Yes. It is the policy of Carleton University that all research taking place on campus or involving our staff or students must have approval by the REB. In these cases, you would apply for an administrative review. In order to apply, you must submit all the documents you already submitted to your home institution: application form, appendices, any email correspondence with the institution, and your clearance from the external REB.

Visit the External REB Review section on our Forms and Templates page for more information. You can also email ethics@carleton.ca if you have questions.

The Tri-Council Policy states that REB review is not required for research that relies exclusively on secondary use of anonymous (not anonymized) information, or anonymous human biological materials, provided the process of data linkage or recording or dissemination of results does not generate identifiable information.

In the case of all other types of data (including anonymized or de-identified data), approval must be sought from the REB. In all cases, we advise you to contact the Office of Research Ethics and Security to confirm whether you need approval and if so, what steps to follow.

All research involving human participants, including secondary data that is associated with a faculty member (including Adjunct Faculty) or a student at Carleton University, must be reviewed by the appropriate REB. This includes research conducted at Carleton, research conducted off campus (e.g., businesses, hospitals, prisons, schools), research approved by another academic institution, and may include archival research.

All research must be undertaken in a responsible, ethical manner that protects participants and researchers. Carleton University has two Research Ethics Boards (CUREB-A and CUREB-B) that review and approve all research projects. In order to ensure that projects are carried out as safely as possible, the REB will want to know what risks a research project entails and what steps you, as the researcher, will take to mitigate and manage these risks. By going through the REB research ethics approval process, researchers are demonstrating the value they place on the well-being of participants.

In addition, funding agencies require that institutions have a process in place ensuring all projects have ethics clearance.

If the true purpose of the experiment, or other similar information is altered, then deception is used. If your study involves deception, then your ethics application should include a description of the nature of the deception, why it must be used, the procedures that will be used to protect the participants (e.g., explanation in the debriefing of the nature of the deception and why it was necessary, such as getting participants’ natural responses). In some disciplines, a debriefing document should also be included that explains full details of the deception to participants. In addition, CUREB requires that once the true purpose of the study is revealed at the end of the project, that the researchers must explicitly offer participants the opportunity to 1) withdraw their data from the study and 2) to consent a second time to the use of their data.

Yes. For educational purposes, all honours students must submit an ethics application for their thesis, including for anonymous archival research. In addition, honours students must include a copy of their ethics clearance certificate, which includes the study reference number, when they submit their thesis. Honours students whose theses are part of an approved program of research for the current academic year only need to submit a copy of the ethics approval certificate with their thesis and need not apply for separate ethics approval for their thesis.

No. In the case of graduate theses, it is necessary to have the prospectus completed and approved before the ethics application is submitted in order to avoid premature and repeated evaluation of the project by the REB.

For instructions on how to use the Online Submission System, please consult the cuResearch User Guide.

Researchers submit to a particular board based on their department.

• CUREB-A: This Board reviews all ethics applications where the lead Carleton University researcher is in the Faculty of Public Affairs, Sprott School of Business, or the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (exclusive of Psychology).
• CUREB-B: This Board reviews all ethics applications where the lead Carleton University researcher is in the Faculty of Engineering and Design, Faculty of Science, Department of Psychology, the Institute of Cognitive Science, or any research that involves the collection of biological specimens or bodily fluids (e.g., blood, saliva, tissue samples), the use of a bio-instrument (e.g., electrodes, MRI/X-ray imaging, sensors for blood pressure or temperature), or a bio-intervention (e.g., administration of a drug by mouth or injection, drug testing, medical devices, rehabilitative exercise programs, mental health programs, inducing moderate or severe physical or biological or pharmacological stress).
• Note: Board expertise will be taken into consideration when protocols are submitted to CUREB-A or CUREB-B for review.
• If you are still unsure, please contact the Research Ethics Coordinators.

Once your proposal has been reviewed, you will be notified by email. Your application will be assigned one of the following recommendations:

• Accept as is
• Minor revisions
• Major revisions
• Refusal

If you are told your ethics application needs minor or major revisions, you will receive feedback from the reviewers as to what needs to be revised.

Once you have made the revisions (highlighted in yellow), submit the revised application through cuResearch. Once re-submitted, allow a minimum of one working week for feedback on the revisions.

Initial feedback from the CUREB varies depending on the level of ethics review and the response time of the applicant:

• Minimal risk reviews, course clearances, and administrative reviews take 2 to 3 weeks on average.
• Full CUREB reviews take 4 to 6 weeks.

During busy periods, the review time may be longer. If you have not heard from us during this time, we encourage you to follow up with a Research Ethics and Compliance Coordinator.

In accordance with the Tri-Council Policy Statement, the REBs use a proportionate approach when reviewing ethics applications, whereby the level of review depends on the foreseeable level of risk to participants. Applications that have a lower risk level will receive less scrutiny than applications with a higher risk level.