiment. If the experiment was conducted in the 1970s, for example, remember that the standards for human experimentation were different back then. Answer the questions as the investigator WOULD have answered them (based upon what you read about the experiment), not as they SHOULD have answered them based upon today’s ethical standards.
Assignment Instructions (Please complete both #1 and #2 below)
1. After carefully reading your article (remember, use the same article you used in Part 1 of this exercise), please complete the attached document. The attached document is editable, so please place your responses directly into the document. Be sure to save the document on your hard drive and then upload it into the slot for the assignment.
2. After completing the Mock IRB Assignment-Part 2, please answer the following questions in a 3-page Word Document (.docx format) and upload as an attachment to the slot for the assignment.
a. What was the most challenging section of the Mock IRB Application-Part 2 to complete? Why was it challenging?
b. Were there any sections of the Mock IRB Application-Part 2 that you felt the authors of your article did not adequately address (either in terms of not doing it or not addressing it in their write-up of their Method/Procedure)?
c. If you were actually the Principal Investigator of this study, what might you do differently in order to adequately address all the questions asked on Part 2 of this Mock IRB Application?
d. How do you think ethical standards have changed (if at all) since the Principal Investigator of your chosen study filled out his/her own IRB Application?
 
“Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!”