- Institutional Review Board
- Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee
- Institutional Biosafety Committee
- Responsible Conduct of Research
- Research Misconduct
IRB review is required for all human subjects research conducted by faculty, staff, and students, on- and off-campus, regardless of the funding support, if any, for the project.
Two initial questions researchers should consider are:
(1) Does my particular project meet the definition of research in the regulations?
(2) Does my particular project involve human subjects?
(1) According to Federal regulations governing research with human subjects (45 CFR 46), Research is defined as "a systematic investigation, including research development, testing and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge. Activities which meet this definition constitute research for purposes of this policy, whether or not they are conducted or supported under a program which is considered research for other purposes. For example, some demonstration and service programs may include research activities." [45 CFR 46.102(d)]
The core of this definition is "a systematic investigation...designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge." It should be noted that the IRB considers the definition of "a systematic investigation" to vary widely depending on the discipline of the investigation and recognizes that it might be more appropriate in some fields to refer to research results as transferable, rather than generalizable.
A project is considered to be “contributing to generalizable knowledge” if the outcomes will be generalized for other organizations, programs or services, designed to draw conclusions, inform policy, or use to support future funding proposals.
(2) Human subject means "a living individual about whom an investigator (whether professional or student) conducting research obtains data through intervention or interaction with the individual, or identifiable private information" [45 CFR 46.102(f)].
Generally speaking, information coming from experience or opinions is not likely to be replicable across people, even in similar situations, and thus means the data are "about" the individual from whom they are gathered. In contrast, factual information should not vary depending on the respondent. Thus the collection of factual data generally does not result in the "informant" becoming a human subject. A few examples of questions that are likely to elicit responses drawing on experience or opinions are "What is your projection of next year's sales data?," "What would be the best ways to improve this system?," and "Has this change in policies impacted the morale of employees?" A few examples of factual questions are "Does this organization have a policy for parental leave?," "What is the annual input into this system?," and "When did this company implement its new inventory structure?"
For assistance in determining whether or not a particular project constitutes research involving human subjects, please contact us.