AAAS Meeting Explores Ways to Improve Ethics Panels that Oversee Social Science Research

The ethics boards that oversee federally funded studies involving human subjects have become part of the research landscape since the 1970s. But some researchers in the social and behavioral sciences complain that the boards—established in response to abuses in biomedical research—too often take a heavy-handed approach toward survey research and other social science projects that pose minimal risk, if any, to those who participate.

A 22 September meeting of the AAAS Committee on Scientific Freedom and Responsibility grappled with how to improve the performance of the ethics panels, called institutional review boards, or IRBs, when it comes to the social sciences. The committee members heard from researchers who recounted frustrating delays while answering board requests for more information or changes to their research plans. They also heard from speakers who have served on IRBs or who have responsibility for their operation. From both researchers and administrators alike, there was general agreement that the system can and should work better.

To learn more about problems with institutional review boards and possible improvements, read the full story.