Assignment:
Respond to Shayla and Jasmine while being respectful of and sensitive to their viewpoints. Consider advancing the discussion in the following ways:
Post an article, video, or visual to reinforce a peer's idea or challenge them to see their point from a different perspective.
Engage in conversation with your peers around the ethics of testing on vulnerable populations. Consider asking a question or sharing your personal experience. Need Assignment Help?
Shayla post:
In cognitive psychology, vulnerable populations include children, individuals with cognitive disabilities, elderly individuals, and people with conditions such as amnesia or Alzheimer's disease. These groups are considered vulnerable because they may not fully understand what is happening during research, may have difficulty communicating, or may not be able to give informed consent on their own. Because of this, they often rely on caregivers or others to make decisions in their best interest (APA 2017).
One important precaution researchers can take is ensuring proper consent. If individuals are not able to give informed consent themselves, researchers must obtain consent from a caregiver or legal guardian. In addition, researchers should closely monitor participants, be aware of their support needs or triggers, and be prepared to stop the study if it causes distress or harm. These precautions help protect participants while still allowing research to move forward.
When considering the balance between helping people and collecting reliable data, the line should always prioritize safety. While research is important, it is not more important than the well-being of the individual. Taking the time to ensure that interventions are safe and appropriate is necessary, even if it slows down progress.
There are also dangers when researchers or the media make unsupported claims about products that claim to improve memory or attention. People may believe these claims and develop unrealistic expectations, which can lead to disappointment or even prevent them from using more effective coping strategies. This highlights the importance of ethical responsibility in both research and communication.
Overall, this topic connects directly to ethics, as researchers have a responsibility to protect vulnerable populations while conducting studies. Ethical practices ensure that individuals are treated with respect, care, and dignity throughout the research process.
Jasmine post:
In cognitive psychology, vulnerable populations can be people with illnesses that cause cognitive impairment such as Alzheimer's, people with psychiatric disorders or development disorders that cause significant cognitive diminishment, and children. People with illnesses such as Alzheimer's are vulnerable due to their cognitive abilities being affected by the disease (Oruche, 2009). They may not fully understand informed consent or the risks and benefits of research which leaves them at risk of being exploited (Oruche, 2009). People with disorders that have significant cognitive diminishment may also not be able to make decisions based on their best interest and be at risk for exploitation or coercion (Oruche, 2009). Children do not yet have the life experience or capacity to understand informed consent or the risk and benefits of research in order to give consent either.
A precaution that psychological scientists can use when testing or applying a new protocol or technology that might help a vulnerable population would be to gain consent from a legally authorized representative or ascertain if there was advance informed consent given (Oruche, 2009). Advance informed consent would show that the patient gave consent before receiving a diagnosis, as in a case where they had a genetic marker for Alzheimer's for example, or if they appointed a person to serve as their proxy during the study (Oruche, 2009).
Between the need to help people with cognitive impairments and the need to patiently accumulate reliable data, the line should be drawn when the principle of beneficence and non-maleficence can't be upheld (Dunn et al., 2015). It should be noted that often the hope of accumulating reliable data is to use that data to help people with cognitive impairments. Studies and trials need to be conducted to find new treatments and cures. At the same time, patients now need to be treated well too. If the scientists can't conduct the study without minimizing harm (minor side effects are different from major risks), then the line needs to be drawn.
The dangers of unsupported claims lie in how loyally they're followed above proven treatments. Using a product that makes an unsupported versus a proven treatment can delay progress, increase symptoms, lead to complications, and in some cases, result in more problems. It's not just wasting time but it's also wasting the opportunity that could be spent actually investing in something that works. Taking a vitamin that claims it helps with weight loss may not seem too serious, but if it costs $50 a month, that money could be spent on a gym membership or more nutritious food. Or what if that vitamin has problematic ingredients?
Testing on vulnerable populations definitely connects to ethics. It's clear that it is not ethical to test on populations that can't give informed consent or can't fully understand the risks and benefits of participating in the research. Testing on vulnerable populations requires extra steps and safeguards in order to ensure that it is ethical and safe for the population.