Comment by protomyth
4 years ago
The IRB of University of Minnesota reviewed the procedures of the experiment and determined that this is not human research.
How is this not human research? They experimented on the reactions of people in a non-controlled environment.
Sounds like the IRB of UMn needs some scrutiny as well.
For IRB human research means humans as subject in the research study. The subject of the study is the kernel patch review process. Yes, the review process does involve humans, but the humans (reviewers) are not the research subject. Not defending the study in anyway.
> Yes, the review process does involve humans
It doesn’t just “involve humans” it is first and foremost the behavior of specific humans.
> but the humans (reviewers) are not the research subject.
The study is exactly studying their behavior in a particular context. They are absolutely the subjects.
Not sure why you are so obsessed with this. Yes this process does involve humans, but the process has aspects can be examined as independent of humans.
This study does not care about the reviewers, it cares about the process. For example, you can certainly improve the process without replacing any reviewers. It is just blatantly false to claim the process is all about humans.
Another example, the review process can even be totally conducted by AIs. See? The process is not all about humans, or human behavior.
To make this even more understandable, considering the process of building a LEGO, you need human to build a LEGO, but you can examine the process of building the LEGO without examine the humans who build the LEGO.
20 replies →