Today, research with human (or non-human) participants requires initial approval by a review board (e.g., the Institutional Review Board, or IRB, at colleges and universities). The IRB is tasked with determining whether a researcher has balanced the safety and well-being of the participants against the likely benefits of the research proposed.

Imagine that a group of researchers decided NOT to seek IRB approval. Instead, they conducted a dangerous study that resulted in many of the participants' deaths (e.g., how long a person was able to survive [dependent variable] in ice-cold water with various types of protective clothing [independent variable]). By the time the research was discovered and stopped, a great deal of potentially useful data had been collected (e.g., the best types of materials and protective configurations for cold-water survival). On the other hand, many participants had been killed as a result of being thrown into cold water to die. The researchers are punished - but, what should be done with the useful data they collected in their 'illegal" study?