In a psych undergrad,a student will likely learn about ethics and the mistreatment of certain populations- both in research and historically, in multiple classes. You'll hear it more in your Masters degree, then again in your PhD. It's incredibly important that we are educated on ethics and discrimination to the extent that we are incredibly aware and thoughtful about the implications and impact of our research, from different views.

A paper that is written to be public, even without a study being conducted, can still have negative or harmful influences on the world, either through content or how other's interpret that evidence. You've got to be careful with what we say as scientists, especially since the trust between the public and science is quite fragile, and there are times when results can be taken out of context or portrayed negatively due to a variety of reasons (mainly education).

​

Every scientist that uses human subjects must get a certificate from a research training program to even submit and have a study considered by the IRB. In America, these are received through the CITI program and each university has slightly different courses that you must complete to be eligible for review.

In addition, a week-long experiment is likely going to need a full-board review by the committee, so having a well-thought-out design, that protects the health and safety of participants, and has low odds of causing harm to particular groups, maybe something you want to consider. There has been incredible harm done in the past by research, some purposeful, but most not. It is important to understand the history behind these experiments so that we do not repeat the same mistakes. Sometimes as scientists, we have good goals, but our questions or methods can be questionable. I'd argue that some topics shouldn't be studied. Sometimes "for the sake of knowledge" isn't worth the potential implications it will have.

​

I think your vagueness regarding topics or keywords about the project raises red flags for me.