Balancing Risk and Rewards: The Role of IRBs in Academic Research

Last registered on April 04, 2022
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Balancing Risk and Rewards: The Role of IRBs in Academic Research
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0009175
Initial registration date
April 01, 2022

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
April 04, 2022, 9:47 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Country
United States of America
Region

Primary Investigator

Name
Seth Zimmerman
Affiliation
Yale University
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Heather Sarsons
PI Affiliation
UChicago
PI Name
Molly Schnell
PI Affiliation
Northwestern
PI Name
Hannes Schwandt
PI Affiliation
Northwestern
PI Name
Jenny Wang
PI Affiliation
MIT

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2022-04-01
End date
2022-06-30
Keywords
Other
Additional Keywords
Science, Innovation
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
We examine how IRBs make decisions about project approval using a survey experiment.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Sarsons, Heather et al. 2022. "Balancing Risk and Rewards: The Role of IRBs in Academic Research." AEA RCT Registry. April 04. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.9175-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2022-04-01
Intervention End Date
2022-06-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Submitted subject scores relating to concerns about IRB protocols.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We will vary characteristics of hypothetical protocols at random.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Qualtrics automated randomization.
Randomization Unit
Hypothetical protocol.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
We will contact roughly 900 individuals with three protocols for each individual, producing a maximum of roughly 2700 protocols. Given that response rates will fall below 100%, this is likely a loose upper bound.
Sample size: planned number of observations
Maximum of 2700.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Maximum of 900.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
University of Chicago
IRB Approval Date
2021-04-21
IRB Approval Number
N/A
Analysis Plan

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials