Posted by bryte on October 16, 2014, at 22:50:50
In reply to Re: discussion, posted by Dr. Bob on October 15, 2014, at 13:53:52
> It didn't even occur to me that a subset of readers could consider collating quiz results to be research on human subjects. I guess it could be argued that users might have wanted to know that their quiz results were going to be collated.
>
> Maybe I should've obtained informed consent to obtain informed consent!
>
> BobMaybe you should stop the passive aggressive ridicule if you want even one person to believe your pretense of promoting civil discourse.
It has repeatedly been stated that best practices for informed consent require someone other than the researcher to review information to which human subjects consent.
One way you manipulated an environment was to require members to participate in an informed consent process you would later claim proves a simple quiz provides adequate informed consent. A person could believe they were played as a fool to provide data for bogus research that reaches flawed conclusions. Acceptance of those flawed conclusions could support widespread obfuscation of procedures that are either peer support, treatment, case study or research, and that informed consent for one any of those is adequate informed consent for all of them.
The fact that something did not occur to you reinforces the reasons a disinterested panel is required to review the scope of both research manipulations and every detail of informed consent procedures. It might have occurred to a member of an IRB.
We do not whether you avoid IRB oversight for the express purpose of avoiding review of circumstances that might occur to them but which did not occur to you.
Your repeated avoidance of discussions involving external oversight of your research practices suggests an attempt to evade oversight.
---------------
While we are on the topic of informed consent, if you refuse to inform your readers you very recently installed scripts that attempt to block privacy protection measures, I will do it for you.
An IRB might require you to inform consenting participants that you require them to provide not only their email, but also attempt to require an ISP address that you can identify, giving you the capacity to identify the physical location from which messages are posted. We have definitely added your Website to lists of privacy violators that otherwise include some of the planet's most repressive regimes. And we defeated your attempted privacy intrusion, as we are sure you noticed.
poster:bryte
thread:1070154
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20140902/msgs/1072366.html