Students and faculty sponsors work in tandem to design and implement a research or scholarly project, and its important to support the student aspect of the equation. Graphic by Miguel Tovar/University of Houston

Do you remember the feeling you had the first time sitting at the wheel of a car? Were you overcome by the feeling of excitement, anticipation, fear, or perhaps a combination of them all? For many, obtaining a driver’s license is a rite of passage; a symbol that you are equipped with both the knowledge and skill of how to safely operate a motor vehicle. This achievement, however, would not have been made possible without the sacrifice of devoting hours to driver’s education and training under a supervisor.

Forging new paths

By the same token, college students who have dedicated years of study in various academic fields may also be ambivalent about conducting research. They will be in dire need of an experienced researcher’s guidance as they navigate down the unfamiliar road of academic research. It is their responsibility to help shape the student’s research interests and forge new paths.

By fostering student-led research, faculty sponsors can assist students by aligning their educational experiences with their career goals. This positions them for compelling careers in academic research.

Student at the wheel

Before a student can be placed in the driver’s seat of their own research protocol, they must be fully equipped with the right tools. If not, they will begin this journey without clear direction. Such was the case of several students at an unnamed university who conducted more than minimal risk studies without IRB approval.

The students started the protocol but were advised by their faculty sponsor that IRB approval wasn’t necessary before conducting research. One of the students rode in ambulances collecting data. They published their findings and even graduated before this was brought to the attention of the university’s Office of Compliance. This is a clear case of noncompliance and the severity of this issue is similar to driving a car without a license.

The Institutional Review Board (IRB) is the governing entity for human subject research. Their role isn’t primarily a research review process. It ensures that human subjects are treated ethically and that their rights are protected. This brought up issues of consent, confidentiality, and potential risk to human subjects and was an example of significant non-compliance.

Federal regulations and university policy mandate IRB approval for research involving human subjects. The requisite applies to faculty, staff and students. The availability of options may create more questions than answers when submitting their first student-led research protocol.

Mapping it out

The University of Houston has taken steps to manage research compliance and optimize student success. It established an Institutional Review Board that reviews only student-led protocols. It’s unique in that very few institutions have this sort of program available. In the two years since its inception, the program has become a transformative resource for both students and their faculty advisors.

Faculty and student protocols are typically grouped together. However, the UH Student IRB Program gives them a single point of contact for IRB-related concerns and individualized support.

The UH Office of Research Integrity and Oversight (RIO) has established an infrastructure to support student-led research through their pre-IRB review process. Students are encouraged to drop by to seek advice or brainstorm with a coordinator. Services, training and educational materials, such as the Faculty Sponsor Manual, are also available to support faculty sponsors.

The submission process can be pretty daunting. Kirstin Holzschuh, executive director of RIO, mentioned that students are unfamilar with the IRB requirements and process. As a result, their protocols would often be sent back for significant revisions. The pre-review system helps eliminate the possibility of their protocols getting stuck in the review process.

Representatives from this office regularly interface with the UH research community. They travel to various colleges and departments across campus and guest lecture on the IRB submission process. They also talk about the ethics of conducting research with human subjects.

Students and faculty sponsors work in tandem to design and implement a research or scholarly project. Therefore, it’s imperative to cultivate an environment where student researchers feel informed and supported by their advisors and the UH community.

------

This article originally appeared on the University of Houston's The Big Idea. Nitiya Spearman, the author of this post, is the internal communications coordinator for the UH Division of Research.

To err is human, after all. Graphic by Miguel Tovar/University of Houston

University of Houston: Navigating non-compliance and human error in research

houston voices

To comply is to obey, or conform to instruction or official requirements. In a perfect world, research non-compliance wouldn’t occur and following the rules would be a behavioral norm. But the reality is, to err is human.

To err is human

Often times the judgement of our own, and others, poor decision-making is rooted in the innate tendency to view things in black or white – categorizing behaviors as either right or wrong, good or bad, thus deeming them as either ethical or unethical.

But this way of thinking often conflicts with the gray world in which we exist. So what happens when research decisions land somewhere in the moral gray area?

Before answering, here are two situations to consider that involve the over-enrollment of research participants:

Case 1:
The IRB has approved a survey for 40 subjects. The PI realizes after the survey has been open for several weeks that she forgot to set a participant limit within the survey program and 60 subjects have completed the survey.

Case 2:

A study involving a new drug to control diabetes symptoms is approved to enroll 30 participants. The study doctor thinks the drug may be beneficial, so she continues enrolling, for a total of 80 subjects.

The devil is in the details

Why is over-enrollment of subjects considered non-compliance?

Many institutions have agreed, within their assurance to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), to apply the Common Rule to all human subjects research, whether the research is funded or not.

The Common Rule regulations found at 45 CFR 46.109(a) and 45 CFR 46.111 (1) state that the IRB shall review and have authority to approve, require modifications in (to secure approval), or disapprove all research activities. This includes the maximum number of research .

And what must the IRB review?

Under the above regulatory requirements, the IRB must evaluate all instances of non-compliance.

In these cases of over-enrollment, the IRB must review the number of subjects over-enrolled and assess any potential effects on additional subjects and/or the research, as well as determine if the noncompliant data may be used for research purposes.

What UH IRB says about Case 1:

While over-enrollment in a survey seems low-risk, depending on the content of the survey questions, the IRB could determine the issue to be more serious, such as for a study collecting data related to illegal substance use or questions about traumatic events (legal or psychological harm). The IRB must ensure that risks to subjects are minimized; only the number of subjects needed to statistically justify the research are approved. Depending on the number of subjects over-enrolled and the time period over which they participated, the non-compliance could also be considered continuing.

What UH IRB says about Case 2:

Investigational drug studies often pose more than minimal risk of harm to subjects. In these studies, it is even more critical to ensure that additional subjects are not exposed to potential harms without scientific justification

In a drug study, the PI may not continue a study based on opinion; the reason a physician is blinded to treatment assignment in many drug studies is to avoid potential bias.

Finding non-compliance: What can you do?

If the number of subjects enrolled exceeds the number approved by the IRB, a finding of non-compliance is justified. The IRB will review the numbers, the Principal Investigator’s reasons for over-enrollment and assess what procedures were conducted in these subjects. Often over-enrollment is inadvertent, however the committee also has the ultimate authority to determine whether the data may be used for research purposes.

Corrective actions, such as continuing education of the PI and/or study team to ensure this issue does not occur again in the future, are often required. In the most serious cases, the IRB may suspend or terminate approval.

If the non-compliance rises to the level of being serious (harms or has the potential to harm subjects or others) and/or continuing in nature, it must be reported to federal oversight agencies such as the Health and Human Services Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) and the FDA. These agencies ensure that the institution is monitoring for these activities and puts appropriate fixes in place.

The importance of intetrity

Non-compliant research can be due to inadvertent errors or deliberate acts of noncompliance. The results could be the same. Human subjects could be harmed. Funding and reputation at an institution conducting research could be negatively affected. In times of reduced federal funding for basic research, there are direct financial costs to the agencies when funds and resources are misused.

The responsibility of ensuring that research protocols are adhered to rests upon the shoulders of the researchers involved.

If you were a member on the IRB, what would you consider to be appropriate consequences for the PI in these situations?

It’s important to note that non-compliance, whether it’s a “little white lie/inadvertent error” or a deliberate violation of the approved protocol can undermine the integrity of both the research process and the academic research enterprise.

------

This article originally appeared on the University of Houston's The Big Idea. Nitiya Spearman, the author of this post, is the internal communications coordinator for the UH Division of Research.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Houston researcher examines how AI helps and hurts creativity

eye on ai

As artificial intelligence continues to grow and seeps into spaces like art, design and writing, a Houston researcher is examining its effects on creativity.

University of Houston’s Bauer College Assistant Professor Jinghui Hou, in collaboration with scholars around the world, recently published the paper "The Double-Edged Roles of Generative AI in the Creative Process" in the journal Information Systems Research.

Through the research, the team identified two stages of creativity that AI can influence: ideation and implementation.

In one study, Hou and her team developed a lab experiment to examine the impact of a cutting-edge generative AI tool during the brainstorming or ideation phase on a group of designers with varying levels of expertise.

The study showed that nearly all designers who used generative AI during this stage improved in the creativity of their graphic design work, and that the improvements were substantial and consistent across the board.

“In the first stage, we find that for anyone, including ordinary people and expert designers, AI is very helpful because of its computational power,” Hou said in a news release. “It can go beyond the imagination that humans have. For example, if I wanted to imagine a tiger with wings, it would be hard to see that in my head, but AI can do it easily.”

However, a second study examining the implementation stage found that AI affects professionals differently than novice designers.

The study showed that novice designers continued to improve in all aspects of their work when using AI. But more expert designers did not see significant improvements in the implementation stage. Rather, expert designers who used AI spent 57 percent more time completing their work compared with their peers who did not use AI.

“In the implementation stage, we find that AI is still very helpful for those ordinary people, but it creates more work for expert designers,” Hou said in the release. “This is because the designer has years of training to materialize a piece of artwork. We find that AI uses different techniques to produce creative work. For designers, it can become burdensome to revise what AI made.”

Hou’s paper suggests that AI is most helpful in the brainstorming stage, but hopes to see generative AI developers program tailor the technology for expert-level, professional needs.

“It could give users more freedom to fit the technology to their usage pattern and workflow,” Hou added. “In a sense, it's not about people catering to the AI, but the AI technology catering to people."

World Cup's 14-mile Green Corridor to leave lasting impact on Houston

Big Win

The FIFA World Cup 2026 Houston Host Committee has announced new details about its massive Green Corridor project, including the many improvements that will outlast the iconic sporting event taking place in Houston this summer.

The Green Corridor will be a 14-mile long verdant artery connecting multiple major landmarks in Houston through safe, walkable paths that include shade trees and other improvements. First conceived in 2024 by the Sustainability Subcommittee led by Elizabeth Carlson, it will unite East Downtown, Downtown, Midtown, the Museum District, and Third Ward through a hike and bike trail as well as METRO Rail stops. Though the Green Corridor is beginning its life as a showcase for the city to visitors attending the FIFA World Cup June 14 -July 4, it will remain a permanent installation for Houstonians to travel the city without cars.

Management of the project is being handled by Impact Houston 26, a portion of the Host Committee empowered by the Harris County-Houston Sports Authority’s Sports Authority Foundation to promote long-term benefits to the city after the World Cup. Funding partners include private corporations as well as civic organizations such as the City of Sugar Land and Rice University.

“The Green Corridor reflects what Impact Houston 26 is all about, using the FIFA World Cup as a catalyst to deliver lasting environmental benefits for our city,” Carlson said in a statement. “Through Impact Houston’s pillar on sustainability, we’re able to collaborate with local stakeholders to create not just demonstrations of resilience and innovation but education and engagement in the community, a meaningful legacy long after 2026.”

The corridor will provide access to both Houston Stadium (also known as NRG Stadium) and the FIFA Fan Festival, as well as improve existing paths like the Columbia Tap Trail in Third Ward. These improvements include the installation of shade structures, native plantings, expanding the tree canopy, air quality monitoring devices, and water and bike repair stations.

Impact Houston 26 is also working with local institutions like the Houston Zoo, Greentown Labs, and Discovery Green to install various educational materials along the Green Corridor.

The Green Corridor initiative.Courtesy rendering

Below is a breakdown of other improvements planned or completed as part of the Green Corridor.

  • Downtown Houston Main Street Promenade: Four permanent shade structures, native plants, and expanding the tree canopy by 154% to be implemented by May 2026. Further shade structures and plantings planned for Texas Avenue.
  • East Downtown Management District: Native tree plantings and landscaping in and around the FIFA Fan Festival site to improve first/last mile connectivity around the Green Corridor.
  • Columbia Tap Trail: Installation of 325 solar lights.
  • Stadium Park/Astrodome and TMC/Dryden plus Fannin South Transit Center: Various landscaping and safety enhancements.
  • Midtown Houston: $1.5 million in landscaping and beautification along the Red Line, including over 80 trees, native plantings, water stations, waste receptacles, crosswalk improvements, and public art installations.

The Green Corridor is only one of the World Cup Host Committee's sustainability initiatives. In January, it announced the "New Year, New Hou" program that provides hospitality businesses such as restaurants and hotels with one of three certifications.

---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.

Houston humanoid robotics startup Persona AI hires new strategy leader

new hire

Houston-based Persona AI, a two-year-old startup that develops robots for heavy industry, has hired an automation and robotics professional as its head of commercial strategy.

In his new position, Michael Perry will focus on building Persona AI’s business development operations, coordinating with strategic partners and helping early adopters of the company’s humanoids. Target customers include offshore platforms, shipyards, steel mills and construction sites.

Perry previously served as vice president of business development at Boston Dynamics, where he led market identification for robotics, and as an executive at DJI. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Chinese and government studies from the University of Texas at Austin.

“Now is the perfect time to join Persona AI as we rapidly close the gap between what’s possible in the lab versus what’s driving real commercial value,” Perry says. “Building industry-hardened humanoid hardware and production-deployable AI is only one piece of the puzzle.”

“Getting humanoids into operations for heavy industry will require the systematic commercial and operational work that makes enterprises humanoid-ready and defining the business case, solving the integration challenges, and building the playbook for safe, scalable adoption,” he adds. “That’s what I’m here to build.”