I don't have the references but if I recall correctly "usability research" (such as that done by the Census Bureau, other agencies, and organizations) on how usable, understandable, readable, etc. their software for searching and presenting data is, does not require IRB review or approval.
Without all of the context information, it seems that it is possible that the goal is "software development" or "s/w validation" and therefore the effort would fall outside the purview of IRBs. Recall that the origin of IRBs was concern about biomedical research involving intervention where there was potential for harm to subjects. begin Aside: Educators or other practitioners can vary their practice to see how things work without IRB review as long as they do not do it in the organized/systematic way called research. Physicians can even do "off-label" prescription as long as it is not "research". end Aside. begin troll: Is it unethical to display a frequency count and percentages of the grades for a course (without any names or identifiability) since someone might feel badly about where they stand in the class? end troll. Art [EMAIL PROTECTED] Social Research Consultants University Park, MD USA Smith, David W. wrote: > For Federal Government sponsored research, there is a definition. An > essential part is the development of generalizable knowledge. One of > the tests of whether something is research is whether the purpose is to > publish a paper reporting the results. If yes, then it is research. > This has raised the question of whether program evaluation is research > or if a descriptive survey, producing rates and means, is research. It > usually is, but there are some gray areas. > > If the government gives you money to do research, such as from NIH or > NSF, then it is research. Some Federal agencies give money for > programs, that is, to deliver services. These aren't research. > > Most research universities now have policies that apply to all research, > not just Federally sponsored research. > > Some kinds of research are either exempt or expedited. The decision to > treat any kind of research as either one lies with the institution and > its IRB. This is also where some gray areas arise. > > Research universities can take the view that they don't take money to do > consulting, they take it to do research. So if money is involved at one > of these, then it must be research. I have even heard it said that if > they take money to do consulting, rather than research, that this could > endanger their tax exemption. I think this is a stretch, but some > lawyers take this seriously. (But it's their job to worry about this > sort of thing.) The whole point of this is that funded work at a > research university must be research if it isn't teaching or service. > > Regards, > > David Smith > > David W. Smith, Ph.D., M.P.H. > > Associate Professor of Biometry > > School of Public Health - San Antonio Campus > University of Texas > 7703 Floyd Curl Dr., Mail Code 7976 > San Antonio, TX 78229-3900 > > > voice: (210)567-3560 > fax: (210) 567-5942 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dennis roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 12:18 PM > To: Robert J. MacG. Dawson; Jerry Dallal > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: another ethical question > > > robert's comments lead me to ask: what makes research research? just > because i say it is? or say it isn't? > > > . > . > ================================================================= > Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the > problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: > . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . > ================================================================= > . . ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . =================================================================
