Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Using our best judgment in conducting human research.

Joan E Sieber1

  • 1Department of Psychology, California State University, Hayward, CA, USA. jsieber@csuhayward.edu

Ethics & Behavior
|April 21, 2006
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Introduction: JERHRE and PRIM&R Begin Their Collaboration.

Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE·2016
Same author

Readability and Understanding of Informed Consent Among Participants With Low Incomes: A Preliminary Report.

Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE·2015
Same author

Evidence-Based Ethical Problem Solving (EBEPS).

Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science·2015
Same author

New beginnings.

Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE·2015
Same author

Is "educational advantage" advantageous?

Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE·2013
Same author

The paradox of teaching responsible conduct of research.

Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE·2013

Federal regulations for human research allow flexibility for ethical conduct. Researchers and IRBs should use mature judgment and empirical data to adapt informed consent, rather than defaulting to rigid rules.

Area of Science:

  • Bioethics
  • Human Subject Research Regulations

Background:

  • Federal regulations governing human research permit discretion for context-specific application.
  • Waivering or altering informed consent elements requires mature moral and scientific judgment.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To explore the process of ethical problem-solving in human research.
  • To encourage researchers and IRBs to utilize regulatory flexibility for ethical conduct.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of federal regulations concerning human research.
  • Discussion of the application of moral and scientific judgment in research ethics.
  • Emphasis on empirical research to inform ethical decision-making.

Main Results:

  • Many IRBs and researchers fail to leverage regulatory flexibility, leading to ethical conflicts.
Keywords:
Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Related Experiment Videos

  • A default to rigid regulatory interpretation hinders ethical research practices.
  • The articles advocate for a proactive approach to ethical problem-solving.

    • Conclusions:

    • Researchers and IRBs should employ mature judgment and empirical data to navigate ethical dilemmas.
    • Utilizing the flexibility within federal regulations can better align science with ethical principles.
    • A shift from rigid adherence to thoughtful application of rules is crucial for ethical human research.