3562027
Descripción
Fichas por madison_dean, actualizado hace más de 1 año
|
Creado por madison_dean
hace alrededor de 9 años
|
|
| Pregunta | Respuesta |
| Nuremberg Trials | defined experiments, such as torture and killing, war crimes |
| Tuskegee Syphilis Study | US Public Health Service withheld penicillin (a known cure for syphilis) from black male sharecroppers. They eventually died |
| Milgram's Obedience to Authority Study | He wanted to discover the cause of the Holocaust. The subjects pulled a lever to shock other people when they answered a q wrong. ***The harm was to the subject pulling the lever who found out precisely what a human being is capable of, which caused the individual psychological discomfort |
| Zimbardo's Simulated Prison Experiment | male college students assumed the role of a prison guard or an inmate. Individuals became carried away with the experiment - guards became hostile and prisoners became passive |
| Humphrey's Tearoom Trade Experiment | ***This is a lack of consent issue. The study involved secret homosexual activity in public restrooms. He pretended to be a voyeur and wrote down license plates and then sent researcher's to their homes to get an interview |
| Project Camelot | U.S. researchers studied student and peasant insurgency movements in Chile. Once this came to light, the gov of Chile expelled the researcher for gathering intelligence for the CIA. |
| research fraud | when a researcher purposely fabricates or misrepresents their findings (The Office of Scientific Integrity was started to combat research fraud) |
| plagiarism | when a writer presents the ideas or work of someone else as his or her own |
| 3 forms of ethically acceptable research conduct | 1. codes of ethics and IRB that are adopted by professional associations or institutions doing research 2. procedures imposed by the federal gov 3. legal regulations in the courts |
| Hew guidelines (1971) | 1. a fair explanation of procedures to be followed, and their purposes, including identification or any experimental procedures 2. a description of any attendant discomforts and risks that can be expected 3. a description of any benefits reasonably expected 4. a disclosure of any appropriate alternative procedures that might be advantageous to the subject 5. an offer to answer any inquiries concerning the procedure 6. instruction that the person is free to withdraw consent and discontinue participation at any time without prejudice to him or her |
| 6 paradoxes of consent | 1. many people studies may be semi-literate and not accustomed to the legal argot of the forms 2. many will distrust a situation requiring their consent on a piece of paper 3. consent of subjects is a continual process dependent on mutual learning and evolution 4. knowing nothing of ethnography, they have no basis upon which to decide to give or not to give consent 5. ethnography involves observation and discussion and not a rationalistic a priori analysis 6. fieldwork is an evolving process; thus the subjects of investigation are likely to shift during the course of the study |
| The Belmont Report | Recommended the altering of the roles of IRB's so as not to interfere with an investigator's freedom. Altered the informed consent process. Called for the recognition of 3 basic principles: 1. respect for persons 2. beneficence 3. justice |
| HHS Guidelines | This reduced dramatically the amount of IRB oversight into research. Principle changes include: 1. the regulations only apply to research with human subjects conducted with HHS or supported full or partially with HHS funds 2. most areas of social science and criminal justice research are exempt from the guidelines 3. may projects are now qualified for expedited review, usually approved by only one member of the IRB |
| Code of ethics | 1. avoid procedures that may harm respondents 2. honor commitments to respondents and respect reciprocity 3. exercise objectivity and professional integrity in performing and reporting research 4. protect the confidentiality and privacy of respondents |
| The Brajuha Case (Weinstein Decision) | Says that serious scholars cannot be required to turn over their field notes to a grand jury unless the gov can establish a substantial need to do so |
| The Ofshe Case | Organizations or individuals may file lawsuits against individuals |
| The Hutchinson Case | Says that research scientists can sue for defamation of character even if they were receiving federal research funds and that senatorial privilege does not extend to remarks made outside the Senate chamber |
¿Quieres crear tus propias Fichas gratiscon GoConqr? Más información.