Learn Before
Case Study

Based on this scenario, explain why this study qualifies for expedited review and describe how the administrative review process will differ from a standard full-board review.

Case context: A psychology professor is proposing a study to measure reaction times in response to visual stimuli. The task is similar to playing a simple video game. The researcher identifies that the study is not exempt, but because the task is no more stressful than activities participants encounter in their daily lives, it qualifies as minimal risk.

Question: Based on this scenario, explain why this study qualifies for expedited review and describe how the administrative review process will differ from a standard full-board review.

Sample answer: The study qualifies for expedited review because it poses no more than minimal risk to participants, meaning the risks are no greater than those encountered by healthy individuals in daily life (like playing a simple video game). The administrative process will differ because it does not require a review by the full IRB committee; instead, it can be evaluated and approved by just one member of the IRB or by a separate sub-committee operating under the IRB's authority.

Key points:

  • The visual stimulus task is a minimal-risk activity comparable to daily-life events.
  • Studies posing minimal risk qualify for the expedited review pathway.
  • Expedited review replaces full-committee deliberation with a review by one IRB member or a specialized subcommittee.

Rubric: The response must demonstrate comprehension by: 1. Linking the video game task to the definition of minimal risk (risks encountered in daily life). 2. Explaining that the expedited review process allows a single member or a designated subcommittee to approve the protocol, bypassing the need for a full-committee review.

0

1

Updated 2026-05-27

Contributors are:

Who are from:

Tags

KPU

Research Methods in Psychology - 4th American Edition @ KPU

Related