Ethics and Behavior 14 (4):351 – 368 (2004)

Authors
Debra Debruin
University of Minnesota
Abstract
It is not unusual for researchers to complain about institutional review board (IRB) oversight, but social scientists have a unique set of objections to the work of ethics committees. In an effort to better understand the problems associated with ethics review of social, behavioral, and economic sciences (SBES) research, this article examines 3 different aspects of research ethics committees: (a) the composition of review boards; (b) the guidelines used by these boards to review SBES - and in particular, behavioral health - research; and (c) the actual deliberations of IRBs. The article concludes with recommendations for changes in the review process and with suggestions for filling the gaps in knowledge about the way IRBs work.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1207/s15327019eb1404_6
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 58,437
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

View all 12 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
27 ( #389,707 of 2,420,984 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #543,702 of 2,420,984 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes