Page 478 -

470 CHAPTER 15 Working with human subjects

IRB review and approval for proposed research generally begins when a re-
searcher submits materials relating to proposed research. A description of the pro-
posed research, draft informed consent forms, instructions to be provided to users,
questionnaires, and materials to be used during the course of the research are some of
the items that might be required. Upon receipt of these materials, the IRB will review
them for completeness and content. The board may approve the research, request ad-
ditional information, require revision of materials, or take other steps as appropriate.
As research cannot begin until the IRB approval is complete, it is generally best
to start this process early. Some research funding agencies will not release any funds
until appropriate IRB approvals have been obtained. As each IRB has its own rules,
it is important that researchers understand and follow the appropriate procedures for
their institution. Many IRBs have websites that describe policies and provide rele-
vant forms. It is a good idea to familiarize yourself with this material. Although some
boards consider applications on a rolling basis, others have scheduled meetings, with
published submission deadlines for consideration at each meeting. Attention to detail
is particularly important for boards that meet on a set schedule: if your IRB meets
bi-monthly, minor omissions in a proposed package may lead to a 2-month delay in
acquiring the necessary approval.
Some IRBs—particularly those at large research institutions with affiliated medical
schools—may spend much of their time focusing on drug or treatment studies. If your
IRB falls into this category, board members may not be aware of the techniques used
in HCI research (and described in this book). You may have to spend some time and ef-
fort explaining ethnography, research based on online data sources, or other techniques
that they are not familiar with. If you run into this sort of challenge, you should stress
the widespread application of these techniques, and the existing body of research from
groups such as the Association of Internet Researchers (http://www.aoir.org) or the
Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference (EPIC, https://www.epicpeople.org/). It's
best to approach such discussions from a collegial, not confrontational, perspective.
IRB policies for US government and government-funded institutions (including
almost all universities and colleges in the United States) are dictated by the Federal
Policy for Protection of Human Research Subjects, otherwise known as the Common
Rule (45 CFR, part 46) (Department of Health and Human Services, 2009). The
Common Rule describes requirements for institutional review, including categories of
studies that can be given expedited review or exempt from review altogether. Studies
that both involve “minimal risk,” and fall into one of nine specified categories can
be candidates for expedited review. Although most of these categories are specific to
biomedical research, categories involving collection of data from recordings made
for research purposes and research involving group characteristics or behavior are
directly of interest to HCI studies. Similarly, studies involving educational strategies;
test surveys, interviews, or observations of public behavior; and studies of existing
data or research data can be considered exempt from full IRB review (Department of
Health and Human Services, 2009). Generally, institutions will have specific sets of
forms for studies that require full IRB review, expedited review, or exemptions, with
expedited review often quicker than full review. Studies that qualify as exempt must