 |
 |
Agree. Personally, I feel the most unethical thing to do would be to avoid involve end users in a design process...and it is kind of depressing the current process pushes in this direction. I am not arguing the ethical side of the business should be neglected, but the current process is designed for medical research - and I am quite annoyed there isn't a design research version which suits the rest of us (since the law changed I would have thought they could have considered this, but no..). Best wishes! /Charlotte Charlotte Magnusson Associate Professor Certec, Division of Rehabilitation Engineering Research Department of Design Sciences Lund University Lund Sweden tel +46 46 222 4097 fax +46 46 222 4431 -----Original Message----- From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of G. Mauricio Mejia Sent: den 17 april 2010 14:33 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: IRB protocols Dear Charlotte, Michael, Dermott, and all I did get the IRB approval. My research only included minimal risk like most of the design researches (I guess). I’d add that IRB also helps you to be organized and obtain reliable data because you have to explain in deep detail what are you going to do. My research was mixed methods and I had to predict some possible questions for the semi-structured interview, and I also explained that other issues might come out. IRB board did not have problems with that and approved it. I agree that design researcher must embrace the IRB requirements in the research processes; however, it also implies limitations because the IRB boards usually take several weeks in the protocol review and modifications also may take significant time. We are in design accustomed to act in very creative and flexible ways, which is not the case in IRB processes. G. Mauricio Mejía Assistant professor Universidad de Caldas, Colombia Master of Design student University of Cincinnati, USA http://mejia.disenovisual.com