People! It seems pretty obvious that the issue here isn't research ethics at all. The issue is that, it would appear that an embarrassed university administration has decided to use its IRB to take revenge on a professor who has done important research that happens to reflect poorly on the school. If you're looking for an ethical issue THAT's the one to contemplate -- not minutia about how large a sample needs to be before a participant is effectively shielded from identification if an anecdote told about his performance on the research task.
Think I am jumping to conclusions? Consider: if the researcher had gone on to CNN (on a VERY slow news day) to explain that some of her subjects were not as good at recalling words that start with the letter "b" as they were words that start with the letter "q", how likely do you think it is that there would have been an abrupt IRB reversal? Burden of proof shifted. Chris --- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada [email protected] http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ ========================= On 2014-01-20, at 11:35 AM, MiguelRoig wrote: > Jim, I think your analogy is not quite on target. We are not talking about > disclosure to other students, it is disclosure to CNN, which can potentially > distribute that information worldwide! Also, and sad to say, getting a 20% on > a test may not be that unique; being in college and not being able to read > multisyllabic words is kind of unique ... or at least I hope so. > > Miguel > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jim Clark" <[email protected]> > To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" > <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:27:02 AM > Subject: RE: [tips] For your friends who question tenure... > > Hi > > The only way these statements could allow identification of individuals out > of the 183 students she worked with would be if the students themselves told > other people. But that opens a can of worms ... if some student tells others > that he got 20% on a test, is my posting the grades without naming the > student a violation of privacy? > > The episode has similarities to Elizabeth Loftus's experiences with an IRB > and perhaps again indicates the need to markedly curtail their activities > with respect to social science research, as called for I understand in the > National Research Council's recent report. > > http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18614 > > Take care > Jim > > > Jim Clark > Professor & Chair of Psychology > 204-786-9757 > 4L41A > > -----Original Message----- > From: MiguelRoig [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 8:20 AM > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) > Subject: Re: [tips] For your friends who question tenure... > > As a member of my institution's IRB, I reacted to the following segment: > "Willingham also shared anecdotes about students she’d worked with during her > career, such as one who was illiterate, and one who couldn’t read > multisyllabic words. Another student asked if Willingham could "teach him to > read well enough so he could read about himself in the news,". It seems to me > that it might, indeed, be possible to identify those individual students > based on the statements Willingham made. If so, that is a problem from an IRB > perspective because broadcasting such details about the students could > conceivably result in social harm for them. That aside, in addition to the > issue of tenure, this case also illustrates the need to be extremely careful > with all aspects of the research process when such research has the potential > of being controversial and of generating public interest. > > Miguel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christopher Green" <[email protected]> > To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" > <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 8:44:25 AM > Subject: [tips] For your friends who question tenure... > > For those of you (probably not many on this list) who might have thought that > tenure is unnecessary in this "modern" era to protect the integrity of > research from the political motivations of a vindictive administration. > > UNC IRB suddenly reverses its decision AFTER THE FACT on whether research > that shows many of its athletes to be functionally illiterate requires > oversight. > > http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/01/20/u-north-carolina-shuts-down-whistle-blower-athletes > > Sheesh! > Chris > --- > Christopher D. Green > Department of Psychology > York University > Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 > Canada > > [email protected] > http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ > ========================= > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=1133043.af3ec43309a63197bc82eb6702801542&n=T&l=tips&o=32912 > or send a blank email to > leave-32912-1133043.af3ec43309a63197bc82eb6702801...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=32913 > or send a blank email to > leave-32913-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=1133043.af3ec43309a63197bc82eb6702801542&n=T&l=tips&o=32918 > or send a blank email to > leave-32918-1133043.af3ec43309a63197bc82eb6702801...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=430248.781165b5ef80a3cd2b14721caf62bd92&n=T&l=tips&o=32924 > or send a blank email to > leave-32924-430248.781165b5ef80a3cd2b14721caf62b...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=32927 or send a blank email to leave-32927-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
