Addressing IRB Concerns
During the institutional review, an Institutional Review Board (IRB) may identify ethical concerns or questions about a proposed study. Researchers must respond to these inquiries in good faith and without delay, which may require them to make additional modifications to their research design and procedures to better protect participants prior to resubmitting their protocol.
0
1
Tags
KPU
Research Methods in Psychology - 4th American Edition @ KPU
Related
Value of the Institutional Approval Process
Addressing IRB Concerns
Adhering to the Protocol
What is the primary purpose of securing institutional approval before beginning a research study?
A researcher may begin a study immediately after submitting a detailed research protocol to an oversight committee, provided they intend to adhere strictly to ethical standards.
Dr. Miller is planning a new laboratory study to investigate the effects of social media use on teenage self-esteem. To adhere to the requirements for Institutional Approval, in which order should Dr. Miller perform the following steps?
To obtain institutional approval, researchers must submit a protocol that allows an oversight committee to evaluate the ethical implications of their study. Match each specific research protocol detail with the ethical concern an Institutional Review Board (IRB) must analyze to determine if approval should be granted.
In addition to a formal oversight committee such as an Institutional Review Board (IRB), who else is explicitly authorized to provide the formal permission required for institutional approval in many academic settings?
To understand the institutional approval process, match each element of the ethical review with the description that best explains its role.
A researcher receives a notification from an oversight committee stating their study is 'Approved Pending Minor Revisions.' The researcher decides to start the study immediately, believing that the required changes to the consent form wording are a mere formality. In evaluating this decision against professional ethical standards, the researcher's action is considered unauthorized because they have not yet secured the final, formal _____ required before data collection begins.
Dr. Smith is conducting a psychology study on stress and memory. Because the study is for an undergraduate class and uses a low-risk online survey, she is permitted to begin administering the survey to classmates while waiting for her instructor to review and formally approve her research protocol.
An oversight committee such as an Institutional Review Board (IRB) evaluates research proposals to confirm they meet ethical standards. To facilitate this review, researchers must submit a detailed document describing the study's purpose, design, risks, benefits, and participant safeguards, which is known as a research _____.
Evaluate the following stages of the ethical research workflow. Order them chronologically to show how a researcher properly integrates institutional approval into their study from start to finish.
Describe the requirements for obtaining institutional approval before initiating a study, including who must grant permission and what document must be submitted to the oversight committee.
Evaluate Dr. Aris's decision. Explain why he is incorrect under the rules of institutional approval, and identify what specific step he must complete before administering his survey.
Suppose you are a student researcher planning a laboratory experiment for a psychology course. Apply the rules of institutional approval to describe the specific authorization you must obtain and the document you must draft to secure it before starting your experiment.
What must researchers typically submit to an oversight committee, such as an Institutional Review Board (IRB), to secure institutional approval before beginning a study?
As long as a psychological study is carefully designed to safeguard participants, a researcher can begin the study prior to receiving formal permission from an oversight committee.
Dr. Rivera is planning a new psychological study on sleep and cognition. Arrange her actions in the correct chronological order to demonstrate the proper process for obtaining institutional approval.
Analyze Dr. Aris's preparation for her new psychology study. Match each of her actions or situations to the specific component of the institutional approval process it represents.
You are evaluating a proposed psychology study. The researcher has designed a highly safe methodology but argues that submitting it to an oversight committee is an unnecessary delay. To strictly enforce ethical standards, you must reject this argument because all researchers are required to secure ________ ________ from their oversight committee or instructor before beginning a study.
Which of the following entities is typically responsible for reviewing a researcher's detailed protocol to grant institutional approval before a psychology study begins?
When an oversight committee reviews a proposed study, its primary goal is to evaluate the statistical significance and overall scientific importance of the research.
Professor Rossi has drafted a detailed methodology for an observational study on playground behavior. Applying the guidelines for psychological research, he knows he cannot immediately start observing children. Instead, his required next step is to submit his detailed research protocol to an ________ to ensure his study adheres to ethical standards and adequately safeguards participants.
Analyze the following scenarios where a psychology researcher has violated the rules of Institutional Approval. Match each scenario to the specific requirement that was neglected.
Dr. Chen designs an anonymous online survey about student study habits. Because the survey collects no identifying information and poses minimal risk, she decides to launch it to collect preliminary data before submitting her research protocol to the Institutional Review Board (IRB). She plans to submit the full protocol only if the preliminary results look promising. Evaluate Dr. Chen's actions according to the requirements for institutional approval. Which of the following is the most accurate
Ethical Review of a Research Proposal
A psychologist proposes a study to examine the effects of 48 hours of continuous sleep deprivation on the problem-solving skills of student volunteers. The proposal states that participants will be compensated and that the findings could have important implications for understanding workplace safety. When this proposal is submitted for review, what is the most critical issue the review committee responsible for protecting human participants will focus on?
Addressing IRB Concerns
Minimal Risk
Institutional Approval
Expedited Research
Exempt Research
What is the primary responsibility of an Institutional Review Board (IRB)?
An Institutional Review Board (IRB) is permitted to consist entirely of scientific experts from the same university to ensure the most rigorous technical review of research protocols.
Match each specific research decision with the Institutional Review Board (IRB) ethical criterion it is designed to satisfy.
A psychologist proposes a study on the impact of social isolation on cognitive performance. Arrange the following ethical determinations in the logical order an Institutional Review Board (IRB) must perform them to satisfy the federal mandate of risk-benefit optimization.
A researcher argues that their university's Institutional Review Board (IRB) is 'unqualified' to review their neuroimaging study because one of the mandatory members is a local librarian with no scientific background. According to federal guidelines, this researcher's evaluation is ______ because the board is legally required to include at least one nonscientist to ensure that research protocols are viewed from a broad ethical perspective outside of the scientific community.
According to federal regulations, what is the minimum number of members required to form an Institutional Review Board (IRB), and what is one of the mandatory requirements for its composition?
Match each Institutional Review Board (IRB) requirement or function with its correct description based on federal ethical guidelines in psychological research.
A university forms an Institutional Review Board (IRB) composed of psychology professors and the university’s Director of Human Resources. This committee satisfies the federal requirement of having at least member who is unaffiliated with the institution.
A researcher submits a study design investigating the effects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performance. Arrange the steps an Institutional Review Board (IRB) takes to analyze and approve this research proposal in the correct logical order.
Suppose you are the director of a new research hospital and must establish its first Institutional Review Board (IRB) to oversee psychological and medical studies. Which of the following configurations successfully constructs a board that adheres to all federal requirements for diversity, scientific representation, and institutional independence?
Federal regulations require that an institutional review board be composed entirely of scientists in order to properly evaluate research protocols for potential ethical problems.
An Institutional Review Board (IRB) evaluates a research protocol where participants are initially deceived about the study's true purpose. The board approves the protocol only on the condition that participants receive a full explanation of the deception immediately following the session. In this scenario, the board is making a judgment that the modified _____ procedures are adequate to meet ethical standards for participant autonomy.
A newly established psychiatric hospital receiving federal funding is forming its first Institutional Review Board (IRB) to review proposed psychological studies. The hospital administration suggests a committee consisting of three clinical psychologists from the hospital staff, one hospital financial director, and one psychiatric nurse also employed by the hospital. Explain whether this proposed committee meets the federal composition requirements for an IRB, referencing specific criteria. Then
Analyze this scenario from the perspective of an Institutional Review Board (IRB) reviewer. Diagnose the ethical shortcomings of the proposed research protocol based on the core criteria the IRB is responsible for ensuring. How should the board decide on this protocol, and what specific modifications should they require the researcher to make before granting approval?
A university researcher argues that since their study on student exam anxiety only uses an anonymous online survey and presents no physical risk, they do not need to submit their research protocol to the Institutional Review Board (IRB). Evaluate the validity of this researcher's argument based on federal IRB regulations.
Which of the following best describes the primary responsibility of an Institutional Review Board (IRB)?
A university researcher plans to conduct an experiment involving mild deception to study social conformity. Before the experiment can proceed, the researcher must submit the study's protocol to the university's ____ to ensure that the potential risks to participants are minimized and justified by the expected benefits.
Learn After
What action must a researcher take if an Institutional Review Board (IRB) identifies ethical concerns with a proposed study?
Match each researcher action with the appropriate description of how it addresses ethical concerns raised by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) during the review process.
A researcher planning a study on social anxiety receives a notice from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) expressing concerns about the potential for psychological distress during the experiment. Arrange the following steps in the correct order to show how the researcher should ethically address these concerns.
If an Institutional Review Board (IRB) identifies a risk of participant coercion and requests a change to recruitment procedures, a researcher who defends their original method as 'standard practice' without proposing any procedural adjustments has fulfilled the ethical requirement to respond in good faith.
When an Institutional Review Board (IRB) identifies ethical concerns during the review process, researchers are expected to respond to these inquiries in good faith and without delay.
What is the primary intent behind the requirement for researchers to respond 'in good faith' to ethical concerns raised by an Institutional Review Board (IRB)?
A researcher has received an IRB decision letter listing four distinct ethical concerns. Match each IRB concern (left column) with the protocol modification that best addresses it (right column).
An IRB review letter identifies two concerns: (1) the recruitment materials target financially vulnerable individuals with an unusually large cash incentive, and (2) the consent form does not explain how participants' personal data will be protected. A researcher responds by revising the consent form but leaves the recruitment materials completely unchanged. Because the researcher did not address both concerns _____, the IRB is likely to withhold approval and request further revisions before the
A researcher studying trauma recall in college students receives an IRB decision letter listing concerns about participant safety, consent adequacy, and data privacy. Evaluate the following researcher actions and arrange them in the order that best ensures all ethical concerns are fully resolved before the protocol is resubmitted.
If an Institutional Review Board (IRB) expresses concerns about a researcher's recruitment methods being potentially coercive, and the researcher responds by arguing that the methods are 'standard practice' without proposing any procedural adjustments, they have failed to meet the ethical requirement of responding in _____.
Based on the protocol review process, what are the primary responsibilities of a researcher when an Institutional Review Board (IRB) identifies ethical concerns or questions regarding their proposed study? Detail how they should respond and what types of actions they may need to take before resubmitting.
Explain what it means for Dr. Aris to address the IRB's concerns 'in good faith' and 'without delay' in this situation. What must Dr. Aris do with their study's design and procedures before resubmitting the protocol?
Imagine you receive an IRB review stating that your proposed online survey on sensitive personal history does not adequately protect participant anonymity. Apply the standard procedure for addressing IRB concerns: describe the tone and timing of your response, and state the exact procedural step you must complete before resubmitting your protocol.