Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
American Journal of Evaluation
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Complexity of the IRB Process

Some of the Things You Wanted to Know About IRBs but Were Afraid to Ask

Using a question-and-answer format, this section addresses questions and concerns about the role of institutional review boards (IRBs) in monitoring the treatment of human participants in evaluation. According to the American Evaluation Association’s Guiding Principles for Evaluators, "Evaluators should abide by current professional ethics, standards, and regulations regarding risks, harms, and burdens that might befall those participating in the evaluation; regarding informed consent for participation in evaluation; and regarding informing participants and clients about the scope and limits of confidentiality" (for the full text, see http://www.eval.org/Guiding%20Principles.htm). Focusing on IRBs is important because evaluators receive varying levels of training in the regulations guiding ethical practice. In addition, evaluators have had disparate experiences with IRBs, ranging from being told that their work is exempt from review to receiving the same level of scrutiny that medical research receives. As academic institutions face increased scrutiny about their adherence to regulatory guidelines, many are becoming more vigilant (and authoritarian) about the behavior of institutional members.

Key Words: human participants • institutional review boards • respect for people

American Journal of Evaluation, Vol. 26, No. 3, 353-361 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/109821400502600307
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?