tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post4450369401733307799..comments2018-01-03T07:02:32.059-05:00Comments on Institutional Review Blog: Researchers Deceive Thousands of ProfessorsZachary M. Schraghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07101709506166167477noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-73987193329941654232010-11-23T02:02:42.020-05:002010-11-23T02:02:42.020-05:00Sounds like quite an interesting study. I'd be...Sounds like quite an interesting study. I'd be a little bit annoyed by the fake email, but I'll be interested to see the results.<br /><br />I am a little surprised that this passed the ethics review, but it should be interesting to read!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-59262704728734197292010-05-16T20:31:08.535-04:002010-05-16T20:31:08.535-04:00I too was subject to this email scam, and am amaze...I too was subject to this email scam, and am amazed that an IRB could approve direct lies to participants - it certainly would not get by a review board in communication disorders where I do my research. But I guess telling lies is par for the course in business.<br /><br />I emailed to complain and of course was ignored by these scam artists.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-1887216091016027072010-05-14T15:06:01.131-04:002010-05-14T15:06:01.131-04:00Even if each of the 6300 recipients averaged only...Even if each of the 6300 recipients averaged only five minutes to read the email, check their calendar, make a decision, and respond (and I spent considerably more time, as did manyothers , lining up resources from administrators and lab operators), then the total time wasted comes out to more than one dozen full work weeks. All in service to the selfish interests of these researchers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-79007682551974263742010-05-12T16:40:52.667-04:002010-05-12T16:40:52.667-04:00Thank you for this comment.
I rather doubt this i...Thank you for this comment.<br /><br />I rather doubt this is a study of impulse buying. Professor Akinola's website explains that she "explores biases that affect the recruitment and retention of minorities in organizations," and she has published in that area. Professor Milkman recently co-authored a paper entitled, "Will I Stay or Will I Go? Cooperative and Competitive Effects of Workgroup Sex and Race Composition on Turnover." So I am inclined to assume, as do the commentators on Professor Gelman's blog, that the researchers' interest in "various backgrounds" is far more than an afterthought.<br /><br />Your comment raises the question of whether subjects of an IRB-approved study should have the right to review the protocol. Currently, the IRB system is not well set up to consume or produce empirical research, and making protocols public would be a step in the right direction.Zachary M. Schraghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07101709506166167477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-24943954785710975312010-05-12T11:10:35.367-04:002010-05-12T11:10:35.367-04:00I was actually one of the subjects of the study - ...I was actually one of the subjects of the study - and based on the "debriefing" message I was sent the actual purpose of the study was to see if there was a difference between being asked to meet the prospective student "now" (today) versus "later" (next week). Based on reading the PIs published worked - mostly popular press articles - it seems that this has something to do with "impulse buying" - which I guess makes sense for a business school researcher.<br /><br />The effect of minority/gender was stated as an afterthought (secondary hypothesis) - perhaps in response to initial IRB review.<br /><br />I don't mind being deceived in this fashion provided it is a well-designed study that is intended to benefit society as a whole - presumably criteria that the IRB should have considered. However, I don't see that either of these criteria were fulfilled.Michael H. Courtnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-73928435051097053112010-05-10T20:32:36.881-04:002010-05-10T20:32:36.881-04:00I see your point. This evening a door-to-door soli...I see your point. This evening a door-to-door solicitor awoke me from a much-needed nap. I thought about demanding $10 in compensation, but then I remembered that I live on Planet Earth.Zachary M. Schraghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07101709506166167477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-83009478140339262452010-05-10T01:52:04.821-04:002010-05-10T01:52:04.821-04:00Too precious indeed. It would be unethical only if...Too precious indeed. It would be unethical only if they didn't cancel the appointment. It would also be unethical if they named or accused individual professors of being something (like being racist) based on their response to an email.<br /><br />But I for one am curious about the aggregate results. And while I do not wish to receive any more emails than I do, nor would I welcome deceitful email, there is benefit in this study. And that benefit should be weighed with the (minimal) level of inconvience to the subject. I assume that's what the IRB did. <br /><br />Besides, this study is very similar to many that have asked for job-interview call backs. I didn't hear any objection to that study. Is the time of a corporate PR people so less important than overworked professors?PCMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13647097472236933108noreply@blogger.com