IRB Case Study 2
In this study investigators analyzed the relationship between traumatic childhood experiences and the effect on interpersonal relationships in adulthood. Thirty participants incarcerated in a Midwestern US correctional facility were chosen using random sampling. Individuals were given the opportunity to decline participation. Individuals who chose to participate signed a consent. A detailed questionnaire was given addressing personal demographic data, type of trauma experienced, and interpersonal relationship behaviors. Interviewers administered questions in a face to face interview.
Risks and Benefits for researcher:
One of the biggest risks involved in a face to face interview with a prisoner would first of all be the risk of the interviewer coming in contact with someone who could potentially be a danger to the person doing the interview. This also could put the researcher at risk if the prisoner is released at any time. In some instances, it may not be beneficial to interview prisoners due to the fact that some inmates may withhold information and only tell researchers what they think the researcher wants to hear. They may not be entirely truthful in many instances (“Challenges of Conducting Research in Prisons”, 2012).
The benefit of a face to face interview with a prisoner is that it is more personal, even though a risk in interviewing prisoners is that they may not be entirely truthful I think they would be more inclined to tell the truth if the interview is in person.
Risks and Benefits for participant:
Risks for the participant that face to face interviews in prison life is a major change to a prisoner’s daily routine. Because the participant is imprisoned, even given the consent, they may feel that they have to participate in the interview and may feel that they don’t have an actual decision in the matter. The participant may feel more inclined to participate in a study when they are incarcerated than they would if they were not (Christopher et al., 2016).
The benefit for the participant is that a face to face interview related to the prisoner’s past could work similar to a counseling session but without the participant feeling as if they are being counseled. This is giving the prisoner the opportunity to vocalize their past an apply it to their present and future. This could make the participant feel as if he or she matters and feel as if they could make a change by volunteering to participate in research.
Risks and Benefits for Society:
The effects of this type of interview could be beneficial to society because it could open people up for the discussion of the effects of trauma that prisoners have faced and could give assistance in counseling services related to such trauma therefore it could help with future society.
Level of IRB approval needed:
The level of IRB approval would be a full review for a prisoner. Prisoners are considered a vulnerable population due to their ability to make informed and voluntary decisions is compromised. A full board review is required for any studies that involve more than minimal risk and that involve protected or vulnerable populations or where subjects may be at physical, psychological or legal risks (“Levels of IRB review,” n.d.).
References:
Challenges of conducting research in prisons. (2012, March 25). National Institute of Justice. https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/challenges-conducting-research-prisons
Christopher, P., Stein, M., Johnson, J., Rich, J., Friedmann, P., Clarke, J., & Lidz, C. (2016, January). Exploitation of prisoners in clinical research: Perceptions of study participants. PubMed Central (PMC). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4793400/
Levels of IRB review. (n.d.). Office for the Protection of Research Subjects | USC. https://oprs.usc.edu/irb-review/types-of-irb-review/
Good analysis; how do the principles of the Belmont report effect societal implications? How do you think the sample size effects viability of the research?
Reading through your post I also agree that changing a prisoners schedule is a major risk. Even though they are adults, people rely on a proper constant and if the routine is broken, it could potentially cause a disruption and the participant to be frustrated.
“Risks may be reduced in a variety of ways…participant privacy and confidentiality are adequately protected; participants are properly monitored; criteria for participant enrollment and withdrawal are appropriate; a timely treatment plan is in place” (2016).
N. (Ed.). (2016, February 01). Chapter 4: Assessing Risks and Potential Benefits and Evaluating Vulnerability (Research Involving Human Participants V1). Retrieved from https://www.onlineethics.org/cms/8033.aspx
Great insight on how risks may be reduced. Privacy and confidentiality are definitely very important and when interviewing prisoners this is especially important because many of the prisoners don’t want information from their personal life to be know with other prisoners.
I think that a larger sample size, including sampling more than people at one prison would have a better effect on the viability of the research. For an estimate to be more precise, the sample should be larger. When the sample size increases the preciseness of the test increases also (Binu et al., 2014).
The principles of the Belmont report are Respect for persons, Beneficence and Justice. How these effect societal implications in this study is first by making sure that the three principles are used by interviewing prisoners so that they feel respected and protected. Respect for persons includes 2 moral requirements such as acknowledging autonomy and protecting those with diminished autonomy, even though these are prisoners being interviewed they still have to have protected autonomy, they deserve to be treated with respect and as much privacy as possible. Beneficence basically means do no harm, maximize benefits and minimize harm to the subject. No interview that is done should be done with the intent to harm the subject or distress them intentionally. Justice, all people should be treated equally, because they are prisoners does not mean that anyone has a right to invade their privacy, they should not feel pressured in any way to participate in the study if they choose not to (HHS, 2018).
Binu, V. S., Mayya, S. S., & Dhar, M. (2014, April). Some basic aspects of statistical methods and sample size determination in health science research. PubMed Central (PMC). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4279315/
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). (2018, January 15). Read the Belmont report. HHS.gov. https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/read-the-belmont-report/index.html#xbasic