given measure is appropriate for a particular study.

In particular, reviewers should consider if survey answers, if known, would impact a subject's reputation, liability, and insurability, or in other ways pose a risk for the subject.

According to the Protection for Pupil Rights Amendment, there are 8 categories of protected information for surveys involving K-12 students. These are: 1) political affiliations of student or student's parent; 2) mental or psychological problems of student or student's family; 3) sex behavior or attitudes; 4) illegal, anti-social, self-incriminating or demeaning behavior; 5) critical appraisals of others with whom students have close family relationships; 6) legally recognized privileged or analogous relationships, such as with lawyers, doctors or ministers, 7) religious practices, affiliations or beliefs of student or student's parent; and income. 8) income (other than that required by law to determine eligibility for participation in a program or for receiving financial assistance under such program). Research involving any of the eight identified categories requires written parental informed consent prior to participation of a child.

Coercion occurs when an overt or implicit threat of harm is intentionally presented by one person to another in order to obtain compliance. For example, a researcher might tell a prospective subject that he or she will lose access to needed health services if he or she does not participate in the research.

Undue influence can occur through an offer of an excessive or inappropriate reward or other overture in order to obtain compliance. For example, a faculty researcher might promise psychology students extra credit if they participate in the research. If that is the only way a student can earn extra credit, then the researcher is unduly influencing potential subjects. If, however, she offers comparable non-research alternatives for earning extra credit, the possibility of undue influence is minimized.

In addition to undue influence that can arise with the offering of rewards, undue influence also can be subtle. For example, students might feel pressure to participate in research if everyone else in the class is doing so. Because influence is contextual, and undue influence is likely to depend on an individual's situation, it can be difficult for IRBs to distinguish undue influence. It is up to the IRB to use its discretion in determining which circumstances give rise to undue influence. For example, an IRB might consider whether the informed consent process will take place at an appropriate time and in an appropriate setting, and whether the prospective subject may feel pressured into acting quickly or be discouraged from seeking advice from others.

Because of their relative nature and lack of clear-cut standards on the boundaries of inappropriate and appropriate forms of influence, researchers and IRB members must be vigilant about minimizing the possibility for coercion and undue influence. Reasonable assessments can be made to minimize the likelihood of undue influence or coercion occurring. For example, the IRB may recommend restricting levels of financial or