IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/39876.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Human subjects requirements and economic education researchers

Author

Listed:
  • Lopus, Jane S.
  • Grimes, Paul W.
  • Becker, William E.
  • Pearson, Rodney

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a web-based survey of economic educators who were asked about their knowledge and experience with human subjects research and the mandated federal protocols that govern such research at most American universities. The results indicate that while economic education researchers are experienced in conducting human subjects research and are aware of the federal regulations, they are not well informed about key details of the regulations. They are skeptical of the net benefits of the mandated protocols because of the perceived discouraging burdens of the paperwork that rarely result in significant modifications of their research projects. The authors conclude that recent calls for modifications to the federal regulations for classroom-based research projects may be justified given the opportunity costs of adhering to the regulations compared to the relatively low levels of perceived benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Lopus, Jane S. & Grimes, Paul W. & Becker, William E. & Pearson, Rodney, 2007. "Human subjects requirements and economic education researchers," MPRA Paper 39876, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:39876
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/39876/1/MPRA_paper_39876.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. Michael Oakes, 2002. "Risks and Wrongs in Social Science Research," Evaluation Review, , vol. 26(5), pages 443-479, October.
    2. Friedman,Daniel & Sunder,Shyam, 1994. "Experimental Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521456821.
    3. John J. Siegfried & Wendy A. Stock, 2004. "The Market for New Ph. D. Economists in 2002," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(2), pages 272-285, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. William Bosshardt & Peter E. Kennedy, 2011. "Data Resources and Econometric Techniques," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 35, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Carlos J. Asarta & Austin S. Jennings & Paul W. Grimes, 2017. "Economic Education Retrospective," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 62(1), pages 102-117, March.
    3. William Bosshardt & Neela Manage, 2011. "Does Calculus Help in Principles of Economics Courses? Estimates Using Matching Estimators," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 56(1), pages 29-37, May.
    4. William E. Becker & Suzanne R. Becker, 2011. "Potpourri: Reflections from Husband/Wife Academic Editors," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 56(2), pages 74-84, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Feuz, Dillon M. & Umberger, Wendy J. & Calkins, Chris R. & Killinger, Karen M., 2000. "Consumer Preference For Domestic Versus International Beef Steaks," 2000 Annual Meeting, June 29-July 1, 2000, Vancouver, British Columbia 36385, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    2. Boone, Jan & Sadrieh, Abdolkarim & van Ours, Jan C., 2009. "Experiments on unemployment benefit sanctions and job search behavior," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(8), pages 937-951, November.
    3. Søberg, Martin, 2003. "Voting rules and endogenous trading institutions: An experimental study," Memorandum 17/2002, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    4. Blair Cleave & Nikos Nikiforakis & Robert Slonim, 2013. "Is there selection bias in laboratory experiments? The case of social and risk preferences," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(3), pages 372-382, September.
    5. Nuzzo, Simone & Morone, Andrea, 2017. "Asset markets in the lab: A literature review," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 42-50.
    6. Chris Starmer, 1999. "Experiments in economics: should we trust the dismal scientists in white coats?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 1-30.
    7. Clare Lombardelli & James Proudman & James Talbot, 2005. "Committees Versus Individuals: An Experimental Analysis of Monetary Policy Decision-Making," International Journal of Central Banking, International Journal of Central Banking, vol. 1(1), May.
    8. Steven Kachelmeier & Kristy Towry, 2005. "The Limitations of Experimental Design: A Case Study Involving Monetary Incentive Effects in Laboratory Markets," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(1), pages 21-33, April.
    9. Anderhub, Vital & Muller, Rudolf & Schmidt, Carsten, 2001. "Design and evaluation of an economic experiment via the Internet," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 227-247, October.
    10. Adriana Gabriela Breaban & Juan Carlos Matallín-Sáez & Iván Barreda-Tarrazona & Mª Rosario Balaguer-Franch, 2012. "The demand for structured products: an experimental approach," Working Papers 2012/15, Economics Department, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón (Spain).
    11. Simon G�chter & Ernst Fehr, "undated". "Fairness in the Labour Market � A Survey of Experimental Results," IEW - Working Papers 114, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    12. Cullis, John & Jones, Philip & Soliman, Amal, 2012. "‘Spite effects’ in tax evasion experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 418-423.
    13. Heblich, Stephan, 2007. "Eigenverantwortliche Individuen und Pro-Aktive Unternehmen," Passauer Diskussionspapiere, Volkswirtschaftliche Reihe V-48-07, University of Passau, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    14. Zizzo, Daniel John, 2013. "Claims and confounds in economic experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 186-195.
    15. Chian Jones Ritten & Christopher Bastian & Jason F. Shogren & Thadchaigeni Panchalingam & Mariah D. Ehmke & Gregory Parkhurst, 2017. "Understanding Pollinator Habitat Conservation under Current Policy Using Economic Experiments," Land, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 6(3), pages 1-13, August.
    16. Sloof, Randolph & van Praag, C. Mirjam, 2008. "Performance measurement, expectancy and agency theory: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(3-4), pages 794-809, September.
    17. Daniel Friedman & Kai Pommerenke & Rajan Lukose & Garrett Milam & Bernardo Huberman, 2007. "Searching for the sunk cost fallacy," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(1), pages 79-104, March.
    18. Falk, Armin & Fehr, Ernst, 2003. "Why labour market experiments?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 399-406, August.
    19. Brooke Helppie McFall & Marta Murray-Close & Robert J. Willis & Uniko Chen, 2014. "Is it all worth it? The experiences of new PhDs on the job market, 2007-2010," NBER Working Papers 20654, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Matthew McGinty & Garrett Milam & Alejandro Gelves, 2012. "Coalition Stability in Public Goods Provision: Testing an Optimal Allocation Rule," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 52(3), pages 327-345, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Human subjects; Experiments; Internal Review Boards; Regulation; Research;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments
    • A2 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:39876. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Joachim Winter). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.