Research Ethics Statement
Ethical Commitments and Principles
Research on vulnerability prediction and institutional manipulation carries profound ethical responsibilities. This statement articulates our non-negotiable commitments to human dignity, autonomy, and transparent research practices.
Core Ethical Principle:
We explicitly reject surveillance paradigms. This framework exists to expose manipulation, not perpetuate it. Individual autonomy and dignity are inviolable—no research goal, commercial opportunity, or institutional pressure justifies compromising these values.
Anti-Surveillance Commitments
1. Voluntary Participation Only
All research participation is strictly voluntary:
- No coercion, manipulation, or undue inducement to participate
- Clear explanation of study purposes, procedures, risks, and benefits before consent
- Right to withdraw at any time without penalty or consequence
- No retaliation against non-participants or those who withdraw
2. Complete Transparency
Participants have full access to information about research methods:
- How vulnerability is assessed (VI calculation methods disclosed)
- What data is collected and why
- How data will be analyzed, stored, and protected
- Who will have access to results
- How findings will be used (research publication, policy advocacy, etc.)
No deception: We do not use deceptive research methods. If temporary information withholding is scientifically necessary (e.g., to avoid response bias), full debriefing is provided immediately after participation.
3. No Vulnerability Monetization
We categorically prohibit:
- Sale of vulnerability data to third parties
- Use of VI/DDI assessments for commercial targeting
- Sharing participant data with institutions they’re disputing
- Exploitation of research access for profit maximization
Research findings may inform commercial tools (e.g., VI assessment software), but individual participant data is never monetized.
4. No Predictive Manipulation
We will not:
- Use vulnerability predictions to manipulate research participants
- Test manipulation tactics on unsuspecting individuals
- Deploy EMM tactics to validate their effectiveness
- Create artificial emotional volatility to study its effects
We study manipulation to prevent it, not perfect it.
Institutional Review Board (IRB) Compliance
Federal Regulations
All empirical research will comply with:
- 45 CFR 46 (Common Rule) – Federal policy for protection of human research subjects
- 21 CFR 50 & 56 (FDA regulations, if applicable) – Protection of human subjects in clinical investigations
- HIPAA (if health information involved) – Privacy protections for health data
IRB Approval Required Before
- Any data collection from human participants
- Piloting intervention protocols with clients/patients
- Administering VI, DDI, or NAI assessments
- Longitudinal tracking of institutional grinding experiences
No Exceptions: Even minimal-risk observational studies require IRB review. We do not conduct unregulated human subjects research.
Informed Consent Standards
Required Elements
All participants must receive clear explanation of:
- Purpose: Why the study is being conducted
- Procedures: What participation involves (assessments, interviews, time commitment)
- Risks: Potential psychological discomfort from discussing institutional manipulation experiences
- Benefits: Potential personal benefits (free VI assessment, intervention access) and societal benefits (improved understanding of manipulation)
- Alternatives: Other options for support (therapy, legal advocacy) outside research participation
- Confidentiality: How data will be protected and who has access
- Voluntary Nature: Right to decline or withdraw without consequences
- Contact Information: Who to contact with questions or concerns
Special Protections for Vulnerable Participants
Individuals currently experiencing institutional grinding may be in vulnerable states:
- Enhanced Disclosure: Extra care to ensure comprehension of consent
- Witness Requirement: Independent witness for consent process (if high VI)
- Cooling-Off Period: 24-48 hours between consent and participation to prevent impulsive decisions
- Referrals Provided: All participants receive information about advocacy organizations and mental health resources regardless of study participation
Data Protection and Confidentiality
Data Security Measures
- Encryption: All data encrypted at rest and in transit (AES-256)
- De-identification: Personal identifiers separated from research data
- Access Controls: Role-based access; only authorized researchers view identifiable data
- Secure Storage: HIPAA-compliant servers; no cloud storage without contractual safeguards
- Data Retention: Minimum retention required by regulations; secure destruction after retention period
Limits of Confidentiality
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed in cases of:
- Imminent risk of harm to self or others (mandatory reporting)
- Suspected child or elder abuse (mandatory reporting)
- Court-ordered disclosure (legal subpoena)
These limits are disclosed during informed consent.
Data Sharing
De-identified data may be shared with:
- Co-investigators listed in IRB protocol
- Other researchers (only with participant consent and IRB approval)
- Public repositories (only aggregate/anonymized data, never individual records)
Vulnerable Populations Protections
Additional Safeguards for High-VI Individuals
Participants identified as high vulnerability (VI ≥ 60) receive:
- Enhanced Monitoring: More frequent check-ins during longitudinal studies
- Priority Intervention Access: Earlier access to fortification interventions if piloting
- Advocacy Referrals: Proactive connection to legal/clinical support services
- Flexible Withdrawal: Simplified process for withdrawing without in-person contact if distressing
Children and Adolescents
If future research includes minors (under 18):
- Parental/guardian consent required
- Child assent obtained in age-appropriate language
- Extra protections for psychological risk
- Mandatory reporting for abuse/neglect suspicions
Conflict of Interest Management
Financial Interests
All researchers must disclose:
- Equity interests in entities that could benefit from research outcomes
- Consulting relationships with relevant industries (insurance, healthcare, technology)
- Intellectual property rights (patents, licensing agreements)
Mitigation Strategies
- Independent Data Monitoring: Third-party oversight for outcome assessment
- Conflict Disclosure: Transparent disclosure to participants and in publications
- Recusal: Conflicted researchers removed from outcome determination roles
Community Engagement and Advocacy
Partnership with Advocacy Organizations
We commit to:
- Consult with disability rights, consumer protection, and patient advocacy groups before study design
- Incorporate lived experience expertise into research protocols
- Share findings with advocacy communities before publication (embargo-respecting)
- Support policy reform efforts informed by research
Participant Advisory Boards
For major studies, we will establish advisory boards including:
- Individuals with lived experience of institutional manipulation
- Disability advocates
- Mental health practitioners
- Legal experts in relevant domains
Dissemination Ethics
Publication Principles
- Open Access: Prioritize open-access journals to maximize accessibility
- Pre-Registration: Pre-register studies to prevent publication bias
- Negative Results: Commit to publishing null findings to prevent research waste
- Data Availability: Share de-identified data upon reasonable request (within legal/ethical constraints)
Media Engagement
When engaging media:
- Avoid overstating findings or making premature clinical claims
- Distinguish theoretical frameworks from validated interventions
- Protect participant confidentiality absolutely
- Correct misrepresentations promptly
Core Ethical Principles Summary
Respect for Persons
Individuals are autonomous agents; their choices must be respected and protected.
Beneficence
Maximize benefits, minimize harms; participant welfare takes precedence over research goals.
Justice
Equitable distribution of research benefits and burdens; no exploitation of vulnerable populations.
Non-Maleficence
“First, do no harm”—we will not use research to cause psychological injury or re-traumatize participants.
Accountability and Oversight
Internal Mechanisms
- Ethics Committee: Independent review of research ethics questions
- Data Safety Monitoring: Ongoing monitoring for adverse events
- Regular Audits: Compliance audits by external consultants
External Accountability
- Submit to IRB continuing review as required
- Respond to participant grievances within 7 days
- Report serious adverse events to IRB within 48 hours
- Annual ethics statement updates reflecting evolving practices
Questions or Concerns
If you have questions about research ethics:
Principal Investigator: Joshua Garfunkel
Email: ethics@disrupttheloop.com
To report ethical concerns:
Independent Ethics Hotline: [To be established with IRB approval]
Anonymous reporting available
Related Policies: