Hypotheses Literature Reviews Notes Rough draft of literature

Hypotheses & Literature Reviews Notes: Rough draft of literature review due next week. & Class meets in Zimmerman Library Rm. 254

In small groups exchange hypotheses • • What is the object? What are the variables? What are the names of the variables? How do they vary? Nominal, ordinal, interval or ratio? What is the moderating variable? (may not be applicable) What is the independent variable? What is the dependent variable? State how you expect them to be related to one another.

Literature reviews • Purpose – Place each work in the context of its contribution to the understanding of the subject under review – Describe the relationship of each work to the others under consideration – Identify new ways to interpret, and shed light on any gaps in, previous research – Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies – Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effort – Point the way forward for further research – Determine where your work will fit

Literature Reviews • Hopefully by the end of this class you will become a more critical consumer. • Questions you should ask when reading a report – What were the research questions? – Who or what was studied? • How were they sampled? – What are the variables? • How were they measured? – What design was used? – What statistics were used? – Do the conclusions follow from the statistics?

Writing Literature Reviews • Avoid summarizing a body of literature – Attempt to identify shortcomings – Provide analysis • Design problems • Problems with measures • Unique subsets of the population not included • Be very careful – Plagiarism can sneak up on you

Finding Articles and Questionnaires • Search engines – Be careful much of what is on the internet is of low quality. – However, you can find peer reviewed articles using Yahoo. – Google Scholar • http: //www. google. com/

Finding Articles and Questionnaires • Research Databases and Indexes http: //www. unm. edu/ – General • EBSCOhost • Expanded Academic ASAP – Specialized • JSTOR – Linked to the articles • Sport. Discus • Pscyinfo • Pubmed – I frequently use • Web of Science

The Ethics of Using Human Participants

The History of Human Participants Ethics • The Need for Action – Nazi Doctors – The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment (1930 – 1972) – The Milgram Study (1961 -1962) • The Nuremburg Code

1974 • The Belmont Report – Respect for Persons – Beneficence – Justice • The National Research Act – Research plans must be approved – Do no harm (physically or mentally) – Informed Consent • The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (The Buckley Amendment) – Confidentiality of Data – “Legitimate Educational Interest”

Informed Consent • Participant must be aware of what they will be asked to do in the study. • Participant must freely choose to participate. (“participants are given explicit assurances of the voluntary nature of their involvement”) • Consent must come from guardian for minors and those with diminished capacity. They themselves should give assent.

Informed Consent • Participants are free to withdraw at any time. • Information should be given in language the participant can understand. • The information should help them decide whether to participate. • Information must include risks and benefits.

Confidentiality • Personally identifying information will be minimized • Access to data and all records will be restricted to those with Legitimate Interest • Anonymous vs. Confidential Participation

Three Levels of IRB Review • Exempted Review – Secondary Data – Surveys, Interviews, Public Observations, Educational Tests – Educational Settings • Expedited Review – Studies involving minimal risk – Studies involving children, prisoners, pregnant women, mentally disabled, in-vitro fertilization, “other vulnerable populations” – blood samples, other biological specimens collected without invasion – “collection of data from voice, video, digital, or image recordings made for research purposes” • Full Review • ALL RESEARCH SHOULD BE REVIEWED.

(Schuster, et al. , 1998) Surveyed Asian and Pacific Islander high school students regarding their sexual practices. Individuals unaffiliated with school proctored the survey. The school district notified parents of the survey and gave them the opportunity to sign a form denying permission for their children to participate. Students could also decline participation, and the names of the students completing the survey were not recorded. Respondents were instructed to skip items they preferred not to answer. What aspects of the study cause concern?

Ethical Issues • A questionnaire on alcohol use seeks information about growing up in an alcoholic family. • Students in an intro psychology class get extra credit for participating in an experiment. • Respondents to a survey are offered monetary compensation for completing the survey. • A questionnaire on workplace stress asks teachers how often they drink alcohol.

Havasupai Issue • What happened to the Havasupai? • Why are the questions the researchers asked offensive to some Havasupai? • Do you think the researchers behaved in an ethical manner? • What are the future consequences of the researchers’ actions?