IRB Case Study 2

Level of IRB Review

In the federal regulations there are three levels of IRB review (exempt, expedited, or full board) which also have specific definitions and guidance on which level is needed (John Carroll University, 2020). There are also human subject regulations decision charts that can be used found on the Office for Human Research (OHRP) website that are helpful.  Prisoners are considered a vulnerable population and any research involving prisoners should receive careful review.  In this case study, the level used for IRB review would be full board review due to the risks to the participants who are prisoners and a vulnerable population (John Carroll University, 2020).  IRB reviews will help ensure beneficence, respect for all persons, and justice according to The Belmont Report (1979).   The board must also decide if the potential benefits outweigh the possible risks.  The Department of Justice also has additional regulations to safeguard prisoners as well as the DHHS (Online Ethics Center for Engineering, 2006).

 

Risks/ Benefits to Researcher

Potential risks to the researcher could be physical harm due to the interview being face-to-face, or psychological harm due to the dangers in going to a prison facility or talking about the trauma that others endured.  This experience could also create personal bias to the researcher.  It would also be better for the researcher to have a larger group to get more information. Benefits could be better understanding of how childhood experiences affected the prisoners’ interpersonal relationships and getting to know those prisoners better.

 

Risks/ Benefits to Participant

Potential concerns and risks to the participant could be threats to privacy, psychological risks, and distress. There is also the possibility of loss of confidentiality due to the small sample size (Online Ethics Center for Engineering, 2006).Participants may benefit from the study because they could feel satisfaction in talking about their story, or they may think they can help someone else.  The study could also give their life some more meaning, or the participant may just be glad to have a visitor in prison.

 

Risks/ Benefits to Society

Benefits to society could be more understanding of how traumatic experiences as children could affect people negatively later on in life with their interpersonal relationships.  The researcher could find correlations that would possibly help prevent someone repeat the same mistakes, seek out treatment, and give them hope.  Another benefit could be that society could see the prisoners that committed crimes in a different light, and help them understand why they chose the path they did.  It could negatively impact society by giving them bias on negatively relating childhood traumas to prisoners or to people they know.  Society could interpret that if someone they know had a childhood trauma then the person may commit a crime or have poor personal relationships.  It is important for the researcher to note that these interviews were conducted in prisoners who voluntarily gave their interview in a Midwestern correctional facility with random sampling.  Society should not think that this group interviewed was a random sample who were not incarcerated.

 

References

John Carroll University. (2020). STEP ONE: Before You Begin: INVESTIGATORS’ GUIDE. Retrieved from https://jcu.edu/research/irb/investigators-guide/step-one-you-begin

 

Office for Human Research Protections, & Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. (1979, April 18). The Belmont Report. Retrieved from https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/read-the-belmont-report/index.html

 

Online Ethics Center for Engineering. (2006, June 14). Chapter 4: Assessing Risks and Potential Benefits and Evaluating Vulnerability (Research Involving Human Participants V1). Retrieved from https://www.onlineethics.org/cms/8033.aspx#figure4-1

 

UNM Office of the Institutional Review Board. (2017, April 12). Guidance on Prisoner Research. Retrieved from https://irb.unm.edu/sites/default/files/Guidance on Prisoner Research.pdf

 

2 Responses

  1. clstein at |

    If you look at Chapter 5: Ensuring Voluntary Informed Consent and Protecting Privacy and Confidentiality from the Online Ethics Center for Engineering (2006) it talks about how people are very careful about what they share and protecting their privacy. You discussed the loss of confidentiality due to a small group. In a population such as a prison one must consider the risk of how private information might be viewed by the other inmates around the research subject(s). One must take great care in making sure that they do not compare or contrast one research subject in front of another. Prisons have a very special environment that can be turned upside down easily. This risk of protecting the individual also turns into a concern to protect the environment and those in it. If one (another prisoner) were to find out protected information and attempt to use it against a research participant it could not only harm the research participant at a personal/emotional level, it could cause harm to the participant and others around if a physical altercation were to break out. And due to that altercation you have a slide of events that could cause additional mental trauma from the disiplinary issues as well as the chance of situations such as early release being revoked.

    Online Ethics Center for Engineering. (2006, June 14). Chapter 5: Ensuring Voluntary Informed Consent and Protecting Privacy and Confidentiality (Research Involving Human Participants V1) Retrieved from https://www.onlineethics.org/cms/8033.aspx#figure4-1

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Skip to toolbar