Human Subjects Review boards: A modest proposal.

1987 ◽  
Vol 42 (5) ◽  
pp. 516-517
Author(s):  
Wilse B. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Human Subjects ◽  
Modest Proposal ◽  
Review Boards

IRB Creep: Federal Regulations Protecting Human Research Subjects and Increasing Instructors' Responsibilities

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane A. Riordan ◽  
Michael P. Riordan
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Institutional Review Boards ◽  
Federal Regulations ◽  
Federally Funded ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Accounting Faculty ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Human Research Subjects ◽  
Review Boards

ABSTRACT: Federal regulations require oversight of federally sponsored research involving human subjects. Universities have responded by forming Institutional Review Boards (IRBs). Although these regulations only apply to federally funded projects, universities have extended the oversight to include all projects involving human subjects. From our own experience, we observe that not all accounting faculty are aware of their responsibilities to their local boards. The sanctions for failing to follow required procedures depend on the infraction, and range from an order to cease work on the project to termination of university service for the faculty member and expulsion for the student. This report helps accounting faculty understand how the review process may affect their role as instructors and serves as encouragement to them to become familiar with the requirements of local review boards.

Educational Research and the Protection of Human Subjects

1977 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 477-519 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin S. DuVal
Keyword(s):  
Educational Research ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Institutional Review Boards ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Legal Restrictions ◽  
Research On Human Subjects ◽  
Protection Of Human Subjects ◽  
Judicial Recognition ◽  
Review Boards

Educational research is increasingly subject to legal restrictions designed for the protection of human subjects of research. In this article the author discusses legal restrictions–both in the courts and under HEW regulations–on educational research, comparing these restrictions with those on biomedical research. He finds that although educational research in particular instances may give rise to suits for damages for invasion of privacy or intentional infliction of psychological distress, the legal issues relating to educational research will most often be resolved in proceedings before institutional review boards charged by HEW with the responsibility for passing upon proposals to conduct research on human subjects. He argues that the interests protected in proceedings before institutional review boards are not limited to those that have received judicial recognition in suits for damages. The author finds that the requirement that the informed consent of subjects be obtained presents difficult issues for educational research. He notes in particular the problems presented by research proposals that as an element of the research design contemplate the observation of subjects without their knowledge and the use of children as research subjects.

Online Research and Obtaining Human Subjects/IRB Approvals

2015 ◽  
pp. 261-276
Author(s):  
Benjamin J. Bates ◽  
Ben Birch
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Institutional Review Boards ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Online Research ◽  
Federal Regulations ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Review Boards

The development of digital computing and the growth of the Internet have opened up new opportunities to engage in online research. These online research practices involving human subjects, often involving relatively new technologies, can create tension between the online investigator and the Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) who are required to review and approve such research prior to data collection. This chapter aims to reduce this tension by discussing the associated ethics issues and applicable federal regulations, identifying specific concerns from the perspective of IRBs, and offering suggestions as to how best to address these concerns in applications in a way that can hopefully serve both the researcher and the review board.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document