Is this unethical?

[psychstudent90]

Hi everyone,

I'm currently recruiting for my MSc dissertation and am struggling to get my numbers up. Before I began recruiting, I didn't think to use an incentive, so I have 52 participants who weren't paid. My dissertation is due in 6 weeks, and my supervisor has disappeared for a month on holiday, and I now have someone I've never met before, who has obviously been assigned the job of helping me recruit.

He is suggesting I use a crowdsourcing website, CrowdFlower (MTurk not available in the UK), and pay each of the participants. I think it's unethical that I haven't paid some of my participants, but am going to pay the next 30 or so. He disagrees. What do you think?

Many thanks in advance!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[psychstudent90]

Not sure - haven't spoken to them. I'll try and get in contact with them - good idea, thanks.

 

[Doctor Eliza]

I agree with asking the IRB. I will add that my dissertation had some participants compensated with course credit and others compensated with money.

 

[psychstudent90]

Some of my participants have been compensated with course credit, but not many. Thanks!

 

[WisNeuro]

Changes to IRB protocols, with a difference in incentive is fairly common, especially when people need to up recruitment numbers. Only catch is that you need to make sure either your IRB protocol allows it, or submit a change in protocol to reflect the change, should be an expedited review since I assume the actual study is not changing.

 

[cara susanna]

I did that (later offered cash or course credit) and my IRB was fine with it.

 

[psychstudent90]

Managed to get by without offering more incentives and ended up submitting Thanks for your help - I forgot to check some of the threads I created, hence only replying now!