A Case for Limiting the Reach of Institutional Review Boards

Institutional review boards (IRBs) governing social and behavioral research seem to systematically exceed the guidelines established by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedicai and Behavioral Research. We examine a clandestine study of prostitution and another of em...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe American sociologist Vol. 42; no. 1; pp. 145 - 152
Main Authors Hessler, Richard M., Donnell-Watson, D. J., Galliher, John F.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Boston Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 01.03.2011
Springer US
Springer
Springer Nature B.V
Subjects
Accountancy
Behavioral Science Research
Behavioral Sciences
Behavioural sciences
Biomedicine
Commercial regulation
Commissions
Employment
Employment Discrimination
Equal Opportunities (Jobs)
Ethics
Evaluators
Experiments
Field research
History and organization of sociology
History, theory and methodology
Informed consent
Institutional review boards
Occupations
Organization of profession, research and teaching. Deontology. Sociology of sociology. Epistemology
Prostitution
Protection
Research Ethics
Research Methodology
Research Subjects
Review boards
Sexuality
Social ethics
Social research
Social science research
Social Sciences
Sociology
Sociology of knowledge and ethics
Sociology of knowledge and sociology of culture
Sociology of science
United States Of America
Clandestine research
Research ethics
Prostitution business
Employment discrimination
Institutional review boards
Ethics
Prostitution
Occupational discrimination
Biomedicine
Behaviour
Social sciences
Institutions
Scientific Research
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Institutional review boards (IRBs) governing social and behavioral research seem to systematically exceed the guidelines established by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedicai and Behavioral Research. We examine a clandestine study of prostitution and another of employment discrimination and conclude that IRBs, more concerned about being sued than they are about protecting research subjects, get in the way of science and cause ethical problems as a consequence. We discuss the ethical principles involved and call for a suspension of all IRB review in the social and behavioral sciences.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0003-1232
1936-4784
DOI:10.1007/s12108-011-9122-5