IRB Research Ethics

Isn't that pretty unethical without an IRB and informed consent?

I hope, if not sure, they followed IRB (institutional review board) for their experiment. You’re right in your point that we, as scientists, shouldn’t simply do whatever is possible. On the other hand processes like IRB provides a mechanism for oversight where ethical issues such as those raised by you are considered.

I'm surprised it passed their IRB. Any research has to go through them, even if it's just for the IRB to confirm with "No this does not require a full review". Either the researchers here framed it in a way that there was no damage being done, or they relied on their IRB's lack of technical understanding to realize what was going on.

This is the kind of study (unusual for CS) that requires IRB approval. I wonder if they thought to seek approval, and if they received it?

IRB approval is a standard requirement for any research done when interacting with human test subjects. The researchers unquestionably didn't apply for IRB approval, and hence they're under scrutiny. No need to dream up conspiracy theories.

That's the problem.It's not ethical to perform experiments on human subjects without their explicit consent.That's why the Institutional Review Board was created:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_review_boardYou can't just perform experiments on large groups of people to see what will happen.

Ah yes, I had forgotten about this unethical chestnut you have brought forth. This is the kind of research which would never (and I do mean literally never-- no chance, zero, nada, zilch) get approved by an institutional review board (IRB) if a scientist wanted to perform a similar experiment. There was no consent process, and the study aimed to effect a tangible and measurable emotional change, for no real greater good/purpose.

Technically, they have a valid point. This was an experiment on human subjects without their consent.I think this observation raises a further discussion about the gatekeeping, chilling effect of ethics boards. Scott Alexander describes his kafkaesque experience with them here:https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/29/my-irb-nightmare/

Herehttps://medium.com/@JamesGrimmelmann/illegal-unethical-and-m...the author explains more clearly his position:"Federal law — primarily the so-called “Common Rule”— ( http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/commonrule/ ) regulates research o

Any research that at all involves a human being-- performed by an institution governed by laws that mandate the existence of an IRB-- must be reviewed by their IRB. Keep in mind that IRB's govern research, not just experimentation.We don't even need to get into the weeds on this just being "answers to questions". All you need to do is look at the human impact: This research study has caused anxiety, time, and potentially money to many people being asked to unknowingly part