Assignment Prompt & Instructions
All information is in the attachments. please read throughly to address all directions and requirements.
**files (2)**
– ## PSY-803Rubric-EthicalControversiesinBehaviorism.pdf
– Screenshot2026-06-08at2.01.13PM.png
**## PSY-803Rubric-EthicalControversiesinBehaviorism.pdf**
6/8/26, 2:02 PM
Page 1 of 2about:srcdoc
Ethical Controversies in Behaviorism – Rubric Total 240 points
Criterion
1. 1:
Unsatisfactory
2. 2: Less Than
Satisfactory
3. 3: Satisfactory 4. 4: Good 5. 5: Excellent
Ethical Analysis and
Critique
Research-Based Discussion
of Specific Historical
Instances Where
Behaviorist Techniques
Were Applied With the Aim
of Behavior Change but
Raised Ethical Debates
0 points
A research-based
discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
either missing or not
evident to the reader.
35.04 points
A discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
present, but inaccurate or
illogical. No research
support is offered.
39.36 points
A research-based
discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
presented, but cursory.
Research support is limited
and from dated resources.
43.68 points
A research-based
discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
present and thorough.
Research support is
limited, but from current
resources.
48 points
A research-based
discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
thoroughly presented with
rich detail. Research
support is thorough and
from current resources.
Contemporary Relevance
Research-Supported
Statement Connecting the
Historical Examples to
Contemporary
Psychological Practices and
Ongoing Ethical Debates
0 points
A research-supported
statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
not presented.
43.8 points
A statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
presented, but inaccurate
or illogical. No research
support is offered.
49.2 points
A research-supported
statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
presented, but is cursory.
Research support is limited
and from dated resources.
54.6 points
A research-supported
statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
presented and thorough.
Research support is
limited, but from current
resources.
60 points
A research-supported
statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
thoroughly presented with
rich detail. Research
support is thorough and
from current resources.
Reflection
Reflection on how Studying
Behaviorism's Ethical
Controversies Influences
Your Own Ethical
Considerations as a
Psychological Practitioner
and Researcher
0 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is not
presented.
43.8 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is
presented, but illogical and
disorganized. There is no
evidence of introspection.
49.2 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is
presented, but displays
little depth of thought or
evidence of introspection.
54.6 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is
presented and displays
reasonable evidence of
introspection.
60 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is
thoroughly presented and
displays significant
evidence of introspection.
Synthesis and Argument 0 points
No synthesis of source
information is evident.
Statement of purpose is
not followed to a justifiable
conclusion. The conclusion
does not support the claim
made. Argument is
incoherent and uses non-
credible sources.
17.52 points
Synthesis of source
information is attempted,
but is not successful.
Sufficient justification of
claims is lacking. Argument
lacks consistent unity.
There are obvious flaws in
the logic. Some sources
have questionable
credibility.
19.68 points
Synthesis of source
information is present, but
pedantic. Argument is
orderly, but may have a
few inconsistencies. The
argument presents
minimal justification of
claims. Argument logically,
but not thoroughly,
supports the purpose.
Sources used are credible.
Introduction and
conclusion bracket the
thesis.
21.84 points
Synthesis of source
information is present and
meaningful. Argument
shows logical progressions.
Techniques of
argumentation are evident.
There is a smooth
progression of claims from
introduction to conclusion.
Most sources are
authoritative.
24 points
Synthesis of source
information is present and
scholarly. Argument is
clear and convincing,
presenting a persuasive
claim in a distinctive and
compelling manner. All
sources are authoritative.
Thesis Development and
Purpose
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible
overall purpose or
organizing claim.
17.52 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are insufficiently developed
and/or vague; purpose is
not clear.
19.68 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are apparent and
appropriate to purpose.
21.84 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are clear and forecast the
development of the paper.
They are descriptive and
reflective of the arguments
and appropriate to the
24 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are clear and
comprehensive; the
essence of the paper is
contained within the thesis.
6/8/26, 2:02 PM
Page 2 of 2about:srcdoc
purpose.
Mechanics of Writing 0 points
Mechanical errors are
pervasive enough that they
impede communication of
meaning. Inappropriate
word choice and/or
sentence construction are
used.
8.76 points
Frequent and repetitive
mechanical errors distract
the reader. Inconsistencies
in language choice
(register), sentence
structure, and/or word
choice are present.
9.84 points
Some mechanical errors or
typos are present, but are
not overly distracting to
the reader. Correct
sentence structure and
audience-appropriate
language are used.
10.92 points
Prose is largely free of
mechanical errors,
although a few may be
present. A variety of
sentence structures and
effective figures of speech
are used.
12 points
Writer is clearly in
command of standard,
written, academic English.
APA Format 0 points
Required format is rarely
followed correctly. No
reference page is included.
No in-text citations are
used.
8.76 points
Required format elements
are missing or incorrect. A
lack of control with
formatting is apparent.
Reference page is present.
However, in-text citations
are inconsistently used.
9.84 points
Required format is
generally correct. However,
errors are present (e.g.
font, cover page, margins,
and in-text citations).
Reference page is included
and lists sources used in
the paper. Sources are
appropriately documented
though some errors are
present.
10.92 points
Required format is used,
but minor errors are
present (e.g. headings and
direct quotes). Reference
page is present and
includes all cited sources.
Documentation is
appropriate and citation
style is usually correct.
12 points
The document is correctly
formatted. In-text citations
and a reference page are
complete and correct. The
documentation of cited
sources is free of error.
© 2026. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
**Screenshot2026-06-08at2.01.13PM.png**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/screenshot2026-06-08at2-01-13pm-png)
**Screenshot2026-06-08at2.01.13PM.png**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/screenshot2026-06-08at2-01-13pm-png)
**## PSY-803Rubric-EthicalControversiesinBehaviorism.pdf**
6/8/26, 2:02 PM
Page 1 of 2about:srcdoc
Ethical Controversies in Behaviorism – Rubric Total 240 points
Criterion
1. 1:
Unsatisfactory
2. 2: Less Than
Satisfactory
3. 3: Satisfactory 4. 4: Good 5. 5: Excellent
Ethical Analysis and
Critique
Research-Based Discussion
of Specific Historical
Instances Where
Behaviorist Techniques
Were Applied With the Aim
of Behavior Change but
Raised Ethical Debates
0 points
A research-based
discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
either missing or not
evident to the reader.
35.04 points
A discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
present, but inaccurate or
illogical. No research
support is offered.
39.36 points
A research-based
discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
presented, but cursory.
Research support is limited
and from dated resources.
43.68 points
A research-based
discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
present and thorough.
Research support is
limited, but from current
resources.
48 points
A research-based
discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
thoroughly presented with
rich detail. Research
support is thorough and
from current resources.
Contemporary Relevance
Research-Supported
Statement Connecting the
Historical Examples to
Contemporary
Psychological Practices and
Ongoing Ethical Debates
0 points
A research-supported
statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
not presented.
43.8 points
A statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
presented, but inaccurate
or illogical. No research
support is offered.
49.2 points
A research-supported
statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
presented, but is cursory.
Research support is limited
and from dated resources.
54.6 points
A research-supported
statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
presented and thorough.
Research support is
limited, but from current
resources.
60 points
A research-supported
statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
thoroughly presented with
rich detail. Research
support is thorough and
from current resources.
Reflection
Reflection on how Studying
Behaviorism's Ethical
Controversies Influences
Your Own Ethical
Considerations as a
Psychological Practitioner
and Researcher
0 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is not
presented.
43.8 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is
presented, but illogical and
disorganized. There is no
evidence of introspection.
49.2 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is
presented, but displays
little depth of thought or
evidence of introspection.
54.6 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is
presented and displays
reasonable evidence of
introspection.
60 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is
thoroughly presented and
displays significant
evidence of introspection.
Synthesis and Argument 0 points
No synthesis of source
information is evident.
Statement of purpose is
not followed to a justifiable
conclusion. The conclusion
does not support the claim
made. Argument is
incoherent and uses non-
credible sources.
17.52 points
Synthesis of source
information is attempted,
but is not successful.
Sufficient justification of
claims is lacking. Argument
lacks consistent unity.
There are obvious flaws in
the logic. Some sources
have questionable
credibility.
19.68 points
Synthesis of source
information is present, but
pedantic. Argument is
orderly, but may have a
few inconsistencies. The
argument presents
minimal justification of
claims. Argument logically,
but not thoroughly,
supports the purpose.
Sources used are credible.
Introduction and
conclusion bracket the
thesis.
21.84 points
Synthesis of source
information is present and
meaningful. Argument
shows logical progressions.
Techniques of
argumentation are evident.
There is a smooth
progression of claims from
introduction to conclusion.
Most sources are
authoritative.
24 points
Synthesis of source
information is present and
scholarly. Argument is
clear and convincing,
presenting a persuasive
claim in a distinctive and
compelling manner. All
sources are authoritative.
Thesis Development and
Purpose
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible
overall purpose or
organizing claim.
17.52 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are insufficiently developed
and/or vague; purpose is
not clear.
19.68 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are apparent and
appropriate to purpose.
21.84 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are clear and forecast the
development of the paper.
They are descriptive and
reflective of the arguments
and appropriate to the
24 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are clear and
comprehensive; the
essence of the paper is
contained within the thesis.
6/8/26, 2:02 PM
Page 2 of 2about:srcdoc
purpose.
Mechanics of Writing 0 points
Mechanical errors are
pervasive enough that they
impede communication of
meaning. Inappropriate
word choice and/or
sentence construction are
used.
8.76 points
Frequent and repetitive
mechanical errors distract
the reader. Inconsistencies
in language choice
(register), sentence
structure, and/or word
choice are present.
9.84 points
Some mechanical errors or
typos are present, but are
not overly distracting to
the reader. Correct
sentence structure and
audience-appropriate
language are used.
10.92 points
Prose is largely free of
mechanical errors,
although a few may be
present. A variety of
sentence structures and
effective figures of speech
are used.
12 points
Writer is clearly in
command of standard,
written, academic English.
APA Format 0 points
Required format is rarely
followed correctly. No
reference page is included.
No in-text citations are
used.
8.76 points
Required format elements
are missing or incorrect. A
lack of control with
formatting is apparent.
Reference page is present.
However, in-text citations
are inconsistently used.
9.84 points
Required format is
generally correct. However,
errors are present (e.g.
font, cover page, margins,
and in-text citations).
Reference page is included
and lists sources used in
the paper. Sources are
appropriately documented
though some errors are
present.
10.92 points
Required format is used,
but minor errors are
present (e.g. headings and
direct quotes). Reference
page is present and
includes all cited sources.
Documentation is
appropriate and citation
style is usually correct.
12 points
The document is correctly
formatted. In-text citations
and a reference page are
complete and correct. The
documentation of cited
sources is free of error.
© 2026. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
**Screenshot2026-06-08at2.01.13PM.png**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/screenshot2026-06-08at2-01-13pm-png)
**## PSY-803Rubric-EthicalControversiesinBehaviorism.pdf**
6/8/26, 2:02 PM
Page 1 of 2about:srcdoc
Ethical Controversies in Behaviorism – Rubric Total 240 points
Criterion
1. 1:
Unsatisfactory
2. 2: Less Than
Satisfactory
3. 3: Satisfactory 4. 4: Good 5. 5: Excellent
Ethical Analysis and
Critique
Research-Based Discussion
of Specific Historical
Instances Where
Behaviorist Techniques
Were Applied With the Aim
of Behavior Change but
Raised Ethical Debates
0 points
A research-based
discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
either missing or not
evident to the reader.
35.04 points
A discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
present, but inaccurate or
illogical. No research
support is offered.
39.36 points
A research-based
discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
presented, but cursory.
Research support is limited
and from dated resources.
43.68 points
A research-based
discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
present and thorough.
Research support is
limited, but from current
resources.
48 points
A research-based
discussion of specific
historical instances where
behaviorist techniques
were applied with the aim
of behavior change but
raised ethical debates is
thoroughly presented with
rich detail. Research
support is thorough and
from current resources.
Contemporary Relevance
Research-Supported
Statement Connecting the
Historical Examples to
Contemporary
Psychological Practices and
Ongoing Ethical Debates
0 points
A research-supported
statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
not presented.
43.8 points
A statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
presented, but inaccurate
or illogical. No research
support is offered.
49.2 points
A research-supported
statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
presented, but is cursory.
Research support is limited
and from dated resources.
54.6 points
A research-supported
statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
presented and thorough.
Research support is
limited, but from current
resources.
60 points
A research-supported
statement connecting the
historical examples to
contemporary
psychological practices and
ongoing ethical debates is
thoroughly presented with
rich detail. Research
support is thorough and
from current resources.
Reflection
Reflection on how Studying
Behaviorism's Ethical
Controversies Influences
Your Own Ethical
Considerations as a
Psychological Practitioner
and Researcher
0 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is not
presented.
43.8 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is
presented, but illogical and
disorganized. There is no
evidence of introspection.
49.2 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is
presented, but displays
little depth of thought or
evidence of introspection.
54.6 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is
presented and displays
reasonable evidence of
introspection.
60 points
A reflection on how
studying behaviorism's
ethical controversies
influences your own ethical
considerations as a
psychological practitioner
and researcher is
thoroughly presented and
displays significant
evidence of introspection.
Synthesis and Argument 0 points
No synthesis of source
information is evident.
Statement of purpose is
not followed to a justifiable
conclusion. The conclusion
does not support the claim
made. Argument is
incoherent and uses non-
credible sources.
17.52 points
Synthesis of source
information is attempted,
but is not successful.
Sufficient justification of
claims is lacking. Argument
lacks consistent unity.
There are obvious flaws in
the logic. Some sources
have questionable
credibility.
19.68 points
Synthesis of source
information is present, but
pedantic. Argument is
orderly, but may have a
few inconsistencies. The
argument presents
minimal justification of
claims. Argument logically,
but not thoroughly,
supports the purpose.
Sources used are credible.
Introduction and
conclusion bracket the
thesis.
21.84 points
Synthesis of source
information is present and
meaningful. Argument
shows logical progressions.
Techniques of
argumentation are evident.
There is a smooth
progression of claims from
introduction to conclusion.
Most sources are
authoritative.
24 points
Synthesis of source
information is present and
scholarly. Argument is
clear and convincing,
presenting a persuasive
claim in a distinctive and
compelling manner. All
sources are authoritative.
Thesis Development and
Purpose
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible
overall purpose or
organizing claim.
17.52 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are insufficiently developed
and/or vague; purpose is
not clear.
19.68 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are apparent and
appropriate to purpose.
21.84 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are clear and forecast the
development of the paper.
They are descriptive and
reflective of the arguments
and appropriate to the
24 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are clear and
comprehensive; the
essence of the paper is
contained within the thesis.
6/8/26, 2:02 PM
Page 2 of 2about:srcdoc
purpose.
Mechanics of Writing 0 points
Mechanical errors are
pervasive enough that they
impede communication of
meaning. Inappropriate
word choice and/or
sentence construction are
used.
8.76 points
Frequent and repetitive
mechanical errors distract
the reader. Inconsistencies
in language choice
(register), sentence
structure, and/or word
choice are present.
9.84 points
Some mechanical errors or
typos are present, but are
not overly distracting to
the reader. Correct
sentence structure and
audience-appropriate
language are used.
10.92 points
Prose is largely free of
mechanical errors,
although a few may be
present. A variety of
sentence structures and
effective figures of speech
are used.
12 points
Writer is clearly in
command of standard,
written, academic English.
APA Format 0 points
Required format is rarely
followed correctly. No
reference page is included.
No in-text citations are
used.
8.76 points
Required format elements
are missing or incorrect. A
lack of control with
formatting is apparent.
Reference page is present.
However, in-text citations
are inconsistently used.
9.84 points
Required format is
generally correct. However,
errors are present (e.g.
font, cover page, margins,
and in-text citations).
Reference page is included
and lists sources used in
the paper. Sources are
appropriately documented
though some errors are
present.
10.92 points
Required format is used,
but minor errors are
present (e.g. headings and
direct quotes). Reference
page is present and
includes all cited sources.
Documentation is
appropriate and citation
style is usually correct.
12 points
The document is correctly
formatted. In-text citations
and a reference page are
complete and correct. The
documentation of cited
sources is free of error.
© 2026. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
**Screenshot2026-06-08at2.01.13PM.png**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/screenshot2026-06-08at2-01-13pm-png)