Remember to respond to two peers 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.

Please don’t let both responses be more than a paragraph each, NO MORE THAN ONE PAGE.

PEER1 -ED

Examples of vulnerable populations in cognitive psychology are those who suffer from some sort of cognitive impediment (Oruche, 2009). People who are considered vulnerable populations in cognitive psychology are those with psychiatric or developmental disorders, have situational or natural impairments, or those with any condition that affects the person’s ability to consent, make decisions, think or logically (Oruche, 2009).

 The strive to help people with cognitive impairments must act accordingly with ethical principles of research in order to accumulate reliable data. Psychological scientists must value the principle of non-maleficence in order to determine what is appropriate for testing with people from vulnerable populations (Dunn et al., 2015). If the risk of harm for the population outweighs the predicted benefits, then the testing should not be completed (Dunn et al., 2015).

The dangers of unsupported claims to help cognitive functioning are that most of these claims are overgeneralized and exaggerated (Spiegel, 2010). The content from which the raw data originates from may be reliable, but these claims often overextended to support a much larger independent claim that the original research does not directly support (Spiegel, 2010). The issue here is that the general public will not fact check these claims and will likely believe whatever statement is being advertised. 

Testing on vulnerable populations applies to the programmatic theme of ethics. This applies to ethics because researchers always must obey by the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (American Psychological Association, 2017). The principles outlined act as rules that must be followed in order to complete research affirming to the most ethical protocol (American Psychological Association, 2017). This regulatory set of principles outlines responsibilities that guide research of vulnerable populations such as appropriate ways to gain consent, nonmaleficence, and humane assessment procedures (American Psychological Association, 2017).

References

American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct (2002, amended effective June 1, 2010, and January 1, 2017). http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.html

Dunn, L.B., Alici, Y. & Roberts, L.W. (2015). Ethical Challenges in the Treatment of Cognitive Impairment in Aging. Curr Behav Neurosci Rep 2, 226–233 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40473-015-0055-0 

Oruche U. M. (2009). Research With Cognitively Impaired Participants. Journal of nursing law, 13(3), 73227162. https://doi.org/10.1891/1073-7472.13.3.89 

Spiegel, A. (2010). 'Mozart Effect' Was Just What We Wanted to Hear. NPR. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128104580

PEER2-BB

Some examples of vulnerable populations in cognitive psychology include those who are cognitively impaired, homeless, in an unstable living situation, kids in foster care, people with mental health issues and much more. Life is not easy, and many people face struggles in their life that make them vulnerable. Mine is my OCD especially now that I have kids, I am constantly paranoid and worried that if I do not check the doors enough at night something bad will happen to them. It is frustrating.

Using emotional intelligence is very important when working with vulnerable people. Not only should care and understanding be applied but the basic ethical principles of research. Such as consent and giving a full rundown of exactly what the testing involves. Imagine if you are doing a test on an anxious person, they need to know everything not only for ethical reasons but for piece of mind.

The line should be drawn where the person feels uncomfortable. I read a lot about tests that involve a headband to assess ADHD on people who have been diagnosed with it. Maybe making a session too lengthy will give invalid data because they get bored and want it over with. Or they get frustrated because of their cognitive issues and instead of stopping you continue the test. I think the line is drawn when the tests cause discomfort and stress.

The dangers of unsupported claims by research and media is false hope. Things like adhd and anxiety do not have a permanent fix but they do have ways to cope with it in a healthy way. Also claims are not fact and making people really believe in something that is not set in stone can cause a lot of heartbreak and they just become even more vulnerable.

The concept of testing on vulnerable populations applies to the programmatic theme ethics. When it comes to testing anything, ethics needs to be brought in to provide safety to those being tested and questioned. When it comes to vulnerable people there needs to be even more of a focus on ethics. People are different. A person with crippling anxiety and a person who has none at all have different limits to what they are ok with. So, asking ethical questions and making sure all the bases are covered are extremely important in order to provide safety to the people being tested.