Mostly agreed. But what if the department chair is in the
English department and sees no harm in a little behavior modification
experiment being assigned by her faculty? Are we behavioral
scientists supposed to keep our nose out of other disciplines' affairs
and let them do their own unmonitored behavioral science
research?
wedj
George,Your solution would work out great if all faculty could be regarded as totally ethical and knowledgeable about all potential shortcomings of their own ethical judgement when it comes to research with human subjects. But if this were true, we wouldn't need IRBs in the first place. The problem arises when the faculty member causes or allows students to do projects that should be IRB reviewed, but aren't, because in the faculty member's judgement, the projects are safe, or because they fall within the faculty member's academic freedom. Regardless of whether the faculty member assumes legal liability for the unethical research of his/her students, I for one, as a citizen of the human subject science community, am not willing to let the research go on. I don't think the veil of academic freedom should allow one to hide from ethical responsibility; not that it often does, but it could. I have had direct dealings with a faculty member who wanted his/her students to do research, under the guise of academic freedom, that would've been deemed by an IRB, and certainly me, to be unethical. It raised quite a hoopla on the campus. Potentially worse than that is when classroom based research falls into the laps of other disciplines; such as when an English professor assigns a behavior modification project to her/his class. Is the English professor required to have her/his assigned human-subjects project reviewed by the IRB? I should hope so, but I doubt the English professor would necessarily know that it should. No doubt the academic freedom vs. IRB review issue is a messy one, but I think it's one we need to start dealing with. wedj
Wallace,
I fully understand and appreciate your concerns. However, I do not believe that the primary responsibility of IRB's are to function as "academic police". In many respects, I believe that is the responsibility of a department chair. At least, I take it to be one of my responsibilities as a chair. At a chair workshop many years ago on legal liabilities of chairs, I was told that department chairs are liable for what they know as well as what they should have known about illegal/unethical behavior of faculty. So, I believe that department chairs have a responsibility to be gatekeepers in their respective departments and to be vigilant when it comes to their curriculum, syllabi, classroom assignments, etc. Unethical behavior of all sorts can certainly occur in the classroom or lab or faculty office. I for one would vehemently resist IRB review of all course syllabi as well as research protocols to ensure that my colleagues are as ethical as I am. Lines must be drawn somewhere. I assume my colleagues are ethical until or unless I have information to the contrary. However, I do not assume that they are knowledgeable with respect to ethical guidelines regarding the use of human participants in research (unless they are psychology colleagues, in which case, they better be). That is why I am available, as are other IRB board members, to consult with faculty that may wish to stray "out of their areas of expertise". I expect their respective department chairs to send that message since it has been sent to them. Take care.
George
--
George D. Goedel
Professor & Chairperson
Department of Psychology
Northern Kentucky University
Highland Hts., KY 41099-2000
(859) 572-5574
fax (859) 572-6085
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
