Review Argosy’s IRB Checklist.

Applicant Name / IRB Protocol Number ___________________________________________

The Application

FORMCHECKBOX Selected appropriate level of review (exempt = archival; expedited = minimal risk w/ general population; full = at risk population or more than minimal risk)

FORMCHECKBOX Included principal Investigator and Faculty Research Supervisor’s names and contact information

FORMCHECKBOX Provided a proposed start date for the project

FORMCHECKBOX Explained purpose of the study & purpose seems reasonable

FORMCHECKBOX Offered a brief but detailed summary of the project, including methodology

FORMCHECKBOX Proposed protocol’s time required, compensation provided and activities seem appropriate

FORMCHECKBOX Described participant demographics (Anticipated sample size & if members of special groups –institutionalized, protected, age, health status, etc.)

FORMCHECKBOX Indicated that deception will or will not be used in the study

FORMCHECKBOX Indicated that audio or videotapes will or will not be used in the study

FORMCHECKBOX Described the precautions that will be taken to insure the confidentiality, privacy or anonymity (cannot be both confidential and anonymous at the same time) of the participants

FORMCHECKBOX Described procedures where confidentiality may be broken by law (e.g., child abuse, suicidal intent).

FORMCHECKBOX Described where the research will take place

FORMCHECKBOX Provided a full example of the proposed Informed Consent and Assent (Attach copies of all relevant forms) or describes alternative methods where consent is not appropriate

FORMCHECKBOX Described any possible physical, psychological, social, legal, economic or other risks to participants

FORMCHECKBOX Described procedures implemented for correcting harm potentially caused by participating in the study

FORMCHECKBOX Explained the potential benefits of the study (to participant and to professional audience)

FORMCHECKBOX Noted any areas that may provide a conflict of interest or promote a coercive atmosphere

The Consent Form (information provided must match the claims in the application)

FORMCHECKBOX Consent is written at an appropriate level for the proposed participant pool (generally 8th grade level)

FORMCHECKBOX If non-English speakers are part of the participant pool, consent is in their native language

FORMCHECKBOX Participant is told clearly why he or she was selected

FORMCHECKBOX Participant is given a clear estimate of the number of expected participants

FORMCHECKBOX Participant is given a clear explanation of why the research is being done

FORMCHECKBOX The principal investigator clearly notes that the study is being done for doctoral studies or other applicable reasons (participant will want to know what the principal investigator gains by doing this study)

FORMCHECKBOX The principal investigator clearly explains if (or what) compensation will be provided (what does the participant gain by participating in this study – if monetary or other concrete benefit, how and when will it be distributed)

FORMCHECKBOX Participant is given a clear explanation of exactly what participation will involve (time required, type of activities expected, type of questions asked, etc.)

FORMCHECKBOX Participant is told that he or she has the right to choose not to participate, and can withdraw at any time without harm

FORMCHECKBOX Where applicable, participant is told that if child or dependent adult abuse is detected, abuse will have to be reported

FORMCHECKBOX Participant is given a clear explanation of potential risks or discomforts and an estimate of likelihood of same

FORMCHECKBOX As applicable, participants are told how to request results or how they will receive results, and these processes are appropriate and not unduly onerous

FORMCHECKBOX Participant is told exactly how privacy/confidentiality/anonymity will be maintained, including who will see the data

FORMCHECKBOX Participant is told if taping is possible or required and, if so, how those tapes will be kept safe (including who transcribes the materials – for example: principal investigator or a transcription service).

FORMCHECKBOX Participant is told that his or her decision to participate will not affect any relationship that seems relevant

FORMCHECKBOX Participant is given full contact information for principal investigator and faculty research supervisor

FORMCHECKBOX Participant is given IRB contact information including reason why one might use same

The Attachments

FORMCHECKBOX Attached an Institutional Permission Letter (where research is taking place if appropriate) or an Assurance of Adherence to Governmental Regulations concerning Human Subjects/Participants (if research project is conducted outside the US)

FORMCHECKBOX Attached a Letter of Informed Consent and (where necessary) Parent/guardian Permission Letter and Oral statement of Assurance (used with minors)

FORMCHECKBOX Provided all proposed data-gathering instruments (s): Observation, Interview, or Survey with clear permissions or documentation of ability to use

FORMCHECKBOX Where appropriate, provided receipt for payment of instrument or documentation of ability to use instrument (email permission, print out of public domain status, etc.)

FORMCHECKBOX Attached a conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement

FORMCHECKBOX Included the CRP or Dissertation Chairperson/Research Supervisor’s signature as well as the principal Investigator’s signature

FORMCHECKBOX Included CITI training forms for both applicant and research chair on project

FORMCHECKBOX Attached a copy of all recruitment materials

Discuss how these factors may serve to benefit or hinder the organizational culture.

·         Provide an overview of the organization you have chosen

·         How does this organization effectively raise awareness regarding stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination? Discuss how these strategies align with the recommendations in the readings. –

·         Discuss how these factors may serve to benefit or hinder the organizational culture.

 

·         Based on the information you have obtained about this organization, what recommendations could you provide the company to help them more effectively work with different personalities, individual differences, or gender differences in the workplace?

Evaluate three peer reviewed research studies using the Research Analysis.

PLEASE READ THE ASSIGNMENT CAREFULLY AND I NEED ALL THE BULLETS ADDRESSED CORRECTLY IN THE PAPER AND NO PLAGIARIZM…..I ALSSO ATTACHED THE DOCUMENTS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE ASSIGNMENT SO PLEASE READ CAREFULLY.

 

Select a stress disorder, anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, or ADHD from the Film List.

 

Use the Research Analysis Job Aid to complete this assignment.

 

Prepare a 1,050 word paper that discusses research-based interventions to treat psychopathology.

 

Review and differentiate the characteristics of the selected disorder and discuss the research about intervention strategies for the disorder by completing the following:

 

  • Evaluate three peer reviewed research studies using the Research Analysis.
  • Conceptualize the disorder using the biopsychosocial or the diathesis stress models.
  • Discuss the treatments or interventions that have been shown to be the most effective for your selected disorder. Why?

 

Cite at least five peer-reviewed sources.

  Title

ABC/123 Version X

1
  Film List

PSYCH/650 Version 1

1

University of Phoenix Material

Film List

Access the Films on Demand site accessed through the University Library by copying the following link into your browser: http://digital.films.com/portalplaylists.aspx?cid=1637&aid=7967 .

You must be logged into ecampus, or the link will redirect you to an incorrect site.

Choose a disorder from the list according to each week, and search Films on Demand for a video that corresponds with that disorder. Use the material on the film to serve as background information about the disorder.

Week Number Disorders
Two · Depression

· Bipolar disorder

Three · Phobias

· Panic disorder

· Generalized anxiety disorder

· Obsessive-compulsive disorder

· Attention deficit hyperactive disorder

Four · Anorexia

· Bulimia

· Delirium

· Dementia

· Parkinson’s disease

· Huntington’s disease

· Alzheimer’s

· Pedophilia

· Sexual disorders

Five · Paranoid

· Histrionic

· Antisocial

· Borderline

· Alcohol dependence

· Drug abuse

Six · Schizophrenia

· Dissociative identity disorder

Copyright © XXXX by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2012 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.

Why is this an ethical dilemma?

Dr. Daniela Yeung, a community psychologist, has been conducting a federally funded ethnographic study of men’s attitudes toward intimate partner violence following conviction and release from prison for spousal abuse. Over the course of a year, she has had individual monthly interviews with 25 participants while they were in jail and following their release. Aiden, a 35-year-old male parolee convicted of seriously injuring his wife, has been interviewed by Dr. Yeung on eight occasions. The interviews have covered a range of personal topics including Aiden’s problem drinking, which is marked by blackouts and threatening phone calls made to his parents and girlfriend when he becomes drunk, usually in the evening. To her knowledge, Aiden has never followed through on these threats. It is CLEAR that Aiden feels very comfortable discussing his life with Dr. Yeung. One evening Dr. Yeung checks her answering machine and finds a message from Aiden. His words are slurred and angry: “Now that you know the truth about what I am you know that there is nothing you can do to help the evil inside me. The bottle is my savior and I will end this with them tonight.” Each time she calls Aiden’s home phone she gets a busy signal.

 

Ethical Dilemma

 

Dr. Yeung has Aiden’s address, and after 2 hours, she is considering whether or not to contact emergency services to go to Aiden’s home or to the homes of his parents and girlfriend.

 

 

 

Respond to the following questions in 1,500 to 1,750 words

 

1.     Why is this an ethical dilemma? Which APA Ethical Principles help frame the nature of the dilemma?

 

 

2.     Does this situation meet the standards set by the duty to protect statue? How might whether or not Dr. Yeung’s state includes researchers under such a statute influence Dr. Yeung’s ethical decision making? How might the fact that Dr. Yeung is a research psychologist without training or licensure in clinical practice influence the ethical decision?

 

3.     How are APA Ethical Standards 2.01a b, and c; 2.04; 3.04; 3.06; 4.01; 4.02; and 10.10a relevant to this case? Which other standards might apply?

 

 

4.     What are Dr. Yeung’s ethical alternatives for resolving this dilemma? Which alternative best reflects the Ethics Code aspirational principle and enforceable standard, as well as legal standards and Dr. Yeung’s obligations to stakeholders

 

 

 

5.     What steps should Dr. Yeung take to ethically implement her decision and monitor its effects?