The IRB Paradox: Could the Protectors Also Encourage Deceit?

Keith-Spiegel, Patricia; Koocher, Gerald P.

doi:10.1207/s15327019eb1504_5

Cited by 66 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Now he includes elaborate, detailed content he knows will bore readers while omitting or distorting elements of his protocol that he believes might cause his IRB to recoil. He reports that this tactic has consistently worked (Keith-Spiegel & Koocher, 2005).…”

Section: Practical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Scientists Want from Their Research Ethics Committee

Keith-Spiegel

Koocher

Tabachnick

2006

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

Self Cite

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Practical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Scientists Want from Their Research Ethics Committee

Keith-Spiegel

Koocher

Tabachnick

2006

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

Self Cite

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It also made recommendations for training individuals to be more culturally competent and comfortable in working with the community while adhering to IRB guidelines. The university was open to these recommendations and acknowledged that something needed to be changed in this type of evaluation and training process to be more prepared when researchers engaged with the community [17][18][19][20].…”

Section: Alternative Constructions To Irbsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bringing the IRB into the Community: A New Framework for the Ethical Regulation of CBPR

Puckett¹

2017

MOJPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The conduct of institutional review boards (IRB) in ensuring ethical protocol is followed has been debated and evaluated for a number of years. The IRB decision-making process utilizes a number of regulations in order to protect human subjects in research purposes. Many critics of the system argue that the strict guidelines make it increasingly difficult to retrieve beneficial results and conduct the experiment as initially planned. However, others believe that the standardization involved with the IRB processes makes research practice safer, more transparent, and more effective. Our paper critiques the ethical component of IRB research and its effects on inhibiting or promoting public health practice. In particular, we will address whether current IRB guidelines constrain communitybased participatory research.

show abstract

“…The way in which the IRBs are fulfilling their mission is not always satisfactory for the investigators in the research field (Van Santvoort, et al, 2008). Sometimes bureaucratic procedures or excessive attention to futilities cause serious delays (Alberti, 2000;Nicholl, 2000;Tully et al, 2000;Giles, 2005;Keith & Koocher. (2005); Martinson et al, 2005;Dingwall, 2006;Yawn et al, 2009).…”

Section: The Role and Functioning Of Medical Ethical Reviewing Boardsmentioning

confidence: 99%