Social and behavioral researchers' experiences with their IRBs

Ethics and Behavior

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 1-17

  Ashcraft, Mark H ^a,b   Krause, Jeremy A ^a  

^a CLEVELAND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

Author keywords

IRB; IRB approval; Minimal risk; Research ethics; Research regulation

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548565509     PISSN: 10508422     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10508420701309614     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Bell, J., Whiton, J., & Connelly, S. (1998). Final report: Evaluation ofNIH implementation of Section 491 of the Public Health Service Act, mandating a program of protection for research subject. Retrieved July 31, 2006, from www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/hsp_final_rpt.pdf
2. Breckler, S. J. (2005). The problem with IRBs. Psychological Science Agenda, 19, November. Retrieved November 28, 2005, from http://www.apa.org/ science/psa/nov05_edcol.html
3. Breckler, S. J. (2006, February). The IRB problem. Monitor on Psychology, 37, 21.
4. Brown, J. G. (1998). Institutional Review Boards: A time for reform. Office of Inspector General, Department of Health and Human Services, OEI-01-97-00193.
5. Burris, S., & Moss, K. (2006). U. S. health researchers review their ethics review boards: A qualitative study. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 1, 39-58.
6. Bye, S., & O'Hara, A. (2006). Revisions to an approved study. In E. A. Bankert & R. J. Amdur (Eds.), Institutional review board: Management and function (pp. 251-253), Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett.
7. De Vries, R., DeBruin, D. A., & Goodgame, A. (2004). Ethics review of social, behavioral, and economic research: Where should we go from here? Ethics & Behavior, 14, 351-368.
8. Emmanuel, E. J., Wood, A., Fleischman, A., Bowen, A., Getz, K. A., Grady, C., et al. (2004). Oversight of human participants research: Identifying problems to evaluate reform proposals. Annals of Internal Medicine, 141, 282-291.
9. Ferraro, F. R., Szigeti, E., Dawes, K. J., & Pan, S. (1999). A survey regarding the University of North Dakota Institutional Review Board: Data, attitudes, and perceptions. Journal of Psychology, 133. 272-280.
10. Gunsalus, C. K., Bruner, E. M., Burbules, N. C., Dash, L., Finkin, M., Goldberg, J. P., et al. (2006). Mission creep in the IRB world. Science, 312, 1141.
11. Illinois White Paper. (2005). Improving the system for protecting human subjects: Counteracting IRB "Mission Creep." Retrieved August 28, 2006, from www.law.uiuc.edu/conferences/whitepaper/
12. Keith-Spiegel, P., & Koocher, G. P. (2005). The IRB paradox: Could the protectors also encourage deceit? Ethics & Behavior, 15, 339-349.