Vviewpoints

I M A G E F R O M S H U T T E R S T O C K . C O M

Computing Ethics
Humans in Computing:
Growing Responsibilities
for Researchers
Considering the role of institutional review boards in computing research.

technology for health treatment) have
worked with IRBs for years. Research-
ers who work in education or with
people under 18 years of age are in or
are heading into the IRB zone. Com-
puting research can show ethical lead-
ership by getting ahead of the curve
rather than merely reacting to it. For
those who must now deal with IRBs
this column suggests a point of view
Supporters claimed the results
were useful, that the researchers had
done nothing wrong, and that Face-
book users agreed to such uses when
they signed up. Critics claimed the
experiment had mistreated people
by including them in the research
without prior knowledge or oppor-
tunity to give informed consent to
their participation. Companies such
as Facebook can conduct research
without the oversight of institution-
al review boards, or IRBs. This was
cited in critiques, suggesting that
problems would have been avoided
if an IRB had reviewed the plan. What
role, if any, should IRBs play in com-
puting research?

Research funding is increasingly predicated on human welfare, establishing a connection that is growing stronger for computing researchers.

Thinking about IRBs is useful because they have become a touchstone for ethics in research. IRBs govern much research at universities, medical centers, and other organizations. Federal research agencies sometimes require IRB approval or exemption before making awards. Some computing researchers (for example, human-computer interaction and information

DOI: 10.1145/2723675