BRM II lectures 6,7,8,9,10 [Exam 2]
Lecture 6 - Ethics
Distinction between ethics, which is often looked over
procedural ethics
● The formal process of applying to and getting ethics approval from research ethics committee
(or perhaps organisation) before conducting a study
● requires researchers to reflect on their proposed methodology and possible risks/harm to
participants and others prior to the commencement of research
practical ethics
● Also known as process ethics, situated ethics (Calvey, 2008) and embedded ethics
(Whiteman, 2012)
● The consideration given to ethics throughout the research process as events or issues arise
(Guillemin & Gillam, 2004)
● The way in which researchers identify and respond to unforeseen ethically important
moments (Guillemin & Gillam, 2004) throughout their study.
Why do ethics matter?
● qualitative researchers interact with their participants
○ relationships may form
○ feeling of obligation to protect
○ privacy and confidentiality
● qualitative research produced a great deal of context information
○ Ex. single case
○ can inadvertently reveal identity of participants.
● our analysis can impact people’s lives
○ New workplace policies
○ Layoffs
○ Reputation
9 Research Ethics Principles
1. Do No Harm
a. your study should not hurt anyone physically or psychologically
b. principle stems from lessons learned from early research like the 1971 Stanford Prison
Experiment
c. Bottom line: if your study seems to be hurting anyone, stop the study, even if this is
problematic for your research design/plans
2. privacy and anonymity
a. two kinds of privacy: 1) institutional and 2) individual
b. any group or organization participating in a research study has a reasonable
expectation, that its identity will not be revealed.
c. how will you conceal the identity of the individuals and institutions/organization you
study?
1
, d. no identifying information about the institution or individual should be revealed in
written or other communication
e. consider how to anonymise descriptions, images, sketches, etc. Use pseudonyms (e.g.
Company X)
f. Your participants may want their identities revealed. They may want to be
acknowledged in your written product. Perhaps they see it as their ‘15 minutes of
fame’. This raised other problems.
g. Bottom line: Remove identifying information from your records. Seek permission
from the participants if you wish to make public information that might reveal who
they are or who the organization is. Use caution in publishing long verbatim quotes,
especially if they are damaging to the organization or people in it. Often, these quotes
can be
located on the Internet and traced to the speaker or author.
3. confidentiality
a. research is based in trust
b. during your research, you might learn a considerable amount of personal information
about your participants.
c. your participant is entitled to expect that information they provide in your research
will not be passed on to anyone else (e.g. their colleague, superiors your friends, etc.)
d. when discussing research data with your research team, do so with sensitivity (e.g.
respect your participants).
e. As a researcher, you are in a situation that you control. If you sense an interview
might be moving in a very personal direction, you might have to stop the interview
and suggest to the participant that they talk to a counsellor or other trusted support
person.
f. Bottom line: It is your responsibility to keep the information you learn confidential.
Take care to not reveal details of one interviewee to another, e.g. ‘Jan said it’s pretty
boring to work here, what do you think?’ is not okay!
4. Informed consent
a. individual should be informed of the nature of the study and may choose whether or
not to participate.
b. They should not be coerced into participation e.g. if a study is to be done in an
organization. Individuals within that group (e.g., student workers) might feel that they
cannot refuse when asked. There might be pressure placed on them by peers or by
superiors.
c. consider the capacity of vulnerable groups to really give informed consent
d. your research might diverge in a direction that causes participants to become more
uncomfortable or unwilling to continue, so consent people give in advance may not
really be ‘informed’.
e. Bottom line: Your responsibility is to make sure that participants are informed, to the
extent possible, about the nature of your study. Even though it is not always possible
to describe the direction your study might take, it is your responsibility to do the best
2
, you can to provide complete information. If participants decide to withdraw from the
study, they should not feel penalized for doing so - e.g. they should not be made to
feel that their relationship with your or the VU is under threat if they decide not to
take part/ withdraw from the study.
5. rapport and friendship
a. once participants agree to be a part of a study, the researcher develops rapport in
order to get them to disclose information.
b. Duncombe and Jessop (2005) bring out issues related to what they call faking
friendship
c. They suggest that the interviewer might put herself in the position of being a friend so
as to get participants disclose more information that they really want to (oo.
120-121). What is the issue here?
d. Bottom Line: Researchers should make sure that they provide an environment that is
trustworthy. At the same time, they need to be sensitive to the power that they hold
over participants. Researchers need to avoid setting up a situation in which
participants think they are friends with the researcher
6. Intrusiveness
a. your study should not be intrusive for your participants: intrusiveness can mean
intruding on their time, intruding on their space, and intruding on their personal lives
b. make a reasonable estimate of the amount of time participation will take
c. participants may not want you in their homes or classrooms - you might have to
negotiate a neutral location for a discussion
d. Bottom line: experience and caution are the watchwords. Be sensitive to your
research participants’ reactions and try to do what makes them comfortable. You are
not an investigative journalist.
7. Inappropriate behavior.
a. individuals participating in a research study have a reasonable expectation that the
researcher will not engage in conduct of a personal or sexual nature.
b. Here, researchers might find themselves getting too close to the participants and
blurring boundaries between themselves and others.
c. We probably all know what we mean by inappropriate behavior. We know it should
be avoided. Yet, there are documented examples of inappropriate behaviors between
teachers and their minor students, between therapists and their patients, and
between researchers and their participants.
d. Bottom line: if you think you are getting too close to those you are studying, you
probably are. Back off and remember that you are a researcher and bound by your
code of conduct to treat those you study with respect. Also speak up if you feel
uncomfortable about your own situation- consider the Welch et al. article on
interviewing high status executives.
8. Data interpretation
3
Lecture 6 - Ethics
Distinction between ethics, which is often looked over
procedural ethics
● The formal process of applying to and getting ethics approval from research ethics committee
(or perhaps organisation) before conducting a study
● requires researchers to reflect on their proposed methodology and possible risks/harm to
participants and others prior to the commencement of research
practical ethics
● Also known as process ethics, situated ethics (Calvey, 2008) and embedded ethics
(Whiteman, 2012)
● The consideration given to ethics throughout the research process as events or issues arise
(Guillemin & Gillam, 2004)
● The way in which researchers identify and respond to unforeseen ethically important
moments (Guillemin & Gillam, 2004) throughout their study.
Why do ethics matter?
● qualitative researchers interact with their participants
○ relationships may form
○ feeling of obligation to protect
○ privacy and confidentiality
● qualitative research produced a great deal of context information
○ Ex. single case
○ can inadvertently reveal identity of participants.
● our analysis can impact people’s lives
○ New workplace policies
○ Layoffs
○ Reputation
9 Research Ethics Principles
1. Do No Harm
a. your study should not hurt anyone physically or psychologically
b. principle stems from lessons learned from early research like the 1971 Stanford Prison
Experiment
c. Bottom line: if your study seems to be hurting anyone, stop the study, even if this is
problematic for your research design/plans
2. privacy and anonymity
a. two kinds of privacy: 1) institutional and 2) individual
b. any group or organization participating in a research study has a reasonable
expectation, that its identity will not be revealed.
c. how will you conceal the identity of the individuals and institutions/organization you
study?
1
, d. no identifying information about the institution or individual should be revealed in
written or other communication
e. consider how to anonymise descriptions, images, sketches, etc. Use pseudonyms (e.g.
Company X)
f. Your participants may want their identities revealed. They may want to be
acknowledged in your written product. Perhaps they see it as their ‘15 minutes of
fame’. This raised other problems.
g. Bottom line: Remove identifying information from your records. Seek permission
from the participants if you wish to make public information that might reveal who
they are or who the organization is. Use caution in publishing long verbatim quotes,
especially if they are damaging to the organization or people in it. Often, these quotes
can be
located on the Internet and traced to the speaker or author.
3. confidentiality
a. research is based in trust
b. during your research, you might learn a considerable amount of personal information
about your participants.
c. your participant is entitled to expect that information they provide in your research
will not be passed on to anyone else (e.g. their colleague, superiors your friends, etc.)
d. when discussing research data with your research team, do so with sensitivity (e.g.
respect your participants).
e. As a researcher, you are in a situation that you control. If you sense an interview
might be moving in a very personal direction, you might have to stop the interview
and suggest to the participant that they talk to a counsellor or other trusted support
person.
f. Bottom line: It is your responsibility to keep the information you learn confidential.
Take care to not reveal details of one interviewee to another, e.g. ‘Jan said it’s pretty
boring to work here, what do you think?’ is not okay!
4. Informed consent
a. individual should be informed of the nature of the study and may choose whether or
not to participate.
b. They should not be coerced into participation e.g. if a study is to be done in an
organization. Individuals within that group (e.g., student workers) might feel that they
cannot refuse when asked. There might be pressure placed on them by peers or by
superiors.
c. consider the capacity of vulnerable groups to really give informed consent
d. your research might diverge in a direction that causes participants to become more
uncomfortable or unwilling to continue, so consent people give in advance may not
really be ‘informed’.
e. Bottom line: Your responsibility is to make sure that participants are informed, to the
extent possible, about the nature of your study. Even though it is not always possible
to describe the direction your study might take, it is your responsibility to do the best
2
, you can to provide complete information. If participants decide to withdraw from the
study, they should not feel penalized for doing so - e.g. they should not be made to
feel that their relationship with your or the VU is under threat if they decide not to
take part/ withdraw from the study.
5. rapport and friendship
a. once participants agree to be a part of a study, the researcher develops rapport in
order to get them to disclose information.
b. Duncombe and Jessop (2005) bring out issues related to what they call faking
friendship
c. They suggest that the interviewer might put herself in the position of being a friend so
as to get participants disclose more information that they really want to (oo.
120-121). What is the issue here?
d. Bottom Line: Researchers should make sure that they provide an environment that is
trustworthy. At the same time, they need to be sensitive to the power that they hold
over participants. Researchers need to avoid setting up a situation in which
participants think they are friends with the researcher
6. Intrusiveness
a. your study should not be intrusive for your participants: intrusiveness can mean
intruding on their time, intruding on their space, and intruding on their personal lives
b. make a reasonable estimate of the amount of time participation will take
c. participants may not want you in their homes or classrooms - you might have to
negotiate a neutral location for a discussion
d. Bottom line: experience and caution are the watchwords. Be sensitive to your
research participants’ reactions and try to do what makes them comfortable. You are
not an investigative journalist.
7. Inappropriate behavior.
a. individuals participating in a research study have a reasonable expectation that the
researcher will not engage in conduct of a personal or sexual nature.
b. Here, researchers might find themselves getting too close to the participants and
blurring boundaries between themselves and others.
c. We probably all know what we mean by inappropriate behavior. We know it should
be avoided. Yet, there are documented examples of inappropriate behaviors between
teachers and their minor students, between therapists and their patients, and
between researchers and their participants.
d. Bottom line: if you think you are getting too close to those you are studying, you
probably are. Back off and remember that you are a researcher and bound by your
code of conduct to treat those you study with respect. Also speak up if you feel
uncomfortable about your own situation- consider the Welch et al. article on
interviewing high status executives.
8. Data interpretation
3
