![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 4 of 4. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Mitchell on July 2, 2001, at 21:33:00
Hello,
A few months ago, a discussion developed on this site about the ethics of research in which a researcher uses as subjects members of a self-help group operated by the researcher.
At the time, "Dr. Bob" defended his publication of an article based on his own review of his own on-line self-help site. Last week, Bob posted a message at an International Society of Mental Health Online Yahoo group acknowledging errors he committed by publishing that aritcle. Bob is apparently continuing to discuss with the U of Chicago IRB proper procedures for this kind of research, so in fairness, he might have been waiting until he reaches a conclusion to make any further statements here.
I am aware that a majority of the active members of this discussion seemed to whole-heartedly support Bob's publication, and that some of the people who objected to his use of this group have since left or have been barred from participating here. Bob has also discussed on this Admin board some of his second thoughts, but, to me, his admissions here did not seem as frank here as they were to the members of the general ISMHO group. I feel it worthwhile to repost his comments here. I suspect he was as aware of the limitations of privacy in a Yahoo group as were the Psycho-babble members who he quoted in the research article.
Thanks,
S
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 3, 2001, at 9:17:35
In reply to Ethics admission, posted by Mitchell on July 2, 2001, at 21:33:00
> I am aware that a majority of the active members of this discussion seemed to whole-heartedly support Bob's publication, and that some of the people who objected to his use of this group have since left or have been barred from participating here.
FYI, Some of the "people" I've blocked have been the same person. One of the drawbacks of the current format is, as I mentioned in the article, "the technical difficulty of effectively preventing determined individuals from gaining at least temporary entry into the group". I can block someone, but they can just come back under a different name.
> I feel it worthwhile to repost his comments here. I suspect he was as aware of the limitations of privacy in a Yahoo group as were the Psycho-babble members who he quoted in the research article.
It's OK with me for this to be reposted. I'm not trying to hide anything. But did you check with the owner of the ISMHO list? Those posts aren't public, like these. :-)
Bob
Posted by Noa on July 3, 2001, at 16:27:16
In reply to Re: another post about the article, posted by Dr. Bob on July 3, 2001, at 9:17:35
> > But did you check with the owner of the ISMHO list? Those posts aren't public, like these. :-)
I was wondering about that. Mitchell, are you a member of that yahoo group (not the general nonmember mailing list, but the group where you can read messages and post)?What about John Grohol's open journal--is that public? Must be, because, unlike the yahoo groups site, I got access to the journal and archives.
The whole discussion is very interesting, though I am not sure about the public nature of the criticism.
I, personally, see that some things might have been done differently in publishing the article (for example, Dr. Bob's reflection about blacking out the screen name in the graphic).
However, I also don't see the article as *research* perse, so
"the environment being observed should not be one's own" (Grohol, Open Journal, 6-5-01)
doesn't seem that big a deal to me. It seemed to me that Dr. Bob did not present the article so much as research, but as a descriptive piece, I think. I am sure there are many precedents in mental health literature of clinicians writing descriptive articles about work they were involved in.
If, though, some kind of review process should have been followed, I do wonder about why the journal that published the article didn't enforce such a process before publishing it. One guess would be that these issues are still in the formative stages with regard to internet application, so just as Dr. Bob might have not followed a "protocol" for review, the journal might not have even had such a process to enforce with contributors. I don't know.
Posted by NikkiT2 on July 4, 2001, at 15:31:24
In reply to Ethics admission, posted by Mitchell on July 2, 2001, at 21:33:00
My feeling on allof this is - This is Dr Bobs site. He set it up for our use, and continues to run it, at his cost and his time, fcvor our use. We should all be thankful to him for this, and not constantly moan. If someone doesn't like Dr Bobs ways, they are free to go elsewhere. On a site I help run I am open to critisism, but at the end of the day it is up to us that do the work and spend the time running the site to do as we wish.
I do get upset when people attack Dr Bob as he is a great man in my opinion for giving us this place to find ehlp, advice and friends.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.