exactly. could we study the puppet - inert? what would be the point? textual analysis and semiotic analysis does have a point - but we dont ever really get IRB permission for that... so its the methodology that leads to the need or not? On Mar 8, 2008, at 8:02 AM, Steve Jones wrote:
The puppet/puppeteer analogy is an interesting one. Indeed, what if one were studying a puppet? Would human subjects approval be necessary? Where does one draw the line? The study of the puppet, inert, we might presume to not be study of a human subject (although maybe the puppet is in some way an "artifact" representing its maker and one would be required to have human subjects approval?). The study of the puppet as a "medium" for interaction with the puppeteer we might presume to be study of a human subject (that is, a study of the puppeteer via the puppet) but a) to what degree, if at all, does the puppet "represent" the puppeteer? and b) what if the puppet had some agency of its own? Then there's the study of the puppet engaged in a play. Perhaps the play is entirely scripted, perhaps it is entirely improvised, or it is somewhere in-between. Is the study in any case human subjects research?
Sj