Human Research Participants Committee
The Human Research Participants Committee works to ensure that human research participants are treated with dignity, respect, and in ways that are ethically consistent with government, discipline (e.g., American Psychological Association Guidelines), and Anderson University standards. The committee is composed of six members appointed by the Provost for a three-year term. Several departments have formed their own committees to approve projects in their specific discipline areas.
Proper evaluation of proposed research helps to protect prospective participants, researchers, and the institution from unethical practices and possible resulting litigation.
Individuals who wish to conduct research involving human participants as noted above should be familiar with the procedures and rules for submitting proposals.
In order to protect the rights of participants and the integrity of the research process, the use of AU students as human participants must be approved by the Human Research Participants Committee.
When is the Human Research Participants Committee Needed?
Approval is needed for all data collected meeting any of these criteria:
- All data collection for publication.
- All data collection conducted by persons not employed by AU.
- All data collection conducted by AU students, staff, or faculty which might in any way be construed to place any participant at physical, emotional, or psychological risk.
- All data collection on sensitive topics, like sexuality or violence.
- All data collection in which participants are asked to divulge highly personal or sensitive information (e.g., health status, history of abuse, sexual attitudes, religious values, etc.).
- All data collection which involves deception or less than complete disclosure of the intent of the data collection.
- All data collection on human participants conducted by AU students, faculty, or staff, involving off-campus participants.
- As part of the university’s commitment to ongoing assessment, student assignments may be copied and used for assessment purposes. Every effort will be made to ensure confidentiality and assessment results will only be reported as aggregated data.
When is the Human Research Participants Committee NOT Needed?
Assignments given by instructors which meet the following criteria, do not require prior committee approval:
- The course is a regular catalog course (not a tutorial or independent study/research project).
- The assignment accounts for less than 10% of the course grade.
- Research participants are limited to students in the class.
- The research does not place participants at risk (as defined above).
- The research is not on sensitive topics (as defined above).
If there is any doubt, consult with the committee chair for clarification.
The departments within the University may collect data on students without approval when it meets the following criteria:
- The data is for internal use only not publication.
- The data is collected by a unit of the university in order to complete its assigned university tasks.
- The data does not endanger the participant physically, emotionally, or psychologically.
How to begin seeking approval:
Choose the proper committee: In order to conduct research that meets the criteria established by the Human Research Participants Committee, the following procedures must be followed:
- Consult with the contact person for the appropriate area:
- Kinesiology: Dr. Earlene Masi
- Psychology: Dr. Lee Griffith
- MBA Program: Dr. Celesta Bates
- DBA Program: Dr. Celesta Bates
- All other areas: Dr. Lee Griffith
- Submit the Research Proposal Form (linked here).
- Review all of the rules and regulations for research proposals below especially regarding time frame for response (#7 below)
The following rules will be followed for research proposals submitted to the Anderson University Human Research Participants Committee for approval.
- All proposals must be received and approved before institutional funds have been committed.
- All proposals must be received and approved before the research program is announced.
- All proposals must be made with adequate time prior to implementation for them to be revised if not approved. (See #7 below)
- If conditions 1-3 are not met, the committee will not be able to approve the proposal. The committee may still be able to comment on the proposal or make suggestions on its implementation. It may also be able to concur with the decision or accede to the request for review but it will not be able to ethically approve the proposal.
- All proposals must be accompanied by a statement of objectives both of the research in general and for each item of data being collected.
- All proposals should be submitted by e-mail to the committee chair whenever possible. When this is not possible (i.e. due to pre-printed surveys), sufficient copies of all needed materials should be submitted to the chair to provide to each committee member If conditions 4 and 5 are not met, the decision of the committee will be delayed until these materials are supplied.
- Researchers must submit their proposals knowing that the approval process has several stages and adequate time planned
- Stage one–Conferring with the committee chair before submission. It is wise, though not required to confer with the committee chair in person or by phone to discuss the proposal.
- Stage two: the proposal is submitted to the committee chair. Under normal circumstances, the chair will respond in about 1 week’s time. Normal turnaround time for the committee is not less than two weeks from the receipt of a completed proposal. It may be considerably more under some circumstances. The response will notify the researcher of any changes that need to be made before the proposal is submitted to the committee or that the proposal has been submitted to the committee. If the proposal is complex, unusual or controversial, this stage may take much longer.
- Stage three: At least two weeks later, the researcher will be notified of the response of the committee. The response will often require revisions by the researcher and the minimum two week review time begins again. When all conditions have been met the researcher will be notified by email that the proposal has been approved.
8. Attempts to influence the committee to accelerate deadlines will be viewed as unethical behavior and referred to the provost.