 Welcome to this video vlog on the institutional review board of Tyson. What do we do? Well, if you hear the institutional review board, you might think, well, is this the Spanish acquisition? So all my research will now be going through this IRB and people will critically look at it. Well, no, I want to warn you upfront. This is not the case. We are here to indeed review proposals involving human subjects. But we are not examining with the aspect that we go into the nutty details. We want to help researchers to help them with their research agenda and to go things as smooth as possible. So what do we do? Well, our idea of an IRB is actually to sustain and improve the quality of research as Tyson for participants. So first of all, we want to protect the privacy of participants and prevent physical, psychological or other harm to participate in research. So this is one thing we evaluate. We are not going to go into the details of the research questions. No, we just want to evaluate whether participants are treated or how they should be treated institution and society. We try to also support and facilitate in the in integrity and transparency of data collection and management and accessibility of research data and results to the extent that that doesn't conflict with a so next to this participant protection. We also have the goal in mind that research should be open if to the extent that it is possible. And important that's the last aspect. And here I also say we are smooth. We try to support, educate and add researchers to conform to this IRB aims and procedures. We also have a minimum possible workload with a minimum possible workload for research. Also, it should not conflict with a and B and this minimum possible workload, I will explain in another video blog. There you will be clear. There it will be clear that indeed the IRB is here, but IRB has a lot of possibilities where people can actually go into a fast track to evaluate the research quicker. Of course, some proposals require full review, but I will explain that in the next video floor, but the important to remember here is, we try to make things smooth. What to why this was established, like I already said, first of all, we want to somehow create some ethics in the data collection and avoid that strange things happen to participants. What do we typically look for while important is that if you do research you fully inform participants, and that they are also willing to participate by giving informed consent to the extent that it is possible. This will prevent as much as possible physical and psychological harm and important. Most of them, the data collection, if possible, should be anonymized to assess to what extent this goal has been achieved so we actually take these principles to heart and we check research proposals on these kind of principles. We sometimes remarks on the proposal which in a revision are often easy to resolve. So most proposals get one revision after one revision. Often most of the things are already in compliance with what we expect as an IRB and you can move on with your research. Another important aspect is of course data management. We want to avoid that some fragments of the data are stored somewhere and nobody knows exactly where storing is actually happened. We want to have transparency in data management, also because Tilburg University also stresses this protection of participants in this storage. So we try to store data anonymously, and we try to also emphasize that maybe it's also open if possible for researchers so that other research can replicate the research results. So there we have a sort of view that if possible with the protection of participants that data is as open as possible for society. So I already mentioned this, it's mainly research related to human persons or a group of human living persons that you are going to approach. It doesn't contain anonymized existing data or pseudo existing data, maybe past data that is available from people that were. Well, information available there. Well, that can be is not under the scope of the IRB the IRB most of the time focuses on human persons that you are going to approach via survey experiments interviews these kind of things. And then you need IRB approval. What is important, like I already said, we evaluate these proposals on certain dimensions, but we are not going to say well is this research relevant enough for society is the contribution large enough. For the journals, not for the IRB so we are not evaluating that important proposed research as of 2020 can only be conducted after having received IRB approval. And also we get sometimes request, can an IRB provide post rock approval after research has been started. The answer is no, we don't do that. As soon as you do human research, it's up to the researcher to then submit to IRB. We cannot give post hoc approval. That that's the principle and often a lot of principles that are followed by competing IRBs at other schools, the ideas. If you have human subjects or you want to approach people go to the IRB first and the process doesn't take long. I will explain that in the next video blog, but most of the time 10 to 15 days at maximum. Why do we want to have it. Well, first of all, there is a legacy argument. A lot of schools have it top journals asked for it institutions also wanted. And so that's why we also thought Tyson need to have an IRB. We cannot run behind all these solutions we have to be front runner on this aspect to the legal argument. But what I find more important is also, there is a good research environment and for my own experience. It's really helpful to get your proposal approved by IRB, because you have to think a little bit already early in the stage of your research on how I would be going to approach people and what am I going to do to make sure that they are approached in an appropriate manner. So it helps researchers to plan their research and I think the IRB should be seen as an advantage. And once you have that quality check you can go on with your research. That's one thing but on the other thing it helps you to think ahead already about these quality issues and you become a better researcher. And that's what I think is really an advantage of the IRB. You become more trained on these aspects and you are aware of things that should be done to protect participants in your research. So I find more important than the legacy argument. So if you want to have more information then visit us at this website. There is more information available. I will also make a next video vlog on how we actually approve proposals. So for now, thank you already. If you have questions, go to this website and I will be answered.