[Air-l] Research question: interviewing online subjects?

[Justin Reedy]

On 5/18/07, Sam Ladner <samladner at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> They also insisted I insert a paragraph that my university would not hold
> anything against them based on their participation. I can only infer there
> was a rash of disappointed undergraduate applicants that had participated
> in
> university-based research....none of my participants understood the reason
> behind that phrase either.


I have heard a lot of folks in the social sciences express frustration at
IRBs and ethics boards, but I think it's very important to remember the
basics of why they exist: to protect research subjects and represent their
interests.

Most researchers in all of the sciences (life sciences, social sciences,
etc.) are very conscientious in their work, and would not willingly harm
their subjects or expose them to suffering (in the case of animals used in
life sciences research, for example). However, there have been far too many
cases where scientists acted in ways that harmed (or could have harmed)
subjects for the sake of their research. The IRB is an entity that is
supposed to represent the interests of subjects, just as researchers
represent their own interests.

Some of the protections or informed-consent clauses may seem strange and
inappropriate for your particular line of research, but IMO, when protecting
a group that has in the not-so-distant past been left unrepresented in the
process or study design and implementation (I'm speaking of research
subjects here), it is far better to be safe than sorry. Also, some of those
clauses can seem weird for your work, but upon further reflection, it's not
too much of a stretch to see how someone could feel coerced into
participating or doing something else they'd rather not do. A large state
university, for instance, can be a powerful entity in a research subject's
community and may seem intimidating to people.

Just to reiterate my overarching point: I try to view an IRB as an entity
representing the interests of subjects, who get no say in the design and
implementation of a study otherwise.

My two cents as a (lowly) graduate student,
Justin Reedy
University of Washington
Department of Communication