Expert answer:Ethical Standards in Psychology

Solved by verified expert:Address each point in this paper. Please use grading rubric as an outline and cover every aspect in its entirety! Must include in-text citations. Original work ONLY NO PLAIGARISM!!In a 7- to 10-page scholarly research paper, evaluate one of the enforceable standards in the Ethics Code (Standard 2: Competency) that can be found on pages 340-353 as it applies to an area of your specialization (I/O Psychology). The enforceable standards are in the second section of the book, Chapters 4–13. Along with the text, use a minimum of five scholarly articles taken from peer-reviewed journals. (To be Attached)In the paper, you should evaluate the Ethics Code and how each section on the standard you chose will affect the ethical decision-making as it applies to your chosen topic. (The ethical standard that I have chosen is Standard 2 Competency)- you would cover each of the substandard within that Ethical Standard. A good approach is to do the following:-Present each substandard in order. Briefly describe the substandard.- Present examples of how that substandard relates to your specialization (my specialization is I/O Psychology).You will synthesize the information from the articles and the course readings. This will be the basis for the majority of your paper (Attached-please use the attached articles). In a one-page section, please analyze the relationship between your personal values (beliefs, possible biases, morals, etc.) and the professional codes specifically related to ethical decision making. (APA Ethics Code is also attached- http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/)The paper should:Follow Assignment directions (review grading rubric for best results).Use correct APA formatting per the APA Publication Manual, 6th Edition.Demonstrate college-level communication through the composition of original materials in Standard American English.Be written in Standard American English and be clear, specific, and error-free. If needed, be sure to use the Kaplan University Writing Center for help.Unit 9 Project Grading RubricCourse ContentStudent evaluates the enforceable standards 2.06 in the code of ethics.Student incorporates the minimum of 5 scholarly journal articles within the paper, plus the text and code of ethics (Minimum of 7 references).Clearly discusses how the standard will affect the ethical and personal decision-making in his/her specialization.The discussion includes an analysis of the relationship between personal values and the ethics code within ethical decision making. This discussion is no more than one page.WritingStyle and Mechanics: Includes introduction with clear thesis statement, complete paragraphs, and summary paragraph rephrasing thesis.APA Style: Uses correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, and APA format. Meets the 7 – 10-page length requirements, which does not include the cover and reference page.— Be sure to apply proper formatting throughout your paper.Title pageRunning headAbstractTitle on the first pageProperly formatted section headersIn-text citationsReferences section
ethical_decision_making.docx

2.06personalproblemsandconflicts.docx

competence_6_i_o_psy_should_know.pdf

competence_1.pdf

competence_2.pdf

Unformatted Attachment Preview

College of Social and Behavioral Sciences
Arts and Sciences
FISHER
The APA Ethics Code and Ethical Decision
Making
T
he APA’s Ethics Code provides a set of aspirational principles and behavioral rules
written broadly to apply to psychologists’ varied roles and the diverse contexts in which
the science and practice of psychology are conducted. The five aspirational principles
described in Chapter 2 represent the core values of the discipline of psychology that
guide members in recognizing in broad terms the moral rightness or wrongness of an act.
As an articulation of the universal moral values intrinsic to the discipline, the aspirational
principles are intended to inspire right action but do not specify what those actions might
be. The ethical standards that will be discussed in later chapters of this book are
concerned with specific behaviors that reflect the application of these moral principles to
the work of psychologists in specific settings and with specific populations. In their
everyday activities, psychologists will find many instances in which familiarity with and
adherence to specific Ethical Standards provide adequate foundation for ethical actions.
There will also be many instances in which (a) the means by which to comply with a
standard are not readily apparent, (b) two seemingly competing standards appear equally
appropriate, (c) application of a single standard or set of standards appears consistent
with one aspirational principle but inconsistent with another, or (d) a judgment is required
to determine if exemption criteria for a particular standard are met.
The Ethics Code is not a formula for solving these ethical challenges. The Ethics
Code provides psychologists with a set of aspirations and broad general rules of conduct
that must be interpreted and applied as a function of the unique scientific and professional
roles and relationships in which they are embedded. Psychologists are not moral
technocrats simply working their way through a maze of ethical rules. Successful
application of the principles and standards of the Ethics Code involves a conception of
psychologists as active moral agents committed to the good and just practice and science
of psychology. Ethical decision making thus involves a commitment to applying the
Ethics Code to construct rather than simply discover solutions to ethical quandaries.
This chapter discusses the ethical attitudes and decision-making strategies that can
help psychologists prepare for, identify, and resolve ethical challenges as they
continuously emerge and evolve in the dynamic discipline of psychology. An opportunity
to apply these strategies is provided in the 10 case studies presented in Appendix B.
Ethical Commitment and Virtues
The development of a dynamic set of ethical standards for psychologists’ workrelated conduct requires a personal commitment and lifelong effort to act ethically;
to encourage ethical behavior by students, supervisees, employees, and colleagues;
and to consult with others concerning ethical problems.
—APA (2010c, Preamble)
Ethical commitment refers to a strong desire to do what is right because it is right
(Josephson Institute of Ethics, 1999). In psychology, this commitment reflects a moral
disposition and emotional responsiveness that move psychologists to creatively apply the
APA’s Ethics Code principles and standards to the unique ethical demands of the
scientific or professional context.
The desire to do the right thing has often been associated with moral virtues or moral
character, defined as a disposition to act and feel in accordance with moral principles,
obligations, and ideals—a disposition that is neither principle bound nor situation specific
(Beauchamp & Childress, 2001; MacIntyre, 1984). Virtues are dispositional habits
acquired through social nurturance and professional education that provide psychologists
with the motivation and skills necessary to apply the ideals and standards of the
profession (see, e.g., Hauerwas, 1981; Jordan & Meara, 1990; May, 1984; National
Academy of Sciences, 1995; Pellegrino, 1995). Fowers (2012) describes virtues as the
cognitive, emotional, dispositional, behavioral, and wisdom aspects of character strength
that motivates and enables us to act ethically out of an attachment to what is good.
Focal Virtues for Psychology
Many moral dispositions have been proposed for the virtuous professional
(Beauchamp & Childress, 2001; Keenan, 1995; MacIntyre, 1984; May, 1984). For
disciplines such as psychology, in which codes of conduct dictate the general parameters
but not the context-specific nature of ethical conduct, conscientiousness, discernment,
and prudence are requisite virtues.
•
•
•
A conscientious psychologist is motivated to do what is right because it is right,
diligently tries to determine what is right, and makes reasonable attempts to do the
right thing.
A discerning psychologist brings contextually and relationally sensitive insight,
good judgment, and appropriately detached understanding to determine what is
right.
A prudent psychologist applies practical wisdom to ethical challenges leading to
right solutions that can be realized given the nature of the problem and the
individuals involved.
Some moral dispositions can be understood as derivative of their corresponding
principles (Beauchamp & Childress, 2001). Drawing on the five APA General
Principles, Table 3.1 lists corresponding virtues.
The virtues considered most salient by members of a profession will vary with
differences in role responsibilities. Benevolence, care, and compassion are often
associated with the provision of mental health services. Prudence, discretion, and
trustworthiness have been considered salient in scientific decision making. Scientists who
willingly and consistently report procedures and findings accurately are enacting the
virtue of honesty (Fowers, 2012). Fidelity, integrity, and wisdom are moral
characteristics frequently associated with teaching and consultation. Across all work
activities the virtue of “self-care” enables psychologists to maintain appropriate
competencies under stressful work conditions (see the Hot Topic “The Ethical
Component of Self-Care” at the end of this chapter.
“Openness to the other” has been identified as a core virtue for the practice of
multiculturalism (Fowers & Davidov, 2006). Openness is characterized by a personal and
professional commitment to applying a multicultural lens to our work motivated by a
genuine interest in understanding others rather than reacting to a new wave of
multicultural “shoulds” (Gallardo, Johnson, Parham, & Carter, 2009). It reflects a strong
desire to understand how culture is relevant to the identification and resolution of ethical
challenges in research and practice, to explore cultural differences, to respond to fluid
definitions of group characteristics, to recognize the realities of institutional racism and
other forms of discrimination on personal identity and life opportunities, and to creatively
apply the profession’s ethical principles and standards to each cultural context (Aronson,
2006; Fisher, in press; Fowers & Davidov, 2006; Hamilton & Mahalik, 2009; Neumark,
2009; Riggle, Rostosky, & Horne, 2010; D. W. Sue & Sue, 2003; Trimble, 2009; Trimble
& Fisher, 2006).
Table 3.1 APA Ethics Code General Principles and Corresponding Virtues
APA General Principles
Principle
A:
Nonmaleficence
Beneficence
Corresponding Virtues
and Compassionate,
and prudent
humane,
nonmalevolent,
Principle B: Fidelity and Responsibility
Faithful, dependable, and conscientious
Principle C: Integrity
Honest, reliable, and genuine
Principle D: Justice
Judicious and fair
Principle E: Respect for People’s Rights Respectful and considerate
and Dignity
Can Virtues Be Taught?
No course could automatically close the gap between knowing what is right and
doing it.
—Pellegrino (1989, p. 492)
Some have argued that psychology professors cannot change graduate students’ moral
character through classroom teaching, and therefore ethics education should focus on
understanding the Ethics Code rather than instilling moral dispositions to right action.
Without question, however, senior members of the discipline, through teaching and
through their own examples, can enhance the ability of students and young professionals
to understand the centrality of ethical commitment to ethical practice. At the same time,
the development of professional moral character is not to simply know about virtue but to
become good (P. A. Scott, 2003). Beyond the intellectual virtues transmitted in the
classroom and modeled through mentoring and supervision, excellence of character can
be acquired through habitual practice (Begley, 2006). One such habit is that the virtuous
graduate student and seasoned psychologist are committed to lifelong learning and
practice in the continued development of moral excellence.
Ethical Awareness and Moral Principles
In the process of making decisions regarding their professional behavior,
psychologists must consider this Ethics Code, in addition to applicable laws and
psychology board regulations.
—APA (2010c, Introduction)
Lack of awareness or misunderstanding of an ethical standard is not itself a defense
to a charge of unethical conduct.
—APA (2010c, Introduction)
Ethical commitment is just the first step in effective ethical decision making. Good
intentions are insufficient if psychologists fail to identify the ethical situations to which
they should be applied. Psychologists found to have violated Ethical Standards or
licensure regulations have too often harmed others or damaged their own careers or the
careers of others because of ethical ignorance. Conscientious psychologists understand
that identification of situations requiring ethical attention depends on familiarity and
understanding of the APA Ethics Code, relevant scientific and professional guidelines,
laws and regulations applicable to their specific work-related activities, and an awareness
of relational obligations embedded within each context.
Moral Principles and Ethical Awareness
To identify a situation as warranting ethical consideration, psychologists must be
aware of the moral values of the discipline. Although the Ethics Code’s General
Principles are not exhaustive, they do identify the major moral ideals of psychology as a
field. Familiarity with the General Principles, however, is not sufficient for good ethical
decision making. Psychologists also need the knowledge, motivation, and coping skills to
detect when situations call for consideration of these principles and attempt to address
these issues when and if possible before they arise (Crowley & Gottlieb, 2012; Tjeltveit
& Gottlieb, 2010; see also the Hot Topic “The Ethical Component of Self Care” at the
end of this chapter). Table 3.2 identifies types of ethical awareness corresponding to each
General Principle.
Table 3.2 APA Ethics Code General Principles and the Ethical Awareness Necessary to
Apply the Principles
APA General Principles Corresponding Ethical Awareness
Principle A:
Beneficence and
Nonmaleficence
Psychologists should be able to identify what is in the best
interests of those with whom they work, when a situation
threatens the welfare of individuals, and the competencies
required to achieve the greatest good and avoid or minimize
harm.
Principle B: Fidelity
and Responsibility
Psychologists should be aware of their obligations to the
individuals and communities affected by their work, including
their responsibilities to the profession and obligations under the
law.
Principle C: Integrity
Psychologists should know what is possible before making
professional commitments and be able to identify when it is
necessary to correct misconceptions or mistrust.
Principle D: Justice
Psychologists should be able to identify individual or group
vulnerabilities that can lead to exploitation and recognize when
a course of action would result in or has resulted in unfair or
unjust practices.
Principle E: Respect for Psychologists must be aware of special safeguards necessary to
People’s Rights and
protect the autonomy, privacy, and dignity of members from the
Dignity
diverse populations with whom psychologists work.
Ethical Awareness and Ethical Theories
Ethical theories provide a moral framework to reflect on conflicting obligations.
Unfortunately, ethical theories tend to emphasize one idea as the foundation for moral
decision making, and illustrative problems are often reduced to that one idea. Given the
complexity of moral reality, these frameworks are probably not mutually exclusive in
their claims to moral truth (Steinbock, Arras, & London, 2003). However, awareness of
the moral frameworks that might help address an ethical concern can also help clarify the
values and available ethical choices (Beauchamp & Childress, 2001; Fisher, 1999;
Kitchener, 1984).
Deception Research: A Case Example for the Application of Different
Ethical Theories
Since Stanley Milgram (1963) published his well-known obedience experiments, the
use of deception has become normative practice in some fields of psychological research
and a frequent source of ethical debate (Baumrind, 1964, 1985; Fisher & Fyrberg, 1994).
Deceptive techniques in research intentionally withhold information or misinform
participants about the purpose of the study, the methodology, or roles of research
confederates (Sieber, 1982). The methodological rationale for the use of deception is that
some psychological phenomena cannot be adequately understood if research participants
are aware of the purpose of the study. For example, deception has been used to study the
phenomenon of “bystander apathy effect,” the tendency for people in the presence of
others to observe but not help a person who is a victim of an attack, medical emergency,
or other dangerous condition (Latane & Darley, 1970). In such experiments, false
emergency situations are staged without the knowledge of the research participants,
whose reactions to the “emergency” are recorded and analyzed.
By its very nature, the use of deception in research creates what Fisher (2005a) has
termed the consent paradox. On the one hand intentionally deceiving participants about
the nature and purpose of a study conflicts with Principle C: Integrity and with
enforceable standards requiring psychologists to obtain fully informed consent of
research participants prior to study initiation. On the other hand by approximating
naturalistic contexts in which everyday behaviors take place, the use of deception
research can reflect Principle A: Beneficence and Nonmaleficence by enhancing the
ability of psychologists to generate scientifically and socially useful knowledge that
might not otherwise be obtained.
Below are examples of how different ethical theories might lead to different
conclusions about the moral acceptability of deception research. Readers should refer
to Chapter 11 for a more in-depth discussion of Standard 8.07, Deception in Research.
Deontology
Deontology has been described as “absolutist,” “universal,” and “impersonal” (Kant,
1785/1959). It prioritizes absolute obligations over consequences. In this moral
framework, ethical decision making is the rational act of applying universal principles to
all situations irrespective of specific relationships, contexts, or consequences. This
reflects Immanuel Kant’s conviction that ethical decisions cannot vary or be influenced
by special circumstances or relationships. Rather, a decision is “moral” only if a rational
person believes the act resulting from the decision should be universally followed in all
situations. For Kant, respect for the worth of all persons was one such universal principle.
A course of action that results in a person being used simply as a means for others’ gains
would be ethically unacceptable.
With respect to deception in research, from a deontological perspective, since we
would not believe it moral to intentionally deceive individuals in some other context,
neither potential benefits to society nor the effectiveness of participant debriefing for a
particular deception study can morally justify intentionally deceiving persons about the
purpose or nature of a research study. Further, deception in research would not be
ethically permissible since intentionally disguising the nature of the study for the goals of
research violates the moral obligation to respect each participant’s intrinsic worth by
undermining individuals’ right to make rational and autonomous decisions regarding
participation (Fisher & Fyrberg, 1994).
Utilitarianism
Utilitarian theory prioritizes the consequences (or utility) of an act over the
application of universal principles (Mill, 1861/1957). From this perspective, an ethical
decision is situation specific and must be governed by a risk–benefit calculus that
determines which act will produce the greatest possible balance of good over bad
consequences. An “act utilitarian” makes an ethical decision by evaluating the
consequences of an act for a given situation. A “rule utilitarian” makes an ethical
decision by evaluating whether following a general rule in all similar situations would
create the greater good. Like deontology, utilitarianism is impersonal: It does not take
into account interpersonal and relational features of ethical responsibility. From this
perspective, psychologists’ obligations to those with whom they work can be superseded
by an action that would produce a greater good for others (Fisher, 1999).
A psychologist adhering to act utilitarianism might decide that the potential
knowledge about social behavior generated by a specific deception study could produce
benefits for many members of society, thereby justifying the minimal risk of harm and
violation of autonomy rights for a few research participants. A rule utilitarian might
decide against the use of deception in all research studies because the unknown benefits
to society did not outweigh the potential harm to the discipline of psychology if society
began to see it as an untrustworthy science.
Communitarianism
Communitarian theory assumes that right actions derive from community values,
goals, traditions, and cooperative virtues. Accordingly, different populations with whom
a psychologist works may require different conceptualizations of what is ethically
appropriate (MacIntyre, 1989; Walzer, 1983). Unlike deontology, communitarianism
rejects the elevation of individual over group rights. Whereas utilitarianism asks whether
a policy will produce the greatest good for all individuals in society, communitarianism
asks whether a policy will promote the kind of community we want to live in (Steinbock
et al., 2003).
Scientists as members of a community of shared values have traditionally assumed
that (a) the pursuit of knowledge is a universal good and that (b) consideration for the
practical consequences of research will inhibit scientific progress (Fisher, 1999; Sarason,
1984; Scarr, 1988). From this “community of scientists” perspective, the results of
deception research are intrinsically valuable, and standards or regulations prohibiting
deceptive research would deprive society of this knowledge. Thus, communitarian theory
may be implicitly reflected, at least in part, in the acceptance of deception research in the
APA Ethics Code (Standard 8.07, Deception in Research) and in current federal
regulations (Department of Health and Human Services [DHHS], 2009) as representing
the values of the scientific community. At the same time little is known about the extent
to which the “community of research participants” shares the scientific community’s
valuing of deception methods (Fisher & Fyrberg, 1994).
Feminist Ethics
Feminist ethics, or an ethics of care, sees emotional commitment to act on behalf of
persons …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

How it works

1. Paste your instructions in the instructions box. You can also attach an instructions file
2. Select the writer category, deadline, education level and review the instructions 
3. Make a payment for the order to be assignment to a writer
4.  Download the paper after the writer uploads it 

Will the writer plagiarize my essay?

You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.

Is this service safe?

All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades