Do Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) Violate the Rights of Free Speech and Press? A Study of Artificial Intelligence and Philosophy

Abstract

The present study is part of a larger study on the accuracy and capabilities of ChatGPT. But it is more than that. It also examines the issue of whether Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) violate the rights of free speech and press by requiring researchers to first obtain permission before they can distribute opinion surveys. ChatGPT was asked to write a two-part essay, where one part gave reasons why such a requirement is unconstitutional and the other part presented arguments that such a restriction was constitutional. The same command was then given to Bard, another chatbot, to see how the essays compared. It was found that the ChatGPT essay was more comprehensive and better in terms of quality. The question was also examined philosophically. The philosophical conclusion was that Institutional Review Boards were acting unconstitutionally in requiring permission to conduct opinion survey research that is anonymous and voluntary in cases where the university is government funded.

Keywords: ChatGPT, Bard, artificial intelligence, AI, free speech, institutional review board, IRB, philosophy, ethics

JEL Classification: C89, I20, I23, I28, I29, K10, K38