Use this skill whenever a user needs help writing, revising, or evaluating an IRB or ethics protocol for qualitative or anthropological research. Triggers include: any mention of "IRB," "ethics protocol," "IRB application," "ethics review," "human subjects," "Common Rule," "informed consent form," "consent process," "how to write an IRB protocol," "ethics board," "IRB submission," "protocol narrative," "exempt vs expedited vs full board," "consent waiver," "verbal consent," "data security plan," "confidentiality," "de-identification," "deductive disclosure," "vulnerable populations," "fieldwork ethics," or "recruitment script." Also trigger when users ask about writing consent forms, recruitment materials, data management plans for IRB, risk assessment for qualitative research, digital ethnography ethics, or oral history IRB issues. Covers all qualitative and ethnographic methods. Do NOT use for upstream method selection (use methodology-selection skill), full research plan writing (use research-plan skill), or grant proposals (use grant-proposal skill). This skill handles writing IRB-ready protocol narratives and associated documents.
From ai-anthropologynpx claudepluginhub mattartzanthro/ai-anthropology-toolkit --plugin ai-anthropologyThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
references/irb-protocol-guide.mdreferences/irb-templates-and-examples.mdGuides Next.js Cache Components and Partial Prerendering (PPR) with cacheComponents enabled. Implements 'use cache', cacheLife(), cacheTag(), revalidateTag(), static/dynamic optimization, and cache debugging.
Migrates code, prompts, and API calls from Claude Sonnet 4.0/4.5 or Opus 4.1 to Opus 4.5, updating model strings on Anthropic, AWS, GCP, Azure platforms.
Details PluginEval's skill quality evaluation: 3 layers (static, LLM judge), 10 dimensions, rubrics, formulas, anti-patterns, badges. Use to interpret scores, improve triggering, calibrate thresholds.
Write IRB and ethics protocols for qualitative anthropological research that satisfy regulatory review criteria while making legible the distinctive epistemics and practical uncertainties of ethnographic work — emergent sampling, relational consent, and shifting field conditions. The skill treats protocol writing as a translation problem: making ethnographic practice reviewable without distorting it.
Contemporary best-practice protocols do two things at once: they (a) satisfy the Common Rule's review criteria (risk minimization, risk-benefit proportionality, equitable selection, consent, privacy and confidentiality safeguards, and added protections when appropriate); and (b) anticipate reviewer questions about ambiguity, and answer them with bounded flexibility (estimated sample sizes plus an amendment plan; tiered consent strategies; contingency plans for fieldwork changes).
| Task | Reference |
|---|---|
| Protocol template, checklist, regulatory foundations, comparative guidance | Read references/irb-protocol-guide.md |
| Method-specific guidance, consent templates, sample language, annotated excerpts | Read references/irb-templates-and-examples.md |
Determine the entry point:
Before generating any content, collect these inputs:
Required:
Important but can be inferred: 4. Institutional context. U.S. Common Rule (default assumption), Canadian TCPS 2, or other? Does the institution use a SmartForm platform or narrative-style application? 5. Review pathway. Does the user expect exempt, expedited, or full board review? If unsure, help determine the likely pathway based on methods and risk profile. 6. Consent approach. Written, verbal with waiver, layered/tiered, ongoing, community-level? If unspecified, recommend based on methods and context. 7. Recording plans. Audio, video, photo, screenshots? Separate consent for recordings is usually required. 8. Data sharing/archiving plans. Will data be archived or shared? Consent language must match sharing plans.
Helpful but not required:
references/irb-protocol-guide.md for the protocol
template, regulatory foundations, checklist, and comparative guidance.references/irb-templates-and-examples.md when the user needs
method-specific guidance, consent form language, recruitment scripts, data
management plan templates, risk mitigation strategies, or annotated
protocol excerpts.Follow the protocol template architecture from the guide reference. The standard protocol narrative contains these sections (adapt to institutional format):
Produce one or more deliverables depending on user needs:
Before presenting output, verify using the dual applicant-reviewer checklist (full version in guide reference):
| Failure mode | Prevention |
|---|---|
| Boilerplate consent that doesn't match ethnographic practice | Write consent language specific to the project's methods, population, and risk profile |
| Treating "confidentiality" as absolute promise | Frame as managed limitation; specify what controls exist and what limits remain |
| Missing deductive disclosure plan for small communities | Require aggregation, temporal fuzzing, role-based descriptors, controlled access |
| No amendment strategy for emergent sampling | Specify what changes require amendment vs what is approved flexibility |
| Consent form that doesn't distinguish primary from incidental participants | Use layered consent: site permission, introduction script, individualized consent |
| Data security described generically ("data will be kept secure") | Name specific controls: encryption, storage locations, access roles, key-file separation |
| Digital ethnography without internet-specific ethics | Require public/private analysis, quoting policy, screenshot handling, platform terms |
| Oral history without addressing attribution/anonymity choice | Offer participant choice model with dissemination options and time-limited restrictions |
Example 1: Full protocol for participant observation + interviews
Input: "I need to write an IRB protocol for my study of street vendors negotiating municipal regulation in Lima. I'll be doing participant observation and semi-structured interviews with about 30 vendors."
Output approach:
Example 2: Digital ethnography protocol
Input: "I'm studying how online health communities discuss alternative treatments on Reddit. I want to analyze posts and do some interviews with active members. My IRB is asking about consent for the Reddit data."
Output approach:
Example 3: Oral history with archiving
Input: "I'm collecting oral histories from civil rights activists. Some want to be named. My IRB is confused about whether this is 'research' and how to handle the naming issue."
Output approach: