Assignment:
Respond To Kimiko And Jordan Posts
Kimiko Post
Physicians are among the highest-paid professionals in the world, and I believe their compensation is generally justified because it reflects the extensive education, years of specialized training, high level of responsibility, and the life-or-death decisions they make every day. Becoming a physician often requires more than a decade of education and residency training, significant student loan debt, and continuous professional development throughout their career. In addition, physicians are responsible for diagnosing complex medical conditions, performing procedures, leading interdisciplinary healthcare teams, and ensuring patient safety. The ethical principle of "first, do no harm" and the American Medical Association's Code of Medical Ethics emphasize that physicians have a duty to prioritize patient welfare, but these ethical obligations do not mean they should not receive compensation that reflects the complexity and demands of their profession (American Medical Association [AMA], 2024).
At the same time, physician compensation should be aligned with delivering high-quality, patient-centered care rather than simply the volume of services provided. The shift toward value-based care encourages healthcare organizations to reward physicians for improving patient outcomes, reducing unnecessary healthcare costs, and enhancing care coordination instead of increasing the number of procedures performed. For example, primary care physicians who effectively manage chronic diseases can help prevent costly hospitalizations, benefiting both patients and the healthcare system. However, extremely large salary disparities between specialties and primary care may contribute to workforce shortages in family medicine and rural healthcare, limiting access for underserved populations. From a healthcare administration perspective, balancing fair physician compensation with affordability, quality, and access is essential to achieving the healthcare triangle while promoting equity and sustainability across the healthcare system. Need Assignment Help?
Jordan Post
Physicians are paid large amounts for their salaries because of the journey it takes to become a doctor and the care they provide to treat patients. To elaborate, physicians go through an extensive amount of schooling. Once school ins completed, they continue to expand on their education by putting what they have learned and applying it in residency. The physicians have to upkeep their license to practice along with medical insurance to protect them when mistakes happen too. The cost that accumulates to become a doctor is substantial which in turn supports the reason why physicians should be paid high amounts. Physicians are required to follow the code of ethics which require to put patients first, provide quality care, and to treat with respect and passion (American Medical Association, 2024). Being a doctor is a serious profession and with all of the skills and education required, the salary should be rewarding.
On the other hand, doctors should be able to provide care to all individuals rather than only providing care to those that can benefit their salary. A great example is the individuals in rural that may not be able to afford medical care (Association of American Medical Colleges, 2024). Doctors should still want to treat because there is a need and not for the salary. If individuals go to school to become doctors for the salary, then that is not following the code of ethics. It is interesting to think that the compensation is based off of the care that is provided. Most of the companies I have worked for rely heavily on the reviews received and the overall reputation of the facility. This aligns with the doctors that are employed because some patients research their doctors depending on the care they need. Since these are all factors, why wouldn't a doctor want to genuinely care about the care they are providing? Overall, I do believe that the salary received is earned from the extensive education a physician endures to become a doctor. While it is deserving, the salary also should represent the quality care provided to the patients served by the doctor. Both go hand in hand to maintain a balance.
Remember to respond to Bionca and Jada while being respectful of and sensitive to their viewpoints. Consider advancing the discussion by answering the following questions:
Did your peers do a good job of translating the findings of their chosen study to a lay audience?
Did your peers relate their chosen study to current and emerging issues in psychological research?
Did your peers describe how the findings of their chosen study could be used personally or professionally?
Bionca Post
The article I chose is Mammen, Köymen, and Tomasello's study, The Reasons Young Children Give to Peers When Explaining Their Judgements of Moral and Conventional Rules, explored how young children explain why certain behaviors are right or wrong. The researchers found that children used different reasoning for moral rules, such as not hurting others, than for conventional rules, like following classroom expectations. Children often explained moral rules by focusing on fairness or harm to others, while conventional rules were justified by social expectations or authority.
This study is important because it shows that young children can distinguish between different types of rules, which can help parents, teachers, and counselors encourage empathy and positive behavior. It also connects to the programmatic themes of research, ethics, and social responsibility by using scientific methods to better understand child development and improve real-world practices.
The findings can help adults explain why rules matter instead of simply expecting obedience. Finally, data literacy is important because it helps people evaluate whether research findings are based on reliable evidence before applying them in education, policy, or everyday life.
Jada Post
The study I chose is Dray et al. (2017), a systematic review that looked at whether school-based resilience programs actually reduce mental health problems in kids and teens aged 5 to 18. They pulled together 57 studies from 16 countries with over 41,000 participants, so there was a lot of evidence to pull from.
The short version for a non-researcher: these programs teach kids how to handle stress and bounce back from hard situations, and the evidence shows they work, especially for reducing depression, anxiety, and emotional distress. What these programs are doing is building emotional skills, helping kids recognize what they are feeling, manage their reactions, and develop healthier ways of coping. That is something that has value beyond the classroom also. Parents can use these same ideas at home, and honestly anyone working through their own stress or difficult life transitions can benefit from understanding how resilience is built.
Youth mental health is important, and what I like about this study is that it is not based on one small sample or one country. It pulls from decades of research across 16 countries, so the findings feel more reliable and applicable to real decisions, not just theory; and because schools are one of the few places where you can reach kids consistently and early, regardless of their background or what resources their family has, the findings carry real weight when it comes to making sure all kids have access to this kind of support, not just the ones whose parents can afford outside help.
For anyone working with young people in education, counseling, child welfare, or juvenile justice, this research gives solid backing to advocate for these programs. Using research to influence decisions that affect kids also comes with responsibility. The authors themselves flagged that most of the included studies carried a high risk of bias and relied heavily on self-report measures. That does not make the findings useless, but it does mean we have to be honest about what the evidence actually supports. Overstating research to push an agenda, even a good one, is an ethical issue. Being able to read studies critically and communicate their limits accurately is part of using evidence responsibly, and that is exactly what Morling (2020) points to as the foundation of data literacy.