Abstract
This chapter outlines debate on the ethics of researching “down”, “up”, and “alongside” and the special contribution of each of the chapters in this section of the book to this debate. The first of these three conceptualisations of research relationships arises from critiques of the disjunctures of power that occur when participants are researched down upon and potentially harmed. In contrast, researching up is a conceptualisation of power held by individual participants or institutions that have sway over the research. A steadier balance is sought when researching alongside individuals or institutions as partners. We conclude by giving consideration to the enactment and limitations of reflexivity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Aldred, R. (2008). Ethical and political issues in contemporary research relationships. Sociology, 42(5), 887–903. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038508094568
Allen, L. (2010). Queer(y)ing the straight researcher: The relationship(?) between researcher identity and anti-normative knowledge. Feminism & Psychology, 20(2), 147–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353509355146
Arras, J. (2008). The Jewish chronic disease hospital case. In E. Emanuel, C. Grady, R. Crouch, R. Lie, F. Miller, & D. Wendler (Eds.), The Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics (pp. 73–79). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bauer, G. R., Hammond, R., Travers, R., Kaay, M., Hohenadel, K. M., & Boyce, M. (2009). I don’t think this is theoretical; this is our lives: How erasure impacts health care for transgender people. Journal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, 20(5), 348–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jana.2009.07.004
Baumrind, D. (1964). Some thoughts on ethics of research: After reading Milgram’s behavioral study of obedience. American Psychologist, 19(6), 421–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040128
Beauchamp, T., & Childress, J. (1979). Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bondi, L. (2009). Teaching reflexivity: Undoing or reinscribing habits of gender? Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 33(3), 327–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098260902742417
Brandt, A. M. (1978). Racism and research: The case of the Tuskegee syphilis study. Hastings Center Report, 8(6), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.2307/3561468
Bridges, D. (2001). The ethics of outsider research. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 35(3), 371–386. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.00233
Chamberlain, K. (2000). Methodolatry and qualitative health research. Journal of Health Psychology, 5(3), 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910530000500306
Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing about us without us: Disability oppression and empowerment. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Connolly, P. (2008). Race, gender and critical reflexivity in research with young children. In P. Christensen & A. James (Eds.), Research with children: Perspectives and practices (pp. 104–121). New York: Routledge.
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
Denzin, N. K., & Giardina, M. D. (2010). Qualitative inquiry and human rights. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Duncan, R. E., Drew, S. E., Hodgson, J., & Sawyer, S. M. (2009). Is my mum going to hear this? Methodological and ethical challenges in qualitative health research with young people. Social Science & Medicine, 69(11), 1691–1699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.09.001
Evans, J. A. (2002). Cautious caregivers: Gender stereotypes and the sexualization of men nurses’ touch. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 40(4), 441–448. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2002.02392.x
Finlay, L. (2003). The reflexive journey: Mapping multiple roles. In B. Gough & L. Finlay (Eds.), Reflexivity: A practical guide for researchers in health and social sciences (pp. 1–20). Oxford: Blackwell.
Goodley, D., & Moore, M. (2000). Doing disability research: Activist lives and the academy. Disability & Society, 15(6), 861–882. https://doi.org/10.1080/713662013
Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, reflexivity, and ethically important moments in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(2), 261–280. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800403262360
Hammersley, M., & Traianou, A. (2012). Ethics in qualitative research: Controversies and contexts. London: Sage.
Herek, G. M., Kimmel, D. C., Amaro, H., & Melton, G. B. (1991). Avoiding heterosexist bias in psychological research. American Psychologist, 46(9), 957–963. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.46.9.957
Horton, J. (2001). Do you get some funny looks when you tell people what you do? Muddling through some angsts and ethics of (being a male) researching with children. Ethics, Place & Environment, 4(2), 159–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668790125466
Kobayashi, A. (1994). Coloring the field: Gender, race, and the politics of fieldwork. The Professional Geographer, 46(1), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0033-0124.1994.00073.x
Koch, S. (1981). The nature and limits of psychological knowledge: Lessons of a century qua ‘science.’. American Psychologist, 36(3), 257–269. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.36.3.257
Langlois, A. J. (2011). Political research and human research ethics committees. Australian Journal of Political Science, 46(1), 141–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2010.544287
Lather, P. (1993). Fertile obsession: Validity after poststructuralism. The Sociological Quarterly, 34(4), 673–693. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1993.tb00112.x
Liazos, A. (1972). The poverty of the sociology of deviance: Nuts, sluts, and perverts. Social Problems, 20(1), 103–120. https://doi.org/10.2307/799504
Monahan, T., & Fisher, J. A. (2015). Strategies for obtaining access to secretive or guarded organizations. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 44(6), 709–736. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241614549834
Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690200100202
Nader, L. (1972). Up the anthropologist: Perspectives gained from studying up. In D. Hymes (Ed.), Reinventing anthropology (pp. 284–311). New York: Vintage.
Oakley, A. (1998). Gender, methodology and people’s ways of knowing: Some problems with feminism and the paradigm debate in social science. Sociology, 32(4), 707–731. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038598032004005
Orne, M. T., & Holland, C. H. (1968). Some conditions of obedience and disobedience to authority: On the ecological validity of laboratory deceptions. International Journal of Psychiatry, 6(4), 282–293.
Patai, D. (1991). US academics and third world women: Is ethical research possible? In S. Gluck & D. Patai (Eds.), Women’s words: The feminist practice of oral history (pp. 137–153). New York: Routledge.
Pillow, W. (2003). Confession, catharsis, or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity as methodological power in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(2), 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951839032000060635
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2001). Inquiry and participation in search of a world worthy of human aspiration. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice (pp. 1–14). London: Sage.
Richardson, L. (1993). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 516–529). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Riggs, D., & Treharne, G. (2015). Ensuring quality in qualitative research. In P. Rohleder & A. Lyons (Eds.), Qualitative research in clinical and health psychology (pp. 57–73). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Rosaldo, R. (1989). Culture and truth: The remaking of cultural analysis. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Rose, G. (1997). Situating knowledges: Positionality, reflexivities and other tactics. Progress in Human Geography, 21(3), 305–320. https://doi.org/10.1191/030913297673302122
Sandelowski, M. (1986). The problem of rigor in qualitative research. Advances in Nursing Science, 8(3), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1097/00012272-198604000-00005
Sandelowski, M. (1993). Rigor or rigor mortis: The problem of rigor in qualitative research revisited. Advances in Nursing Science, 16(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/00012272-199312000-00002
Schlichter, A. (2004). Queer at last? Straight intellectuals and the desire for transgression. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 10(4), 543–564. https://doi.org/10.1215/10642684-10-4-543
Schwandt, T. A. (1996). Farewell to criteriology. Qualitative Inquiry, 2(1), 58–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780049600200109
Scourfield, J., & Coffey, A. (2006). Access, ethics and the (re)construction of gender: The case of researcher as suspected paedophile. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 9(1), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570500436122
Smith, D. (2011, August 12). Pfizer pays out to Nigerian families of meningitis drug trial victims. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/aug/11/pfizer-nigeria-meningitis-drug-compensation
Stone, E., & Priestley, M. (1996). Parasites, pawns and partners: Disability research and the role of non-disabled researchers. The British Journal of Sociology, 47(4), 699–716. https://doi.org/10.2307/591081
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Marx, J., Treharne, G.J. (2018). Introduction: Researching ‘Down’, ‘Up’, and ‘Alongside’. In: Macleod, C., Marx, J., Mnyaka, P., Treharne, G. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Ethics in Critical Research. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74721-7_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74721-7_21
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-74720-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-74721-7
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)