11 ms·
> The Institutional Review Board doesn't seem to be much of an "ethical board" YES! I know you intended this as an insult, but it is actually one of the most i
by seoaeu 5y ago
> The Institutional Review Board doesn't seem to be much of an "ethical board"
YES! I know you intended this as an insult, but it is actually one of the most insightful comments in the thread. An IRB is not supposed to be an ethical board. They have a much more limited scope of overseeing human subject research.
> How did they conclude this doesn't count as "human subjects research" given the expectation is to measure a human response to an email (framed as from a person)?
Because there's a precise definition of "human subject research" which is actually a lot more limited than many people think.
- hatsunearu 5y agoThen it sounds like the blame is solely on the researchers for thinking IRB approval == greenlight to do whatever the hell we want. Or we have a mismatch in the social contract of research.
- dawnbreez 5y ago> Because there's a precise definition of "human subject research" which is actually a lot more limited than many people think. We've had two different cases now where that disconnect has led to studies which cause stress and other harm to human subjects, because the study was classified as "not human subject research" despite directly involving humans at every step of the way. Perhaps that definition needs to be rewritten.