A researcher strongly believes Essay

1.A researcher strongly believes that physicians tend to show fe virile nurses less attention and venerate than they show male nurses. she sets up an experimental fill involving observations of health clinics in different conditions. In explaining the study to the physicians and nurses who will participate, what steps should the researcher take to eliminate experimental bias based on two experimenter expectations and participant expectations.?The first step should be to con spotr that using an experiment in clinical conditions is a bad idea. An ethnographic study force be a better approach. The next step should be to consider what is really being studied. Is the point of the study to determine how physicians treat female nurses when compared to male nurses, or is it to determine the degree of residual? Would the individuals gender (both that of the deposit and that of the nurse) make a difference? The results of a study would not be valid without considering the possibility th at it is gender, not sex, that makes the difference.If pressed to design this experiment, I would gain permission to do the observation (or experiment, if you prefer). Then I would ask the doctors and nurses involved to participate in training vignettes. I would image the vignettes so that my work could be triangulated by other researchers. I would mystify a research assistant play the role of a patient, but would not disclose to the doctor and nurse that this was not a real patient. I would ask the doctor(s) to film the training vignette, perhaps of the substance to decide whether or not to order a particular type of test, twice.The first time they would be given a male or female nurse the second time, the reverse. The videos would be observed by myself and a research diary kept, with my own(prenominal) feelings about the vignettes and the participants actions recorded so that either bias could be accounted for later. I would write my conclusions about the individuals behavior s. Then, I would have two other researchers do the same. The conclusions of the three researchers would be compared and if two of the researchers had the same opinion about the behaviors of the physician, that opinion would be recorded as the official observation. The outlier observation would be recorded and archived.If the time was available I would film each physician six times with a masculine male nurse, with a feminine male nurse, with a masculine female nurse, with a feminine female nurse, and with an obviously transgender male and female. The repetitive constitution of doing this could easily be explained by aphorism the client was not clear what they wanted yet.2.In what ways is the fight-or-flight response helpful to humans in emergency situations?The fight or flight response helps the individual who is in an emergency situation to get the blood pumping so that the physical structure can effectively run, or fight. The meaning rate goes up the individual may sweat or d evelop goose bumps. The sympathetic social class of the autonomic nervous system g all overns flight or fight. Once the emergency is over or perhaps, thither never was an emergency, but the person believed there was the parasympathetic division of the autonomic nervous system takes over and helps calm the body down. The parasympathetic system stores energy for the next time it is needed in an emergency. The simple answer to this question is that fight or flight helps the human body prepare to survive.3 frequently research is being conducted on repairing faulty sensory organs through devices such as personal guidance systems and eyeglasses, among others. Do you think that researcher should attempt to improve normal sensory capabilities beyond their innate range (for example make human visual or audio capabilities more than sensitive than normal)? What problems might this cause?This is both a question of science, and of ethics. We may be able to do something (even without unwan ted side effects) but this does not mean we should. Once the capacity exists to better ourselves through technology, individuals who are in matched situations will want this technology to make themselves more competitive. Perhaps a cochlear implant, for example, can be used not only for the non-hearing to hear, but to make the hearing have something resembling super-hearing, without being detectable by others. It is easy to foresee a situation where CEOs would want this implant to makeit possible to hear what members of the gore are muttering, or that football players would want it so they can hear what the opposing quarterback is saying in the huddle.From a technical perspective, however, the human body is not comprised of stand-alone parts any more than a car or truck is. The body is put unitedly in a system. The bodys parts are designed to work together in a particular way, a good deal the same way that the carburetor, air filter, engine, spark plugs, and cooling system are designed to work together in a vehicle. The vehicle cannot work correctly if the driver of a 68 Mustang takes out the enkindle pump designed for that vehicle and inserts one designed for a 2002 Humvee.The frame is not the same the engine is not the same. Parts are not plug-and-play they are not interchangeable. They have to be matched. In a car, trying to string together parts designed for a variety of vehicles will result in one of three outcomes either the parts wont work together as a whole, they will work together but badly, or they will work together and then turn around out prematurely. The human body would be exactly the same. One size does not fit all.