The smith family has very little money and no health insurance. a researcher approaches them and promises free healthcare for their three children for 2 years if he can subject the children to a series of experimental vaccines that may have serious side effects. the smith family feels compelled to participate to get the free health care. according to the apa code of ethics, this researcher is in violation of the principle of:

From the case described in the question, it seems that the researcher is inducing the Smith family to enroll their children in the study with the promise of free healthcare, despite the possibility of harm to the children.

In this case, the researcher is violating the first principle mentioned in the APA code of ethics, which is beneficence and nonmaleficence. This principle states that psychologists must perform work that is beneficial to others, but does not hurt anyone in the process of carrying out the work.

d. i assume the underlined word is "role." reformat if it isn't.

explanation:

role is closest to part because when replacing words, "playing a vital decision," "playing a vital activity," and "playing a vital dollar" don't make logical sense. the only meaningful choice is "playing a vital part."

this fits one of merriam-webster's definitions of role: "a function or part performed especially in a particular operation or process."