An Introduction to Subject Pools BSSA Brown Bag

An Introduction to Subject Pools BSSA Brown Bag October 31, 2014

What is a subject pool? • Traditionally, the subject pool is designed to provide subjects for psychological research by faculty and students in the department. • Interdisciplinary component at Metro State • The studies are also designed to be part of the learning experience of introductory psychology. • Courses that would benefit would be any type of research methods course or introduction to science courses

Rationale • Instructors at non–research institutions are less able to expose their students to research firsthand • Subject pools are mostly associated with psychology courses at research institutions. Sieber and Saks (1989) found that 74% of graduate-level psychology departments have developed HSPs and that 93% of HSPs are used in “introduction to psychology” courses. • To have our students represented in the behavioral and social research that is presented and published in our academic communities. • To avoid spending class time or “extra credit” burdens on instructors by going class to class. Additionally, to avoid multiple emails requesting class participation from multiple student and faculty researchers.

Benefits for Students • Students have found participation to be: • A valuable learning experience (Davis & Fernald 1975; King 1970). • Helped increase their knowledge of psychology (Coren, 1987). • A better understanding of the research process (Landrum & Chastain, 1995; Sullivan & Lashley, 2009). • Rosell et al. (2005) found that compared to lecture alone, students’ actual knowledge about participants’ rights and informed consent increased more when they participated in experiments. • Gil-Gomez, Leon, and Pascual-Ezama (2012) found that students who took part in HSP studies achieved higher scores on a methods exam than students who did not. • Research supports the idea that participation provides a rich pedagogical resource, even for nontraditional schools (i. e. community colleges; Chin & Stayte, 2014).

Benefits for Instructors • The most commonly cited justification for having students participate in research is that they will receive educational benefit from their involvement (see, for example, Bowman & Waite, 2003). • Can be incorporated into course curriculum as a requirement, as optional, as extra credit options, or even as in class demonstrations. Directions will be provided for whatever your preferred method is. • Little to no work on instructor’s side, as support is provided for: • • • Assistance with introduction and setup Class and syllabus materials In class presentation (if requested) Final report of students and participation Maintenance, support, and crediting for alternative options by Subject Pool Administrative team.

Benefits for Researchers • Faculty members are expected to conduct research; however, it is often difficult to gain access to research participants. • In some research fields, the use of student participants is generally accepted, depending upon the nature of the research project. In other fields, student participants are not commonly used in core studies, but the use of student participants is acceptable for pretests and pilot studies. • Also, the program facilitates data collection for multiple student types (e. g. classroom, online, etc. ) • This program offers a readily available, affordable source of research participants

SONA • SONA is the cloud-based application used to manage the subject pool • Easy to use and easy to navigate • Allows researchers to: • • • Set up studies Manage schedules and timeslots for data collection Pre-screen participants Manage third-party integration (e. g. Survey Monkey) Generate Reports 24 -hour system availability

HSRB (Human Subjects Review Board) • The subject pool has the support of the HSRB (October, 2014 meeting) • Applications, modifications, and other forms have been modified to include options for using SONA for participants • Works closely with Subject Pool team to vet research projects before they are opened for data collection.

Criteria for Subject Pools • All student participation in subject pool research must be completely voluntary. • It is up to the student to decide whether to participate in any study; instructors cannot mandate or require student participation. • Alternative assignments must be provided to students who decline from participating in research. • Departments usually provide students with incentives (e. g. , extra credit or credit hours) to participate in the subject pool. • Subject pools including subjects under 18 years of age are required to obtain parental consent prior to any minor's involvement in research. • Instructors are strongly discouraged from recruiting subjects they directly supervise or selecting subjects on such basis.

Criteria for the Alternative Assignment • The alternative assignment should meet some basic standards to ensure that students are not unduly influenced to participate in research. Faculty and staff should make every effort to ensure that they do not exert undue influence on students to participate in research rather than the alternative assignment. • Clearly describe the alternative assignment in a way and at a time that allows the students to make an informed choice about which method they will use to earn credit. This description should be: • Clear and complete • Written and published (and provided to students in the subject pool) • Available at the time when the research option is described • To assure issues of fairness and justice, the alternative assignment should require approximately the same time and effort commitment as research participation.

Who to contact • Co-Directors • Kerry Kleyman (kerry. kleyman@metrostate. edu) • Kimberly Halvorson (kimberly. halvorson@metrostate. edu) • Lab Manager • Mikki Haegle (mikki. haegle@metrostate. edu) • Graduate Research Assistant • Katie Herzog (bj 5368 hk@metrostate. edu) • The HSRB • hsrb@metrostate. edu

References • Bowman, L. L. , & Waite, B. M. (2003). Volunteering in research: Student satisfaction and educational benefits. Teaching of Psychology, 30, 102 -106. • Chin, L. G. , & Stayte, P. G. (2014). Can Human Subject Pool Participation Benefit Sociology Students? . Teaching Sociology • Coren, S. (1987). The psychology student subject pool: Student responses and attitudes. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 28(4), 360. • Davis, J. R. & Fernald, P. S. (1975). Psychology in action. Laboratory experience versus subject pool. American Psychologist, 30, 523 -524. • de Liaño, B. G. G. , León, O. G. , & Pascual-Ezama, D. (2012). Research participation Improves student's exam performance. The Spanish journal of psychology, 15(02), 544 -550. • King, D. J. (1970). The subject pool. American Psychologist, 25, 1179 -1181. • Landrum, R. E. , & Chastain, G. (1995). Experiment spot-checks: A method for assessing the educational value of undergraduate participation in research. IRB: A Review of Human Subjects Research, 17, 4 -6. • Miller, A. (1981). A survey of introductory psychology subject pool practices among leading universities. Teaching of Psychology, 8, 211 -213. • Rosell, M. C. , Beck, D. M. , Luther, K. E. , Goedert, K. M. , Shore, W. J. , & Anderson, D. D. (2005). The pedagogical value of experimental participation paired with course content. Teaching of Psychology, 32(2), 95 -99. • Sieber, J. E. , & Saks, M. J. (1989). A census of subject pool characteristics and policies. American Psychologist, 44, 1053 -1061. • Sullivan, M. P. , & Lashley, S. L. (2009). Developing Informed Research Participants in an Introductory Psychology Participant Pool. Teaching of Psychology, 36(1), 24 -28.