Bryant University. The Character of Success

Institutional Review Board


The IRB on Human Subjects shall review all research involving the use of human subjects prior to initiation of that research. The IRB exists to help ensure the protection of human subjects used in research projects, to provide guidance to researchers in the design of experiments, to inform and protect the faculty on legal issues, and to provide a process that encourages the review of experimental protocols.


IRB members are appointed by the President or his appointed designee. The IRB is composed of eleven members with varying experience, expertise, background, and gender in order to promote adequate review of research activities.

Members include:

  • Four faculty from liberal arts disciplines.
  • Four faculty from business disciplines.
  • Two administrators who will also serve as record-keeper.
  • A faculty member who is not affiliated with Bryant University, either directly or indirectly.

Current members are:

  • Jay Amrien, School of Health Sciences
  • David Atkin, Communication (University of Connecticut) 
  • Andrea Boggio, History and Social Sciences    
  • Gregg Carter, History and Social Sciences 
  • A. Can. Inci, Finance
  • Robert Jones, Planning and Institutional Research
  • Kacy Kim, Marketing
  • Gaytha Langlois, Science and Technology
  • Qin Leng, Science and Technology
  • Teresa McCarthy, Marketing
  • Sukki Yoon, Marketing (Chair) 



The IRB will meet as needed so as to respond to proposals within two weeks, shorter if possible. The IRB will make every effort to prevent the delay of research projects or submission of funding proposals.


All committee deliberations will be a matter of public record. Minutes will be kept at all committee meetings, and the committee's decisions on proposals will be communicated in writing to the investigator, the Chair of the investigator's department, and the Provost. Copies of these minutes and final decisions will be available to the Bryant community.

The Provost will conduct an annual review of the program to ensure that the review process is adequately serving the research community, and that proper protection is being afforded human subjects.