Which example of research with prisoners would be allowable under the regulations?
A)Examining age at first arrest as a predictor of adult criminal history.
B) Examining the use of financial incentives.
The Correct Answer for the given question is Option A)Examining age at first arrest as a predictor of adult criminal history.
Answer Explanation
Checking the history of the criminal of adult crimes involves examining the age of the prisoner. Crime research is governed by federal laws. Prisoners are categorized as vulnerable people under federal law. Their voluntary decision to participate in the study makes them vulnerable.
In order to design a protocol for prison research, the IRB should be contacted. According to the definition of a prisoner, “anyone who has committed a crime and is subject to legal punishment or awaiting trial” is in prison. Research involves reporting to the IRB the prisoner as a subject.
IRB deals with the protocol by assessing the specific situation of each prisoner during the study. Subjects’ privacy is not guaranteed by the analyst, since strict restrictions are implemented on the motivators.
According to Federal Regulations, the investigators provide safeguards for prisoners involved in research activities, as the question refers to the regulation. The research proposal should also include the necessary information and rationale from the investigators.
In addition to these, the investigators must also take specific steps to ensure informed consent is obtained
. During participation, if a participant becomes imprisoned, it is the responsibility and duty of the PI to inform the IRB. As a result of all these measures, the protocol is reviewed again according to Subpart C, which is withdrawn from the study.
The correct answer to the question is Option A) Examining age at first arrest as a predictor of adult criminal history.
Option A is allowable under research regulations because it involves retrospective analysis of existing data to examine the relationship between age at first arrest and adult criminal history.
This type of research does not directly involve the use of prisoners as subjects, but rather relies on historical data that has already been collected.
Let’s delve into the details to understand why this option is permissible and why the other options are not.
Option A: Examining age at first arrest as a predictor of adult criminal history
This option is allowable because it primarily involves the analysis of existing data. Researchers would likely access criminal records or databases that contain information on individuals’ age at first arrest and their subsequent criminal history.
By analyzing this data, researchers can gain valuable insights into whether there is a correlation between the age at first arrest and the likelihood of continued criminal activity in adulthood.
Here’s why Option A is permissible:
No direct involvement of prisoners: This research does not require direct contact with or the participation of prisoners. Instead, it relies on pre-existing data sources that do not involve the recruitment or interaction with incarcerated individuals.
Ethical considerations: Since this research doesn’t directly involve prisoners, it avoids many of the ethical concerns associated with research on incarcerated populations. There is no need for obtaining informed consent from prisoners or addressing issues related to coercion or vulnerability.
Beneficial knowledge: Research on the factors influencing criminal behavior is valuable for understanding and addressing criminal justice issues. By examining the relationship between age at first arrest and future criminal activity, policymakers and practitioners can potentially develop more effective intervention and prevention strategies.
Option B: Examining the use of financial incentives
This option is not allowable under regulations without further clarification because it involves prisoners and financial incentives, which can raise ethical concerns and require specific safeguards. Let’s explore why this option is problematic:
Involvement of prisoners: Option B explicitly mentions examining the use of financial incentives. This implies that prisoners would be the subjects of the research, and they would be exposed to financial incentives as part of the study. This raises ethical questions about the coercion and vulnerability of prisoners.
Informed consent: Research involving prisoners must ensure that informed consent is obtained from participants. However, when financial incentives are introduced, there may be concerns that prisoners are participating primarily for monetary gain rather than voluntarily providing informed consent.
Coercion and undue influence: Offering financial incentives to prisoners can create a situation where they feel compelled to participate in the research, potentially undermining the voluntary nature of their participation. This coercion and undue influence are ethical concerns that need to be carefully addressed.
Regulatory oversight: Research involving prisoners is subject to strict regulations and oversight to protect their rights and well-being. Introducing financial incentives complicates the ethical and regulatory landscape, necessitating a robust protocol to ensure compliance with ethical guidelines.
In summary, Option B raises significant ethical and regulatory concerns due to its direct involvement with prisoners and the use of financial incentives.
While research on prisoners is not inherently prohibited, it must adhere to stringent ethical standards and undergo careful review to ensure the protection of participants’ rights and well-being.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Option A is permissible under research regulations because it involves the analysis of existing data and does not directly involve prisoners as research subjects.
It allows researchers to gain valuable insights into the relationship between age at first arrest and adult criminal history while avoiding many of the ethical challenges associated with research on incarcerated populations.
On the other hand, Option B is problematic due to its direct involvement with prisoners and the use of financial incentives, which raise ethical concerns related to coercion, informed consent, and undue influence.
Therefore, when conducting research involving prisoners, it is crucial to carefully consider the ethical implications and regulatory requirements to ensure the protection of participants’ rights and well-being.
Wagering Contract – Difference between Wagering and Contingent contract | Business Law
MBA,BBA.
I am Smirti Bam, an enthusiastic edu blogger with a passion for sharing insights into the dynamic world of business and management through this website.
I hold a MBA degree from Presidential Business School, Kathmandu, and a BBA degree with a specialization in Finance from Apex College,
- Marginal Costing Quiz – Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) | Cost Accounting - November 29, 2024
- As part of the consent process, the federal regulations require researchers to: - September 8, 2024
- Concept and Nature of Intellectual Property Rights – Explained in Detail | Business Law - January 30, 2024