*****  To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org  *****

> University human subjects committees (called IRBs by the Mericans) have 
> an awful lot of discretionary power and are subject to fads. If they 
> start believing that SNA itself is intrinsically pernicious or 
> dangerous, then much of our research will stop cold in its tracks.

IRBs approve studies on a per-project basis, and are more likely to 
approve projects where there is a very clear explanation of the 
methodologies and practices being used.

We've seen very similar patterns with the IU IRB in the last few years - 
as they've come to more clearly understand what computer-mediated 
communication research 'ought to look like', it has gotten easier and 
easier for us to get them to approve projects that use public, online 
data.

Establishing a pattern of structured, ethical, sound research is a good 
way to make friends with your IRB members ;)

I have a hard time believing that IRBs - American or otherwise - are 
likely to start rejecting projects just because the words "network" or 
"social network" are included.  That just doesn't make sense - if all of 
the legal and ethical 'bases' are covered, there'll be no reason to 
concern themselves with the project.  The responsibility for making the 
ethical and moral dimension of a research project clear lies with the 
researcher, not with the university-level staff who interpret it.

I suppose it is possible that university counsel could 'suggest' to the 
IRB staff that particular sociological methodologies are inappropriate, 
but that too seems unlikely and extremely difficult to implement.

--elijah

_____________________________________________________________________
SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send
an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line
UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.