A student plans to interview 15 principals about personal experiences with disruptive students, including disciplinary actions and thoughts on their appropriateness. The research data could impact the principals' careers, and identifiers will be collected. This study would be subject to which type of review?

A student plans to interview 15 principals about personal experiences with disruptive students, including disciplinary actions and thoughts on their appropriateness. The research data could impact the principals' careers, and identifiers will be collected. This study would be subject to which type of review?

• A. Convened Review
• B. Exemption
• C. Expedited
• D. Not Human Subjects

Answer: (A)

When the study involves more than minimal risk to participants and includes identifiable information that could affect their careers or professional standing, it needs a full, convened IRB review. Interviewing principals about disciplinary actions and their views on appropriateness, while collecting identifiers, creates potential reputational and career risks, so the review must be thorough and overseen by the entire IRB at a convened meeting. Exemption applies only to very low-risk research with data that isn’t identifiable or sensitive; the task here does not fit that. Expedited review is for minimal-risk research that a single reviewer or a small committee can handle; the identified risks and potential impacts call for more comprehensive oversight. Not human subjects would apply if there were no living individuals or no identifiable data, which isn’t the case here.

When the study involves more than minimal risk to participants and includes identifiable information that could affect their careers or professional standing, it needs a full, convened IRB review. Interviewing principals about disciplinary actions and their views on appropriateness, while collecting identifiers, creates potential reputational and career risks, so the review must be thorough and overseen by the entire IRB at a convened meeting. Exemption applies only to very low-risk research with data that isn’t identifiable or sensitive; the task here does not fit that. Expedited review is for minimal-risk research that a single reviewer or a small committee can handle; the identified risks and potential impacts call for more comprehensive oversight. Not human subjects would apply if there were no living individuals or no identifiable data, which isn’t the case here.