The purpose of the Sexuality IRB Resource Repository (SIRBRR) is for sexuality researchers to share their IRB experiences in order to (1) best way to operate around knowledge sharing with IRBs to improve the process of ethics review and research more broadly and (2) hold our research to the highest and most culturally appropriate standards of ethics.
The Sexuality Institutional Review Board Resource Repository is not affiliated with Widener University's Institutional Review Board.
Research is "a systematic investigation including research development, testing and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge" (45 CFR 46.102(l)). Guidelines for research ethics can be found in the U.S. Federal Regulations on the Protection of Human Subjects, specified as Title 45, part 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations, sometimes called 45 CFR 46 or “the Common Rule.” The rules and regulations are in place to protect participants from harm that can occur during the research process. The regulating bodies in place for ensuring the ethical treatment of human subjects is called an Institutional Review Board or IRB.
IRBs are charged with ensuring research complies with the policies outlined in the Common Rule (45 CRF 46.101(a)). Some IRBs may also be responsible for enforcing other regulations that may differ by institution or state (45 CRF 46.102(h)). When research is well designed, ethical regulations are considered, accounted for, and clearly outlined in the IRB application.
Ensuring participant safety is important, and all research (about sexuality or not) can be poorly designed and jeopardize participant safety. Because of their comfort with the research topics, sexuality researchers may underestimate assessment of risk while people who do not work in the field of sexuality may overestimate risk. Some IRBs may be more familiar with reviewing sexuality research than others. An IRB’s lack of comfort with sexuality research may lead to delays or rejections in the approval process.
Occasionally, IRB members may be over-scrupulous about well-designed sexuality research resulting in IRB overreach beyond participant safety concerns into the content of the sexuality research. For example, an IRB member might have a concern that sexuality research is inherently harmful or unethical. This type of concern is often a matter of subjective comfort with the topic, not an ethical concern supported by research.
Click on the Resources page to find a list of helpful articles about the intersection of Sexuality Research and Institutional Review Board operations.
If you’d like to contribute your experiences to help other sexuality researchers, please fill out the Sexuality IRB Contribution Form.
Research may have standards and regulations, but subjectivity can still exist on these review boards. As a result, researchers may find an IRB to be overscrupulous about content related to sexuality. If you have had experience with an overscrupulous institutional review board, please tell us about it. This information will be reviewed for anonymity and added to the publicly accessible repository on this page.
Thank you for your contributions to the field of sexuality research!
Once we have several entries, the entries will be posted here for review.