Subjectivity, Power, and the IRB

Professional Geographer

Volumn 64, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 7-15

  Martin, Deborah G ^a   Inwood, Joshua ^b  

^a CLARK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

Author keywords

human subject; institutional review board; power; research ethics; subjectivity

Indexed keywords

ETHICS; INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK; RESEARCH;

EID: 84861155637     PISSN: 00330124     EISSN: 14679272     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00330124.2011.596781     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. American Association of University Professors (AAUP). 2000. Institutional review boards and social science research Report of Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure. http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/comm/rep/A/protecting.htm (last accessed 24 June 2009)
2. Bradley, M. 2007. Silenced for their own protection: How the IRB marginalizes those it feigns to protect. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 6(3): 339-49. http://www.acme-journal.org/Volume6-3.htm (last accessed 20 July 2009)
3. Burris, S. and Welsh, J. 2007. Regulatory paradox: A review of the enforcement letters issued by the Office for Human Research Protection. Northwestern Law Review, 101(2): 643-86. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/lawreview/issues/101.2.html (last accessed 12 June 2009)
4. Cahill, C. 2007. Repositioning ethical commitments: Participatory action research as a relational praxis of social change. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 6(3): 360-73. http://www.acme-journal.org/Volume6-3.htm (last accessed 20 July 2009)
5. Cahill, C. 2007. "Participatory ethics. Special issue". In ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies Edited by: Cahill, C., Sultana, F. and Pain, R. Vol. 6, (3). http://www.acme-journal.org/Volume6-3.htm (last accessed 20 July 2009)
6. Carpenter, D. 2007. Institutional review boards, regulatory incentives, and some modest proposals for reform. Northwestern Law Review, 101(2): 687-706. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/lawreview/issues/101.2.html (last accessed 12 June 2009)
7. Coe, F. L. 2007. The costs and benefits of a well-intended parasite: A witness and reporter on the IRB phenomenon. Northwestern Law Review, 101(2): 723-34. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/lawreview/issues/101.2.html (last accessed 12 June 2009)
8. De Vries, R., DeBruin, D. A. and Goodgame, A. 2004. Ethics review of social, behavioral, and economic research: Where should we go from here?. Ethics & Behavior, 14(4): 351-68.
9. De Vries, R., DeBruin, D. A. and Goodgame, A. 2004. "Conducting human research. Special issue". In Ethics & Behavior Edited by: DuBois, J. Vol. 14, (4)
10. Elwood, S. 2007. Negotiating participatory ethics in the midst of institutional ethics. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 6(3): 329-38. http://www.acme-journal.org/Volume6-3.htm (last accessed 20 July 2009)
11. Gunsalus, C. K. 2004. The nanny state meets the inner lawyer: Overregulating while underprotecting human participants in research. Ethics & Behavior, 14(4): 369-82. http://law.bepress.com/uiuclwps/papers/art42 (last accessed 30 June 2009)
12. Hamburger, P. 2004. Getting permission. Northwestern Law Review, 101(2): 405-92. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/lawreview/issues/101.2.html (last accessed 12 June 2009)
13. Israel, M. and Hay, I. 2006. Research ethics for social scientists: Between ethical conduct and regulatory compliance, London: Sage.
14. Kelman, H. C. 1972. The rights of the subject in social research: An analysis in terms of relative power and legitimacy. American Psychologist, 27(11): 989-1016.
15. Kelman, H. C. 2007. "Symposium on censorship and institutional review boards. Special issue". In Northwestern Law Review Edited by: Lindgren, J., Murashko, D. D. and Ford, M. R. Vol. 101, (2). http://www.law.northwestern.edu/lawreview/issues/101.2.html (last accessed 12 June 2009)
16. Menikoff, J. 2007. Where's the law? Uncovering the truth about IRBs and censorship. Northwestern Law Review, 101(2): 791-800. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/lawreview/issues/101.2.html (last accessed 12 June 2009)
17. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. 1979. The Belmont Report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.htm (last accessed 26 June 2009)
18. Shea, C. 2000. Don't talk to the humans: The crackdown on social science research. Lingua Franca, 10(6): 26-34. http://mailer.fsu.edu/~njumonvi/irb-article.htm (last accessed 18 September 2009)
19. Sieber, J. E. 2004a. Empirical research on research ethics. Ethics & Behavior, 14(4): 397-412.
20. Sieber, J. E. 2004b. "Using our best judgment in conducting human research". In Ethics & Behavior Vol. 14 (4), 297-304.
21. Stark, L. 2007. Victims in our own minds? IRBs in myth and practice. Law and Society Review, 41(4): 777-86.