After carefully reading the policy statement below, you may make an application for Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval for your research involving human subjects. This online form is automatically forwarded to the IRB convener, Dr. Scott Seay, who will follow this policy in evaluating your proposal. The convener will be in touch about next steps using the contact information that you provide in this application. If you have questions, please reach out to Dr. Seay directly at sseay@cts.edu or (317) 931-2347. Thank you!
Christian Theological Seminary (CTS) is committed to safeguarding the welfare, rights, and privacy of all persons who participate as subjects in research conducted by its faculty, staff, and students. Moreover, the seminary is committed to ensuring that the subjects of such research are aware of their rights and the protections available to them.
The safeguards derive from the following ethical principles:
First articulated in 1979 in the so-called “Belmont Report,” these ethical principles were soon adopted as policy by the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services in Title 45, Part 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations (45 CFR 46) and published in amended form in the Federal Register on June 18, 1991.
The Institutional Review Board (IRB) is the body charged with reviewing all research involving human subjects to ensure that the above policy statement is enforced. Researchers must receive the approval of the IRB before beginning their research.
Research that is subject to IRB review and approval include—but is not limited to—pilot studies, class assignments, capstone projects, masters- and doctoral-level thesis work, and independent research, whether the research is conducted on or off-campus.
The IRB at CTS is convened by the Director of the Doctor of Ministry degree program. Its members include the convener, the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty (ex officio), and two CTS faculty members (ordinarily one licensed in clinical work).
The IRB will set and publish on the seminary's master calendar two meeting dates each semester during which they will review all research proposals presented to it. At the discretion of the IRB convener, additional meeting dates may be set.
The IRB review process ordinarily follows three steps:
“Approval” may be granted by the initial reviewer(s). All Requests reviewed by the full IRB must receive unanimous approval by all members.
In assigning levels to the research request, the reviewer(s) must apply the following criteria to determine the potential risk to the human subjects:
|
Level I Exempt |
Level II Expedited |
Level II Full Board |
Does the research involve subjects with diminished autonomy or particular vulnerabilities? |
No |
No |
Yes |
Does the research involve the collection or recording of behavior which, if known outside the research, could reasonably place subjects at risk of criminal or civil liability or be damaging to the subject’s financial standing, employability, or reputation? |
No |
No |
Yes |
Does the research involve the collection of information regarding sensitive aspects of subjects’ behavior (e.g., drug or alcohol use, illegal conduct, sexual behavior)? |
No |
No |
Yes |
Does the research involve subjects under age 18? |
No |
No |
Yes |
Does the research does involve deception? |
No |
No |
Yes |
Does the research present more than minimal risk to the subject? (Minimal risk means that the probability and magnitude of harm or discomfort anticipated in the proposed research are not greater than those ordinarily encountered in daily life or during the performance of routine physical or psychological examinations or tests.) |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Does the research does require a waiver from informed consent procedures? |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Human subjects in research must have sufficient information to make an informed decision to participate in the research study. If they cannot give informed consent, it must be obtained from their legal representatives (e.g. minors, mentally or cognitively incapacitated). Consent requests must be either clearly written or orally conveyed in a manner understandable to subjects, using language that is non-technical. All scientific, technical, or medical terminology must be plainly defined.
Some research requires the use of mailed or e-mailed questionnaires. In such cases, a mailed or e-mailed response will itself be regarded as evidence of informed consent, provided that the questionnaire clearly explains the purpose and nature of the research.
If a Request is denied because the IRB determines that the risks outweigh the benefits of the research, and the researcher disagrees with the committee’s decision, the researcher may appeal the decision by re-submitting the following: (1) the original Request form; (2) a letter of appeal detailing the researcher’s arguments for approval; and (3) any other pertinent information in support of the appeal.
The appeal should be directed to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty for his or her review. Applications submitted for appeal will be considered by the full IRB—including the dean—at the next scheduled meeting date. The final decision of the IRB will be stated in writing to the researcher. If the appeal is denied, the research cannot be conducted.