Because one IRB makes a bad decision doesn't mean, in general, deception studies are easy to get approved. Furthermore, this study used an "no human subjects" exemption to avoid a full review - which should not have happened. The Linux code attack study has also roundly criticized in the research community because it was such an abnormal failure of IRB.
> The Linux code attack study has also roundly criticized in the research community because it was such an abnormal failure of IRB.
So how is the board doing? Did its members face any consequences at all or are they still there ready to rubber stamp the next study with full approval and flimsy excuses?
