reflect upon your learning of the specific theories, concepts, themes, and terminology in each of the course modules. Use the assigned readings of each module along with the discussions and activities to write about each of the textbook chapters completed to this point (Chapters 7-14). You should synthesize and write about the specific theories and terminology from each chapter and provide specific examples from everyday life of the specific theories and terminology of each chapter. Use the activities and questionnaires to help you reflect upon your attributes in relation to each chapter’s themes.
Write 3-4 pages of organized reflection about the specific theories, concepts, and terminology from each chapter (7-14) in which you discuss personally experienced and observed everyday examples of your findings and the themes revealed in each of the chapters (7-14).
Introduction to Leadership Peter G. NorthouseSage Publications, 5th Edition,ISBN-13: 978-1544351599ISBN-10:In studies where several parties Page 6 of 10 Ethical Issues of Interviewing SAGE SAGE Research Methods 2007 SAGE Publications, Ltd. All Rights Reserved. are involved, such as by individual interviews within organizations, or with married or divorced couples, it should be made clear before the interviewing who will later have access to the interviews. In extreme cases, protecting confidentiality can raise serious legal problems, for example if a researcher – through the promise of confidentiality and the trust of the relationship – has obtained knowledge of mistreatment, malpractice, child abuse, the use of drugs or other criminal behaviour either on the part of the interviewee or others. The qualitative research interview involves different ethical issues from those of a questionnaire survey, where confidentiality is assured by the computed averages of survey responses. In a qualitative study where subjects’ statements from a private interview setting may be published in public reports, precautions need to be taken to protect the subjects’ privacy. Here there may be an intrinsic conflict between ethical demands for confidentiality and basic principles of scientific research, such as providing the necessary information for inter-subjective control and for repeating a study. We should also note that in some cases interviewees, who have spent their time and provided valuable information to the researcher, may want, as is usual in journalistic interviews, to be credited with their full name. Parker (2005) has argued that anonymity of the subjects may actually serve to protect the researcher, denying the subjects a voice in the research project. The subjects’ anonymity may serve as an alibi for the researcher in retaining the privilege of controlling and disseminating the information about the study. Parker thus advocates discussing openly with those who take part in research whether or not they might actually prefer to be named and to speak openly for themselves. Consequences The consequences of an interview study need to be addressed with respect to possible harm to the subjects as well as to the expected benefits of participating in the study. The ethical principle of beneficence means that the risk of harm to a subject should be the least possible. From a utilitarian ethical perspective, the sum of potential benefits to a subject and the importance of the knowledge gained should outweigh the risk of harm to the subject and thus warrant a decision to carry out the study (Guidelines, 1992, p. 15). This involves a researcher’s responsibility to reflect on the possible consequences not only for the persons taking part in the study, but for the larger group they belong to as well. An interviewer should take into account that the openness and intimacy of the interview may be seductive and can lead subjects to disclose information they may later regret. A research interviewer’s ability to listen attentively may also in some cases lead to quasi-therapeutic relationships, for which most research interviewers are not trained; compare here the challenges to the therapeutic interviewer reported in Box 2.3. In particular, long and repeated interviews on personal topics may lead to quasi-therapeutic relations. The personal closeness of the interview relation puts strong demands on the ethical sensitivity and respect of the interviewer regarding how far to go in his or her questioning. The integrity of the researcher The researcher as a person is critical for the quality of the scientific knowledge and for the soundness of Page 7 of 10 Ethical Issues of Interviewing SAGE SAGE Research Methods 2007 SAGE Publications, Ltd. All Rights Reserved. ethical decisions in an interview inquiry. Moral research behaviour involves more than ethical knowledge and cognitive choices; it encompasses the moral integrity of the researcher, his or her sensitivity and commitment to moral issues and action. By interviewing, the importance of the researcher as a person is magnified because the interviewer is the main instrument for obtaining knowledge. Being familiar with value issues, ethical guidelines and ethical theories may help in choices that weigh ethical versus scientific concerns in a study. In the end, however, the integrity of the researcher – his or her knowledge, experience, honesty and fairness – is the decisive factor. With the dependence on the ethical judgements of the researcher, it becomes important to foster the ethical skills of interview researchers. These may be promoted by the study of ethically complex cases of interview research, and by conversations with peers and representatives of the subjects studied (Brinkmann and Kvale, 2005). The independence of research can be co-opted from ‘above’ as well as from ‘below’ by those funding a project, as well as by its participants. Ties to either group may lead the researcher to ignore some findings and emphasize others to the detriment of an investigation of the phenomena being as comprehensive and unbiased as possible. Interviewing is interactive research; through close interpersonal interactions with their subjects, interviewers may be particularly prone to attempts at coalition making by them. Interviewers may identify with their subjects so closely that they do not maintain a professional distance, but instead report and interpret everything from their subjects’ perspectives – in anthropological terms, ‘going native’. The role of the interviewer can involve a tension between a professional distance and a personal friendship. Thus in the context of a feminist, caring, committed ethic, the interviewer has been conceived as a friend, as a warm and caring researcher. This early conception of the interviewer as a caring friend has later been criticized from a feminist standpoint. Duncombe and Jessop (2002) argue that an interviewer’s show of intimacy and empathy may involve a faking of friendship and commodification of rapport, sanitized of any concern with broader ethical issues. When under pressure to deliver results, whether to a commercial employer or to their own thesis, the interviewer’s show of empathy may become a means to circumvent the subject’s informed consent and persuade interviewees to disclose experiences and emotions that they later on might have preferred to keep to themselves or even ‘not know’. In the expression of a therapist researcher, Fog (2004), an experienced interviewer’s knowledge of how to create rapport and to get through a subject’s defences may serve as a ‘Trojan horse’ to get inside areas of a person’s life where they were not invited. The use of such indirect techniques, which are ethically legitimate within the joint interest of a therapeutic relationship, becomes ethically questionable when applied to research and commercial purposes. Micro-and macro-ethics in interview studies Ethical issues in interview research tend to be raised in relation to the personal implications for the subjects, whereas the wider social consequences of the interviews have received less attention. In line with the common treatments of research ethics, I have focused above on the micro-ethics of the interview situation and of possible future consequences for the subjects involved. I shall now go on to draw in a macro-ethical Page 8 of 10 Ethical Issues of Interviewing SAGE SAGE Research Methods 2007 SAGE Publications, Ltd. All Rights Reserved. perspective and address potential consequences of the knowledge produced by interviews in a broader social situation (cf. Brinkmann and Kvale, 2005). By drawing upon the historical interview investigations presented in Chapter 1, I shall point out potential conflicts between ethical demands from a micro-and a macro-perspective. Ethical issues may differ when viewed from a micro-and a macro-perspective. An interview situation may be experienced positively by the subject, when a researcher with a professional authority shows a strong interest in what he or she has to say. The wider social consequences of the knowledge produced in such interviews may, however, be problematic in some cases. This concerns the Hawthorne studies by the management of how to manage the workers more efficiently and increase their output, and today in particular when interviewing for increased consumption. Consumer interviews as individual motivational interviews or as focus groups may well follow standard ethical guidelines and also be enjoyable to the participants. On a macrolevel, however, the consequences are more questionable. Focus group interviews about teenager attitudes to smoking may provide knowledge for improving advertisements to teenagers for smoking, or the knowledge produced may be used in health campaigns to discourage smoking. In a capitalist consumer society it is likely that there will be more capital available for producing and applying knowledge on smoking attitudes for the tobacco industry’s advertisements to increase tobacco consumption than for public campaigns seeking to reduce the use of tobacco. Tensions of ethics on a micro-and a macro-level also arise in academic interview research. We may here draw in a historic study on anti-Semitism – The Authoritarian Personality by Adorno et al. (1950). In the wake of the Second World War the researchers investigated a possible relation of anti-Semitism to an authoritarian upbringing. An important part of the study consisted of therapeutically inspired interviews, where the researchers used therapeutic techniques to circumvent their subjects’ defences in order to learn about their prejudices and authoritarian personality traits. On a micro-level this research clearly violated the ethical principle of informed consent, whereas on a macro-level the knowledge obtained of the roots of anti-Semitism was intended to have beneficial social and political consequences. Ethical issues on a macro-level can ideally be approached by public discussion of the social consequences and uses of the knowledge produced. We may here draw in an interview study by Bellah and co-workers (1985) about individualism and commitment in America, to be discussed in Chapter 6. The researchers saw the very aim of doing social science as a public philosophy, as engaging in debate with the public about the goals and values of society: ‘When data from such interviews are well presented, they stimulate the reader to enter the conversation, to argue with what is being said. Curiously, such interviews stimulate something that could be called public opinion, opinion tested in the arena of open discussion’ (Bellah et al., 1985, p. 305). Key points • With the production of interview knowledge through the interaction of the interviewer and interviewee, close attention needs to be given to the ethical implications of this personal interaction. Page 9 of 10 Ethical Issues of Interviewing SAGE SAGE Research Methods 2007 SAGE Publications, Ltd. All Rights Reserved. • Ethical issues raised by an interview study go beyond the live interview situation itself, to encompass all stages of an interview project. • Ethical guidelines for social science research emphasize the need to obtain the subjects’ informed consent to participate in the study, to secure the confidentiality of the subjects, to consider the consequences for the subjects of participation in the research project and to be attentive to the researcher’s role in the study. • Ethical requirements for research are mostly formulated in a general form. With few standard rules to be followed, much is left to the judgement of the researcher. Thus an interviewer continually has to make on-the-spot decisions about what implications of an answer to follow up, and what connotations may be too sensitive for the interviewee to be followed up. • With the person of the interviewer being the instrument of interview research, ethical decisions in an interview project to a large extent come to rest on the integrity of the interviewer as a person. • The ethical issues of an interview project go beyond the micro-ethics of protecting the interview subjects to also encompass macro-ethics concerning the value of the interview-produced knowledge in a larger social context. Further reading Ethical issues about and around doing interviews can be studied in reading the following texts: Edited by: Eisner, E.W. and Peshkin, A. (eds) (1990) Qualitative Inquiry in Education. New York: Teachers College Press. Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects(1992). Berkeley: University of California Press. Kimmel, A.J.(1988) Ethics and Values in Applied Social Science Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Edited by: Mauthner, M., Birch, M., Jessop, J. and Miller, T. (eds) (2002) Ethics in Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781849208963.n3 Page 10 of 10 Ethical Issues of Interviewing Profession and Society Ethics in Qualitative Research Angelica Orb, Laurel Eisenhauer, Dianne Wynaden Purpose: To critically examine ethical issues in qualitative research. Organizing Construct: The ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, and justice are guides for researchers to address initial and ongoing tensions between the needs and goals of the research and the rights of participants. Methods: Research literature, ethics literature, and researcher experiences. Conclusions: Ethical principles can be used to guide the research in addressing the initial and ongoing issues arising from qualitative research in order to meet the goals of the research as well as to maintain the rights of the research participants. JOURNAL OF NURSING SCHOLARSHIP, 2000; 33:1, 93-96. ©2001 SIGMA THETA TAU INTERNATIONAL. [Key words: qualitative research, ethics] * E thical issues are present in any kind of research. The research process creates tension between the aims of research to make generalizations for the good of others, and the rights of participants to maintain privacy. Ethics pertains to doing good and avoiding harm. Harm can be prevented or reduced through the application of appropriate ethical principles. Thus, the protection of human subjects or participants in any research study is imperative. Violations of human rights in the name of scientific research have been among the darkest events in history. From 19321972 more than 400 African American people who had syphilis were deliberately left untreated to study the illness. Although the Tuskegee syphilis study was sponsored by United States Public Health Service, the disclosure of the 40year study caused public outrage (Caplan, 1992). Another example of unethical research is the experiment conducted between 1950-1952 in which more than 1,000 pregnant women were given diethylstilbestrol to prevent miscarriages. These women were subject to a double-blind study without consent. Only 20 years later, when the children of these women had high rates of cancer and other abnormalities did the participants learn they were subjects of these experiments (Capron, 1989). The nature of ethical problems in qualitative research studies is subtle and different compared to problems in quantitative research. For example, potential ethical conflicts exist in regard to how a researcher gains access to a community group and in the effects the researcher may have on participants. The literature provides few examples of ethical issues in qualitative health research. Punch (1994) claimed that one hardly ever hears of ethical failures in qualitative research. However, Batchelor and Briggs (1994) claimed that the failure of researchers to address ethical issues * * has resulted in those researchers being ill-prepared to cope with the unpredictable nature of qualitative research. Qualitative researchers focus their research on exploring, examining, and describing people and their natural environments. Embedded in qualitative research are the concepts of relationships and power between researchers and participants. The desire to participate in a research study depends upon a participant’s willingness to share his or her experience. Nurse researchers have to balance research principles as well as the well-being of clients (Ramos, 1989). Qualitative health research is focused on the experiences of people in relation to health and illness. Yet nurse researchers may find that their roles as researchers and as clinicians may be in conflict. Qualitative studies are frequently conducted in settings involving the participation of people in their everyday environments. Therefore, any research that includes people requires an awareness of the ethical issues that may be derived from such interactions. Ethics in health research includes appropriateness of the research design, the methodological design, and the funding sources, as well as behaviors in reporting data. The purpose of this paper is to show these and related ethical issues and ethical principles to be used in qualitative research. Angelica Orb, RN, PhD, MACE, Alpha Chi, Senior Lecturer, School of Nursing, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia. Laurel Eisenhauer, RN, PhD, FAAN, Alpha Chi, Professor and Associate Dean for Graduate Programs, School of Nursing, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA. Dianne Wynaden, RN, RMHN, MSc (HSc), Lecturer, School of Nursing, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia, and Clinical Nurse Consultant, Directorate of Mental Health Services, Fremantle Hospital and Health Service, Fremantle, Western Australia. Correspondence to Dr. Orb, School of Nursing, Curtin University of Technology, GPO Box 1987, Perth, Western Australia 6845. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Accepted for publication June 12, 2000. Journal of Nursing Scholarship First Quarter 2001 93 Ethics in Qualitative Research Issues in Qualitative Research Although ethical review boards scrutinize most nursing research proposals, the researchers are ultimately responsible for protecting the participants. Dresser (1998) said that the administrative burden of ethical reviews and procedures is balanced by the protection of participants. She suggested close monitoring of high-risk studies. In qualitative studies, researchers rely heavily on collecting data through interviews, observations, written materials, and audiovisual material. While in the field, researchers should negotiate access to participants to collect data; thus the quality of social interactions between researchers and the participants may facilitate or inhibit access to information. Once access to the field has been granted and the first steps of data collection are taken, researchers may experience ethical dilemmas that may not have been anticipated in the research plan (Field & Morse, 1992). Ramos (1989) described three types of problems that may affect qualitative studies: the researcher/participant relationship, the researcher’s subjective interpretations of data, and the design itself. For example, a researcher’s deception or disclosure of damaging information can occur. Humphrey’s study of homosexuals is one example (Punch, 1994). His controversial research method of participant observation using deception shocked American academics who wanted to revoke the researcher’s doctoral degree. He observed men in a public bathroom and followed them to their homes under the guise of working on a different project (Punch, 1994). Clarke (1996) used deception in a forensic unit, claiming that this approach was necessary to obtain “uncontaminated” data. She used participant observation over a period of 6 weeks while working as a nursing auxiliary. Clarke did not disclose her role as researcher. She retreated to the restroom to take notes or to speak into a small dictaphone. Clarke justified this method stating that some degree of deception is permissible when “dealing with sensitive aspects of subjects’ behaviour” (p. 38). When preparing research protocols, nurse researchers should consider the potential ethical issues that can be anticipated in the study, such as informed consent, confidentiality, data generation and analysis, researcher/ participant relationships, and reporting of final outcomes. The Process of Data Collection The purpose of qualitative studies is to describe a phenomenon from the participants’ points of view through interviews and observations. The intention of the researcher is to listen to the voice of participants or observe them in their natural environments. The researcher’s interpretation of these experiences is usually described as an emic perspective (Field & Morse, 1992). The acceptance of this statement means that researchers recognise that participants are autonomous people who will share information willingly. A balanced research relationship will encourage disclosure, trust, and awareness of potential ethical issues. Kvale (1996) considered an interview to be a moral endeavour, claiming 94 First Quarter 2001 Journal of Nursing Scholarship that the participant’s response is affected by the interview, and that the knowledge gained through the interview affects our understanding of the human experience. The personal interaction between researchers and participants is crucial in data gathering by keeping in mind the research focus and being clear about the role of researchers. The researchers’ perceptions of field situations are determined by personality and the nature of the interactions (Punch, 1994). Although qualitative research methods make it difficult to predict how data will be collected through interviews or observation (Streubert & Carpenter, 1999), researchers have the obligation to anticipate the possible outcomes of an interview and to weigh both benefits and potential harm. For example, in the case of interviewing victims of violence, the interview may trigger painful experiences and the participant may become distressed during the interview. In this case, the researcher is confronted with an ethical dilemma—to continue with the interview and gain more insight about the topic under study or to stop the interview and give advice or refer the participant to an appropriate treatment or counseling service. Deciding to continue would indicate that the researcher considers that the value of the data obtained from the distressing experience outweighs the participant’s distress. Smith (1999) wrote about the potential therapeutic benefits of participants’ reviving unpleasant memories and also the importance of seeking ongoing consent. Hutchinson, Wilson, and Wilson (1994) identified the benefits of qualitative interviews as catharsis, selfacknowledgment, sense of purpose, self-awareness, empowerment, healing, and providing a voice for the disenfranchised. Stopping the interview and searching for possible solutions for the participants’ distress indicates that researchers are aware of the vulnerability of participants and their rights. The moral obligation of researchers is to refer participants to counseling or ensure that they have regained control of the situation by talking. In some cases, a followup phone call or visit may be appropriate. Ethical dilemmas that may rise from an interview are difficult to predict but the researcher needs to be aware of sensitive issues and potential conflicts of interest. An interview is usually equated with confidentiality, informed consent, and privacy, but also by recurrence of “old wounds” and sharing of secrets. The interview opens new risks to both researchers and participants. Researchers may be required by law to report information about child or elder abuse, drug traffic, or crimes. Courts for domestic and criminal proceedings may subpoena researchers’ records. In some studies in the US, researchers may wish to consider obtaining a Certificate of Confidentiality from the Department of Health and Human Services (Lutz, Shelton, Robrecht, Hatton, & Beckett, 2000). The following example is one of those ethical dilemmas that are silent in qualitative health research literature. During an interview, a participant revealed to a graduate student doing the interview that she was involved in drug dealings; the student was advised by one of the supervisors to delete such interviews. A year later the participant’s spouse was dead from drug abuse. Researchers who are doing qualitative Ethics in Qualitative Research health research must be aware not only of the promise to maintain confidentiality but to search vigorously for ways to deal with the ethical and legal issues they may encounter. Ethical codes and guidelines for research projects do not have answers to all of the ethical issues that may arise during research. Subsequently, ethical dilemmas that are not part of the study may arise (Field & Morse, 1992) during an observation in a clinical area. A novice researcher observed the following event. An elderly woman asked to be taken to the toilet; a nursing staff member said that was not a convenient time and moved along to the next patient. In this situation the researcher is witnessing an unethical behaviour. In this case, Codes of Ethics indicate the rights of patients but do not indicate to the researcher how to respond to this situation. Such situations require careful examination of the moral responsibility of researchers. For example, based on his past experience, Patton (1990) recommended full disclosure of the purpose of the study when doing participant observation. He claimed that false or partial explanations are too risky and add unnecessary stress. Qualitative researchers are expected to describe the research experience in an authentic manner, often contrary to their own aims (Munhall, 1988). The research protocol also should provide enough information ensuring protection of human subjects. Moreover, such protocols must give details of the manner in which the study will be conducted, followed by details of access to participants, informed consent, and access and storage of data. Ethical Principles The difficulties inherent in qualitative research can be alleviated by awareness and use of well-established ethical principles, specifically autonomy, beneficence, and justice. Autonomy Several authors have claimed that the protection of human rights is a mandate in health care research (Dresser, 1998; Kvale, 1996; Munhall, 1988; Raudonis, 1992). Capron (1989) said that any kind of research should be guided by the principles of respect for people, beneficence, and justice. He considered that respect for people is the recognition of participants’ rights, including the right to be informed about the study, the right to freely decide whether to participate in a study, and the right to withdraw at any time without penalty. In a qualitative research study this principle is honored by informed consent, which means making a reasonable balance between over-informing and under-informing (Kvale, 1996). It also means that participants exercise their rights as autonomous persons to voluntarily accept or refuse to participate in the study. Consent has been referred to as a negotiation of trust, and it requires continuous renegotiation (Field & Morse, 1992; Kvale, 1996; Munhall, 1988). Informed consent is dynamic, for example, in studying responses of family caregivers to caring for chronic patients, determining who needs to give informed consent may be necessary. For example, it may pertain only to caregivers or consent from patients or other family members may also be required. Beneficence A second ethical principle closely linked with research is beneficence—doing good for others and preventing harm. Beneficence in some situations may be taken to the extreme as paternalism. A paternalistic approach indicates the denial of autonomy and freedom of choice. For example, the researcher may want to study the problem of violence among elderly women but may decide not to include them because they may be too vulnerable. In this case, the researcher is not giving elderly women the opportunity to decide for themselves and for their experiences to be heard. Research strategies used to collect data and selection criteria also have ethical implications. For example, Raudonis (1992) indicated that considerable thought was given to inclusion criteria during the recruitment of potential participants for a nursing study of hospice patients’ perspectives of empathy. Those patients who were unable to give consent or unable to participate in open-ended interviews were not asked to participate. If researchers are maintaining the principle of beneficence, overseeing the potential consequences of revealing participants’ identities is a moral obligation. The use of pseudonyms is recommended. However, this strategy may not be sufficient if the study is conducted in a small community where participants could be easily recognised. In such cases, circulation of the study may need to be restricted, for instance, reports of a study conducted with a group of Aboriginal nursing students may be restricted until the participants graduate from the nursing program. Such a group is small and can be easily recognised by the nursing community. Protection of participants’ identities also applies to publications. Participants should be told how results will be published. Quotations or other data from the participants, even though anonymous, could reveal their identity. Ideally, participants would approve the use of quotations use
Do you have a similar assignment and would want someone to complete it for you? Click on the ORDER NOW option to get instant services at essayloop.com. We assure you of a well written and plagiarism free papers delivered within your specified deadline.