Learn Before
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.
Question: 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.
Sample answer: When an Institutional Review Board (IRB) identifies ethical concerns, a researcher is responsible for responding to these inquiries in good faith and without delay. Additionally, the researcher must make modifications to their research design and procedures to better protect study participants before resubmitting their protocol.
Key points:
- Respond in good faith
- Respond without delay
- Make modifications to research design and procedures
- Protect participants better
- Complete modifications prior to resubmitting
Rubric: Grading criteria: 1) Explicitly mentions responding in good faith. 2) Mentions responding without delay. 3) Mentions modifying the research design or procedures. 4) Mentions doing this to better protect participants. 5) Mentions that modifications must be completed before/prior to resubmitting the protocol.
0
1
Tags
KPU
Research Methods in Psychology - 4th American Edition @ KPU
Related
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 protocol can move forward.
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.