The role of Institutional Review Boards is to protect participants. While there are committees that oversee research conducted with animals, IRBs focus on protecting the well-being of human participants. Well-being does not refer solely to physical safety. IRBs also strive to ensure that participants’ are not coerced to participate in research. Coercion has many faces: outright threat or blackmail is an obvious form of coercion. However, anytime the participants feel constrained to refuse to participate, then coercion is at play. Such situations arise when there is a power differential between a participant and a researcher: when the researcher wears a lab coat and assumes a demeanor of authority, when the participant is a student or employee of the researcher, and believes that refusal may impact a grade or employment. Another form coercion can take is when an incentive is provided and participants consent only because of the incentive. In short, the IRB is mandated by federal guidelines to ensure that participants receive sufficient information so they know what they are agreeing to, that they are not coerced and that the study is sufficiently resilient methodologically so that participants are not asked to waste their valuable time.
The way IRBs decide that a study has merit and is ethically sound is based on the protocol the researcher(s) submit. It is therefore essential that the protocol that is approved is clear in outlining the what where when and how of the project. Once the protocol is approved it is the contract that must govern the researcher and the project. The protocol must be in effect, at least, for the duration of data collection. If the researcher wants to collect data after the protocol’s expiration date, a request for continuation must be submitted to the IRB. Any change requires a new review. Any deviation from the protocol, or collecting data after a protocol expires, constitutes noncompliance and must be reported to the federal arm that oversees all human subject research. This triggers a series of events that may lead to serious consequences to the researcher, the institution or both.
At UNC Asheville, the IRB is committed to creating an environment where investigators will conduct research with the highest thought, technical skill, and care; investigators will adhere to high standards of research ethics; comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations; and always consider the rights and welfare of research participants; and IRB members and staff will keep abreast of the latest developments in the ethics and regulations of human participant research and will perform thorough and consistent review of research proposals.” Institutions vary in scope and guidelines that their review boards adopt. At UNC Asheville, all research conducted by, or with the participation or support of faculty, staff, and students of the institution must be reviewed by the University’s Institutional Review Board.
The IRB is comprised of representatives from across academic disciplines. Faculty who are interested in serving on the Board, or wish to know more about its function, are encouraged to reach out to the IRB Chair.