[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Online listening tests and psychoacoutics experiments with large N

We've done a couple of web-based experiments
through our IRB.  We were able to get them exempt
on the basis that the listening tests involved no risk
to the subjects, that we kept absolutely no personal
data (indeed, it was completely anonymous), and
that we had a click-through consent form in which
they asserted they were at least 18 and we told
them who to complain to.

We've gotten pretty good response rates (several
hundred people giving us their opinion on the similarities
between named pop musicians at the defunct musicseer.org,
or typing words to describe music clips a la ESP game
at http://game.majorminer.com/ ), but as to the repeatability
or control of conditions -- well, point taken.


On 7/2/07, Pierre Divenyi <pdivenyi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I see a looming danger, like a tiger hiding in
the shade ready to jump on any US investigator
actually running online listening experiments.
The tiger is called the IRB. I mean, (pray tell)
how the world would the investigator ensure
protection of the unsuspecting web subject who
takes part even in 15 minutes of listening? Those
not living under the tutelage of Institutional
Review Boards may have no idea what it takes to
get approval even for our obviously unthreatening
listening experiments and how serious the
consequences of even the slightest infringements
of their often arbitrary rules could be. I am
sure many of our colleagues have a few personally
experienced horror stories to tell. The large-N
studies for those boards spell simply "NO".