- EFIMM0077 Dissertation (MSc A&F) UOB Assignment Answer UK
- The Effect of Poor Accounting Methods on a Business Dissertation Sample, UK
- NX9625 Assess Knowledge Of Contemporary Professional Practice In Business And Management Informed By Theory And Research Dissertation Sample UON UK
7132PY Capstone Research Ethics Proposal Sample (Coventry MSc Psychology)
For information and reference only – not to be submitted as your own work.
This extract shows how a Coventry University MSc Psychology student might shape the three parts of the 7132PY Project Planning and Ethics capstone document. It is built around one invented, low-risk example topic so you can see the structure, the ethics reasoning and the reflective voice. You can browse related briefs in our Coventry University questions hub, and our companion 7132PY capstone research ethics proposal guide explains the marking logic. If you need a proposal shaped around your own topic, our dissertation research proposal help page explains how we support it.
What this sample covers
- Part 1: extracts from an integrated research proposal and ethical review, including an ethics-risk table and a participant documents checklist.
- Part 2: a short global and social impact analysis extract.
- Part 3: a Gibbs-based reflective essay extract.
- Illustrative topic only: a qualitative interview study on how UK office workers set boundaries around out-of-hours messages. Every figure marked (illustrative) is invented for demonstration.
| Part | Indicative length | Weighting | What the marker looks for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proposal and ethical review | About 1,500 words | 40% | Justified design, realistic recruitment, workable analysis, ethics reasoning tied to the BPS codes |
| Global and social impact | About 500 words | 20% | Evidence-led link to social good, cultural awareness, a named framework |
| Reflective essay | About 1,000 words | 30% | Structured reflection, honest challenges, professional identity, future goals |
| Writing quality and appendices | Across the document | 10% | APA 7th, inclusive language, complete and consistent appendices |
Part 1: Integrated Research Proposal and Ethical Review (extract)
1.1 Rationale and aim
Out-of-hours messaging is now routine in many UK offices, yet research on how employees actually negotiate boundaries tends to rely on surveys that capture frequency, not reasoning. The proposed study asks what strategies non-managerial office workers describe when they decide whether to respond to messages outside contracted hours, and how they justify those choices to themselves and to colleagues.
The aim is exploratory, so no directional hypotheses are tested. The guiding research question is: How do office-based employees make sense of, and manage, expectations to respond to work messages outside contracted hours?
1.2 Design and justification
A qualitative design using semi-structured interviews is proposed. The question concerns meaning and decision-making, which a fixed-response survey would flatten. Interviews also let participants raise boundary strategies the researcher has not anticipated, something a closed questionnaire cannot do.
A survey was considered and rejected for the main study because it would answer a different question, namely how common the behaviour is. A short demographic form will still be used to describe the sample.
1.3 Participants and recruitment
The target is 12 adults (illustrative) aged 18 or over who have worked in an office-based role in the UK for at least six months. Exclusion applies to anyone currently in a line-management role, since managers set the expectations the study explores, and to anyone currently on sick leave for work-related stress, to avoid distress on a topic close to their situation.
Recruitment will use a poster and short message shared through university alumni networks and professional social media groups. Purposive sampling will aim for variation in sector, working pattern and tenure. Nobody will be approached through their own employer, which removes any sense of pressure to take part.
1.4 Procedure and analysis
Interviews (about 40 minutes each, illustrative) will take place on a university-licensed video platform, with audio recorded on a password-protected device. A topic guide will open with general working patterns before moving to specific incidents. Recordings will be transcribed verbatim, anonymised and then deleted once transcripts are checked.
Data will be analysed with reflexive thematic analysis following the six phases described by Braun and Clarke (2006): familiarisation, coding, generating themes, reviewing themes, defining themes and writing up. Because reflexivity is central, a reflective journal will be kept throughout and summarised in the final write-up.
1.5 Ethical review
The proposal follows the principles in the BPS Code of Human Research Ethics (British Psychological Society [BPS], 2021a) and the values in the BPS Code of Ethics and Conduct (BPS, 2021b): respect, competence, responsibility and integrity. The plan is written to fit the university ethics application format, with each risk linked to a specific mitigation and document.
| Ethical issue | Likelihood / severity (illustrative rating) | Mitigation | Where evidenced |
|---|---|---|---|
| Participants criticising an employer, creating a risk of identification | Medium / medium | Pseudonyms, removal of employer and job-title details, explicit instruction not to name colleagues | Information sheet, transcription protocol |
| Mild distress when discussing work pressure | Low / medium | Right to pause or stop, signposting to support services in the debrief, no probing beyond what the participant offers | Debrief sheet, topic guide |
| Data security (recordings held on a device) | Low / high | Encrypted storage, deletion of audio after transcript checking, access limited to researcher and supervisor | Data management section |
| Pressure to participate through personal networks | Low / low | No recruitment of direct contacts, voluntary wording, no incentives beyond thanks | Recruitment poster |
| Withdrawal after data are anonymised | Medium / low | Clear cut-off date stated in advance (two weeks after interview, illustrative) | Consent form |
1.6 Participant documents checklist (appendices)
- Participant information sheet: purpose in plain English, what taking part involves, time commitment, voluntary nature, withdrawal rights and cut-off date, confidentiality limits, data storage and retention, contact route for concerns.
- Consent form: separate tick boxes for taking part, audio recording, use of anonymised quotations and understanding of withdrawal limits.
- Debrief sheet: restated aims, thanks, support signposting, researcher contact details.
- Recruitment poster and demographic form, both using inclusive language and no unnecessary identifiers.
Personal data handling will rely on a lawful basis consistent with UK GDPR, which the Information Commissioner’s Office notes is likely to be public task or legitimate interests for new research (Information Commissioner’s Office [ICO], 2026).
Part 2: Global and Social Impact Analysis (extract)
The study’s most direct contribution is to workplace wellbeing policy. Findings about how employees justify replying, or not replying, could inform employer guidance on communication norms and strengthen the evidence behind “right to disconnect” discussions, which are developing differently across countries.
Three levels are considered. Locally, organisations could use themes to review team messaging etiquette. Nationally, the findings may add qualitative depth to debates about working-time regulation. Globally, the analysis recognises that the UK sample reflects one cultural setting: expectations of availability differ across work cultures, so results should not be generalised without further cross-cultural work.
A public health framing, treating chronic work-related stress as a preventable population-level risk, offers one lens. A social justice lens is also useful, because workers with less job security may feel less able to refuse out-of-hours contact. The proposal therefore commits to reporting how themes differ by employment security, not only by sector.
Part 3: Reflective Essay on Personal and Professional Development (extract)
The reflection uses Gibbs’ (1988) reflective cycle, with Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning cycle noted where it clarifies how my thinking changed.
Description and feelings
My first draft of the ethics application proposed recruiting through a former workplace group. My supervisor asked whether people might feel obliged to say yes. I felt defensive at first, because I had treated the form as an administrative hurdle rather than a design tool.
Evaluation and analysis
On reflection the question exposed a real power dynamic that I had not considered. Reading the BPS (2021a) guidance on voluntary participation showed me that ethical risk is built into recruitment choices, not added at the end. Revising the plan to use open networks cost me two weeks but made the sampling logic stronger.
Conclusion and action plan
I learned that ethical reasoning and methodological reasoning are the same activity viewed from two angles. Next, I will draft consent materials earlier, test them with a peer, and log each revision with a reason. This links to my aim of working in applied research, where ethics approval is a routine professional step, and to the integrity and responsibility principles in the BPS (2021b) Code of Ethics and Conduct. Resilience is also on the list: the revised plan needed three rounds of feedback before it was ready.
Further help
If your own proposal needs a sounder methods section, see our dissertation methodology help. Once your draft is written, proofreading services can check APA 7th formatting and appendix consistency. You can also read independent comments on our student reviews page.
About the expert
Subject expert: Jasper Edwards, who holds a Master’s in Psychology from King’s College London and works across psychological research, health psychology and social psychology.
References
British Psychological Society. (2021a). BPS code of human research ethics. https://www.bps.org.uk/guideline/bps-code-human-research-ethics
British Psychological Society. (2021b). Code of ethics and conduct. https://www.bps.org.uk/guideline/code-ethics-and-conduct
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Further Education Unit, Oxford Polytechnic.
Information Commissioner’s Office. (2026). A guide to lawful basis. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-resources/lawful-basis/a-guide-to-lawful-basis/
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.
UPTO 35% DISCOUNT
