Human research is essentially divided into two grups; in- terventional and interaction studies. The probability of research-induced harm for volunteers in interventional research is always higher. There- fore, it is not possible to obtain an ethics committee approval for such studies. However, interaction studies can be categorized into different categories, and determining which of these categories has negligible harm for the volunteer may eliminate the need for ethics committee ap- proval. The details of the volunteer's data, under what conditions, when, how and for what, are used to determine the ethical committee approval requirement. However, the inability to reveal these details in a concrete way causes confusion or skipping an important phase in the ethical committee approval phase of the research process. In this article, four main problems underlying the aforementioned confusion, especially for funding institutions or scientific journals, are identified. These prob- lems are, when it is necessary to question the necessity of ethical com- mittee approval, the incomplete definition of minimal risk, the incompatibility and insufficient personal data definitions in the national legislation, and the undefined responsibility of the ethics committee ap- proval exemption decision. As the ultimate goal, facilitating sugges- tions for discussing the justification and current situation of each problem and identifying and solving these problems are presented.