According to the lawyer who sat on our IRB, surveys typically did not
require IRB approval as the potential respondent could always choose NOT to
respond. The legal notion was that, by responding to a survey, the
individual was providing implicit consent by her/his behavior.
My experience is that some IRB committees take it upon themselves to be a
bit more powerful than they are/or have to be for protecting subjects from
"reasonable risks".
I spoke with a colleague whose research using FDA approved (as safe) odors
was rejected because it was possible that some subjects might have a
negative reaction to the odors. Isn't this always true? Does that mean that
all odor research should be discontinued?
My point here is that the priority of IRBs should be protection of subjects
indeed. But there is NO research which is completely risk-free.
I know some of these comments are off the original topic... but I think
they're worth a second thought.
Cheers,
Vincent Prohaska wrote:
> Yes. Even "non-sensitive" surveys need IRB approval. I think the issue of
> the sensitivity of the survey is an IRB matter.
>
> Vinny
>
> Vincent Prohaska, Ph.D.
> Associate Professor and Chair
> Department of Psychology
> Lehman College, City University of New York
> Bronx, NY 10468-1589
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 718-960-8204
> 718-960-8092 fax
--
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Steven M. Specht, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Psychology
Psychology Department
Utica College of Syracuse University
1600 Burrstone Rd.
Utica, NY 13502
(315) 792-3171
"To teach is to learn twice". - Joseph Joubert (1754-1824)
