Bias in Diverse Research: Law Ethics

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Background of the Case and Legal Implications
Assessment Bias Analysis
Ethical Implications for Diverse Populations
The Role of Norming in Creating Bias
References

Introduction

Modern social and legal research is often faced with an inherent structural unfairness of measurement instruments and perceived norms. Control groups and widely utilized scales systematically overestimate privileged groups of respondents while taking advantage of the underprivileged groups of respondents. This tendency is caused by the scientific analysis systems themselves being designed, most often, by the members of the privileged groups, who perceive themselves as normal variables. When the norm is rigid and uniform in its behavioral patterns and their variations alike, the members of other social, ethnic and cultural groups are perceived as outliers, decreasing the representative value of a study.

Background of the Case and Legal Implications

For a first section of the report, which addresses the background of the case and its legal implications, the American Equal Opportunity Employment Act, known also as the VII amendment to the U.S. constitution was chosen. First passed in 1972 and edited in 1991, the act outlaws the employment opportunity discrimination against African Americans and other minorities. The implications include that practices such as systematic differences in payment for identical tasks and systematic differences in career progression speed between majorities and minorities were made illegal. Furthermore, the Act requires of employers to make reasonable accommodation to the religious needs of their employees, such as to provide days off on religious holidays for members of other faith then Christian.

Discrimination is thereby made illegal against any individual, with common discriminatory factors including race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, disability, genetic information or age. It was established to address the systematic power abuse and unequal opportunity provision in the national employment practice to any individual that did not, one way or otherwise, fit the established ideal in their characteristics. Researchers have commented in the acts role to dismantle in particular the family responsibilities expectations and the implicit bias showcased by employers worldwide towards female employees. The concept is generally referred to as maternal discrimination, and relates to the tendency of employer to reluctantly hire women between the ages of 20 and 40. The reluctancy is of a discriminatory nature, since it is tied to the perceived stereotype of these female employees becoming mothers and being less able to dedicate their full time to work. With the EEOC revision in 1991, a wave of court cases filed by female employees against their employers followed, revealing the wide prevalence of such issue.

The fundamental nature and contextual purpose of the EEOC is to target unconscious bias that prevent employers from providing equal opportunities and rewards to their employees regardless of their social characteristics. With bias having a systemic origin, they have already been implemented in the employment practices and now require to be dismantled (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 1991). It is not sufficient to simply not engage with current situation, as it is not fully possible, since companies require the ability to operate. By continuously working within the existing bias, people unwillingly perpetuate them further, continuing the cycle. Hence there emerges an active necessity to revise the social systems that have been plagued by the unequal group treatment of its members.

Assessment Bias Analysis

Modern social and psychological researchers are polarized and challenged by the wide popularity of standardized assessment methods and frameworks in the studies that involve minority groups. The systemic differences of study results between different ethnic groups tend to emerge throughout the modern research body, often with little to no dependence on the field itself. In psychology, Black, Hispanic, Asian and Arab patients and clients are underdiagnosed or misdiagnosed with much greater frequency then their white counterparts. Studies have linked this tendency to the existence of the Eurocentric standard in the current theoretic framework, which prioritizes the way of life of a certain group over the rest. This prioritization is inherently disproportionate and leads to the emergence of the assessment bias.

Outliers and uncharacteristic behavioral patterns in social sciences are generally difficult to address, with the reasons behind them generally belonging to one of the following groups. Firstly, performance and behavioral differences from an established pattern might be linked to ones genetic influences. Secondly, the environment and pre-existing conditions might shape a persons behavior and lead to the unexpected results. Thirdly, these two influences may combine resulting in unexpected special cases the system is generally not equipped to address. And finally, a participants outlier status can be a direct consequence of a mistake within the system that does not account properly for a participants variables.

For a test to be biased, it must on a systemic basis overestimate or underestimate the variable it is trying to assess. In biased research this occurs due to the evaluation procedures and norming being pre-disposed to measure a certain set of neutral characteristics above another set of neutral characteristics. Since the presence of bias in research with diverse groups is a one of the topical scientific issues, it is fair to assume that the majority of researchers are somewhat familiar with it. However, researchers themselves, regardless of their commitment to inclusion and diversity, are generally constrained by time and financial resources. They are unlikely to dismantle the systemic bias individually, since the system itself serves as a tool for them to work on the research question of choice.

Ethical Implications for Diverse Populations

When a study involves working with a wide range of diverse groups its representative value increases. Different perspectives and experiences enhance the overall quality of any paper in the area of social sciences, since sociological research ins continuously faced with the challenge of inclusivity. However, particularly when a research lies within the psychological field, ethical implications and considerations arise when interviewing a diverse group of respondents. These considerations are caused by the wide variety of factors, including cultural differences, multigenerational historical traumas, systemic bias and potential intergroup clashes with other respondents.

It the context of social sciences, diversity generally refers to inclusion of more marginalized and disenfranchised groups alongside the more privileged ones. It may concern a wide range of characteristics, however is primarily brought up in relation to race, gender, class and social orientation. These factors are influential for ones level of privilege and initial power in the modern society, which favors some of the variations in these characteristics above others. Diversity in research and assessment is instrumental to challenge these existing dynamics, which are not only unfair, but lead to false perceptions of the surrounding world. With all of these factors in mind, every researcher should aim for working with diverse populations. However, these levels of unequal power between the groups of participants must be taken into account. Particularly when the study involves intergroup interaction, a researcher must be prepared to mediate potential conflicts between members of different groups of participants. Social inequalities and power dynamics must be taken into account when assessing the causes and consequences of the conflict.

Furthermore, when working with a diverse group it is a researchers responsibility to prevent and, if necessary, address the biases presented in the research questions. Social sciences in general tend to adopt the white Eurocentric cultural and religious background as the norm. The tendency is explored more in the upcoming section of the report, but in practice it might compromise the research materials without a scientists discriminatory intention. Thus, although scientific accuracy is required for any research, if a scientist is working with a diverse group they are ethically obliged to check the questions and exercises for potentially marginalizing implications.

The Role of Norming in Creating Bias

The concept of norming refers to the idea of there existing a constructed norm, a behavioral pattern expected from a certain group of individuals. It is primarily used in the psychological and achievements assessment, and is typical for the performance review studies. In particular, tests that measure an individuals performance against the group average are referred to as norm-referenced assessments. These studies are widely utilized in education, as they allow the academical stakeholders to measure a students progress when compared to the other people of their age.

However, as the norm is constructed through the data available on a selected group, norming might present a serious problem in research when used excessively or incorrectly. In psychology, assessments are generally tasked with a purpose of identifying and studying individual behavioral patterns and personality characteristics. When a perceived difference or similarity with the established group is factored into an individual assessment, it might be perceived differently. The efficiency of individual personality research becomes compromised when a psychologist focuses excessively on it being normal or abnormal (Cohen & Swerdik, 2017). In such cases, the reference framework is not always helpful, as historically one is more likely to perceive a new thing negatively if it opposes the existing established pattern.

Furthermore, the norming procedures themselves are complicated and require a great amount of resources to be carried out correctly. The researchers behind the process are statistically likely to exclude the ethnically, socially and economically disadvantaged groups from their research. As a result, the established norms appear to be uneven and unrepresentative of people whose groups did not take part in the norming process to begin with. These biases are particularly evident in the scientific areas that rely on the colonial notions of the human norm. Sports science presents an illustrative example, where the eurocentrism of the existing performance guidelines currently presents a major problem to the evaluation process of the athletes. Generally, the lack of representativity and inclusivity in the norm testing can be tied to the demographic characteristics of the researchers themselves. Since the majority of the acting academics share the same race and gender, as well as similar age groups and economic backgrounds, they are likely to develop lacking norming procedures.

Finally, norm-referenced studies often rely on large amounts of short questions with multiple choice and no ability to further expand ones entry. To carry out the norm-referenced testings comparative potential, researchers prioritize the standardized assessments to increase processing times. Thus, even when the norming process is conducted carefully, the norm-referenced test structure often does not leave enough room for nuance, natural variation and contextual differences.

References

Cohen, R. J., Swerdlik, M. E. (2017). Psychological testing assessment: An introduction to tests and measurement. 9th edition, McGraw-Hill Education

United States., Federal Depository Library Program,, United States., & United States. (1991). U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Click Here To Order Now!