The Holocaust study is a very good example of why oral history projects should be reviewed by the IRB. Among the criteria for IRB review are those projects that have the potential to cause physical, psychological, social, or economic harm. Questions asked of the population involved (prison guards and others) certainly do that. Most importantly, though, is the ability of subjects to know they can say "NO" to the researcher. Informed consent forms tell the subjects that they don't have to respond. If there's no IRB review, there is probably no informed consent form, which means the subjects may not know they can refuse to answer. In addition, the fact that the interviewer is from a university adds "authority" to the questions, and a respectful older person may feel compelled to answer the questions. The term "generalizable" does not mean it has a predictive quality, as Barbara suggests. In fact, it has a more vague or indefinite meaning. It also implies, in a research way of thinking, that the information uncovered will be disseminated. Robert Bloomberg does not need approval to talk to his uncle about World War II. Bob isn't doing research with a large sample, he's not planning on publishing, he's doing the questioning as a nephew, not a university professor, and---above all--his uncle has the ability to say "No." Gene Stein San Diego State University Research Foundation -----Original Message----- From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@hrinet.org] On Behalf Of Barbara Gray Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 8:44 AM To: xxxxxx@hrinet.org Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] Anthropology, History and Rhetoric Our IRB has been having similar discussions. The question that keeps coming up is about the definition of research and specifically "contributing to generalizable knowledge," with "generalizable" being the undefined word. Does "generalizable" connote an ability to predict outcomes based on research results? If ability to predict is what makes the activity one that contributes to generalizable knowledge, then where do all the studies using qualitative methods fit in? One of our IRB members is actually doing an oral history project about the Holocaust that the IRB has not reviewed (our current policy based on the OHA/OHRP decision). Some of her interviewees served as guards in the concentration camps. Disclosure of what some have told her could definitely put these people at risk. She also interviews survivors, who can obviously have some strong emotional/psychological response to recall of events. Some IRB members think this should have been reviewed by the IRB because of potential harms; others think that, although she should be (and is) well aware of her ethical responsibilities, it is not an IRB matter because the project will not contribute to generalizable knowledge (i.e., offer a predictive model of some sort). Perhaps it is the sensitivity of the research, and not the generalizability, specific activities, research design, or discipline that should drive what is subject to IRB review, tempered with a healthy respect for the varying accepted disciplinary methods for collecting research data within the social sciences. Our IRB is talking about developing a parallel review structure for non-federally funded research--don't know if it would be any less restrictive, but it may at least be more understandable to social scientists, historians, and educators. But we're waiting to see the result of the proposed changes to expedited review criteria. I have mixed feelings about this, and like all of you, no good answers. Ms. Barbara H. Gray Director of Grants & Contracts Valdosta State University 1500 North Patterson Street Valdosta, GA 31698-0429 Telephone: 229-333-7837 Fax: 229-245-3853 Email: xxxxxx@valdosta.edu -----Original Message----- From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@hrinet.org] On Behalf Of Bloomberg, Robert Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 11:17 AM To: xxxxxx@hrinet.org Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] Anthropology, History and Rhetoric So let me see if I got this right-- If I ask my uncle, who is 84, to relate to me his experiences, say, during WWII, I need informed consent and IRB approval? -----Original Message----- From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@hrinet.org]On Behalf Of Elisabeth Sherwin Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 10:57 AM To: xxxxxx@hrinet.org Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] Anthropology, History and Rhetoric So do you make History submit to IRB and then get exempt? ====================================================================== Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists") ====================================================================== ====================================================================== Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists") ====================================================================== ====================================================================== Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists") ====================================================================== ====================================================================== Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists") ======================================================================
