Respond to the forum question below.
Imagine that you have been a member of a research team conducting an Institution Review Board (IRB) approved study of interpersonal aggression among preschoolers for more than a year. In that time, your team has repeatedly employed a consistent set of procedures to study preschoolers’ behaviors. The procedures involve volunteer mothers bringing their children to your university’s child development lab for an observed “play session”. So far your young study subjects have been fairly racially homogenous (alike), from middle-class families and recruited (via contact with their parents) from a university preschool, affluent parts of town day-care centers, and a pre-kindergarten program being offered in the neighborhood school district. This means that, much to your frustration, you can’t claim that your study results are useful in understanding the behaviors of different race/ethnicity preschoolers and those from varying socio-economic status (SES) and education level families.
But wait…now you have learned that a friend of a friend can help you gain research access to a group of unusually racially diverse preschoolers from varying SES and education backgrounds, if you can do observations of these children really soon and at their day care facility. Several of your team members want to pursue this option and move on it quickly, arguing that there is no time to prepare a formal research proposal before embarking on the study in a new setting. “Besides the time issue,” they argue, “except for happening in a different place, our procedures should go just like all the others we’ve done and we already had them reviewed and approved by the IRB.”
- Discuss how your team would be leaving itself open to problems by moving ahead with no revised study formal proposal.
- Explain two problems you might encounter with this approach.
- Then provide a possible solution for each of the problems you have listed.
- Answer minimum of 150 words.
When a team has Institution Review Board approved study, they must stick to the plan that was submitted and approved. Two problems that would come into would be variable inconsistencies, we well as invalidation of current research data. In a situation when you decide to throw in variables of any type that are not consistent with a case study, you will find yourself usually creating an invalidation of the entire research study. In this given situation I would absolutely require of my team to submit a revised study plan, and simply restart the study if need be. I would absolutely not alter nor change any portion fo the study thus far. I would see through the current study, and apply for a second case study to include the more dynamic group of children to observe. In order to obtain a beneficial case study you must remain consistent and not change the approved plan because your team found a simpler solution, or found a way to help alter the results.
If the team decides to go ahead with the new test study before doing a new proposal for approval by the Institution Review Board then they run the risk of the research being done for nothing. They need to take the time to add the new research subjects to the proposal and resubmit it even if it takes a little longer. Another problem they face is obtain a consent form from the parents of the children at the new day care center. Also, the data may be skewed based on the two separate data sets being added together at different locations and times. I would take the time to write a new proposal to ensure it is done properly. I would also ensure we presented a consent form to the legal guardians of the children involved in the research project. Lastly, I would recommend a blended experiment to see how the children from each group interacts with the others. Along with the data from the separate groups.
I hope everyone has a great 8 weeks, and I look forward to working with all of you.
Minimum 150 answer to each