Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
psy400ch2p41-46
psy400ch2:THE INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| institutional review boards (IRBs) | protecting the health and well-being of research participants, liable for the research they approve. |
| IRBs ensure that researchers treat participants with | respect, consider potential risks and benefits, and secure the confidentiality of participants and their data. |
| IRB reviews proposals submitted by researchers prior to the start of a research project, | evaluating the proposals in light of the ethical principles outlined by the APA |
| two aspects of the IRB organization | the committee itself and the staff that supports the committee |
| The Committee | at least five members, one with research focus is in the sciences, one nonscicntific, and another with no institution ties |
| The science person is usually an active researcher | in the behavioral or biomedical sciences |
| the nonscientist researcher is | often from the humanities |
| "non-affiliated” individual is generally someone from the local community, | often connected to local churches, medical facilities, or community organizations |
| standards can vary widely between social-behavioral and | biomedical IRB panels, even at the same institution |
| Staff Members do an initial review of the proposal to ensure that it has been fully completed, that all the proper forms | (e.g., consent forms, copies of surveys or questionnaires) have been included, the information within the proposal is consistent |
| Of all IRB committee members, | staff members are the people you should get to know |
| Collaborative Research | conducted by researchers at different institutions; all affiliated institutions will need to grant approval |
| planning and working with de-identified data (data in which the identifying information about participants has been removed) | not be interacting with human subjects, their institutional IRB may not require them to obtain approval |
| Cross-cultural Research involves different ethical rules and regulations, often | with few or no standing institutional review board committees. |
| mission creep: the expansion of IRB oversight to include areas unrelated to the protection of human subjects | such as evaluating questions researchers want to ask in qualitative research. |
| definitions of risk used by many boards have expanded such that | they require researchers to proactively manage any problematic outcome that might occur, however unlikely. |
| well-intentioned informed consent policies have made certain types of research entirely unworkable | (e.g., participant observation), while creating substantial barriers to research that employs deception as part of its protocol |
| With more rigid and expansive IRB oversight, entire areas of scientific inquiry on high-profile, | controversial issues may fall outside of the realm of permissibility |
| time spent by researchers responding to tangential IRB requests could | actually take time away from real measures to ensure participant safety |
| researchers must take the basic responsibility for ethical conduct and that | IRBs should be used as a resource, rather than the ultimate source of ethical judgments. |
| DEFINING RESEARCH: systematic investigation, including research development, | testing and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge |
| Generalizable knowledge | conclusions drawn from data, underlying principles or laws of nature, explanations, predictions |
| Northwestern University’s IRB excludes journalism activities | patient Case reports, instructor classroom data, death records, autopsy records, or cadaver specimens, oral history |
| activities that are not intended to produce generalizable knowledge and test particular hypotheses | via a systematic investigation tend not to be counted as research |
| systematic attempts to evaluate a particular hypothesis or hypotheses and to | apply findings to a broader context are considered research |
| investigations intended to be published in an academic journal | or presented at an academic meeting likely qualify as research |
Created by:
james22222222