...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Applied Communication Research >Communication Scholars' Narratives of IRB Experiences
【24h】

Communication Scholars' Narratives of IRB Experiences

机译:传播学者对IRB经历的叙述

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

I am writing regarding a negative experience I had with my university's IRB. My usual mode of research is quantitative, but I needed to do some qualitative focus groups for my latest project. I completed the 8 page IRB protocol asking permission to conduct focus groups with adults (21 and over) of various ages. I wanted to do focus groups on young adults and senior citizens. I suspect that the IRB did not think I would be capable of doing focus groups given my quantitative background. Over a 4 month time period I had to re-write the protocol 5 times. They kept asking about minors (the first 4 revisions had this question in it), although I had stated on page one that I would be working with adults only. I finally got approval to do my focus groups as long as I did them anonymously. No amount of questioning gave me an adequate answer as to how to do this.
机译:我写的是关于我所在大学的IRB的负面经历。我通常的研究方式是定量研究,但我需要为我的最新项目做一些定性研究。我完成了长达8页的IRB协议,要求允许与不同年龄的成年人(21岁及以上)进行焦点小组讨论。我想针对年轻人和老年人进行焦点小组讨论。我怀疑,鉴于我的定量背景,IRB认为我没有能力开展焦点小组会议。在4个月的时间内,我不得不重写协议5次。他们不断询问未成年人(前4个修订中有这个问题),尽管我在第一页上说过我只会和成年人一起工作。只要我匿名进行焦点小组讨论,我最终都会得到批准。关于如何执行此操作,我没有任何疑问。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号