Search

This paper explores issues of reflexivity and knowledge production when cisgender researchers conduct social work research, using feminist narrative methods, to advance understanding about trans and non-binary people's identities and experiences. Cisgender (or 'cis') refers to people who identify with the gender identity assigned to them at birth. The paper examines cis identity, privilege and positionality arguing for a reflexive engagement of the ways in which these influence ethical decision-making and research praxis. In this way, we speak to existing critiques that suggest that only trans and non-binary people should research their own experiences and identities. To address the neglect of gender diversity in education for social work practice and research, we propose that doing social work research with trans and non-binary communities requires cis researchers to adopt critical ethical reflexivity (CER) to scrutinise the impact of gender normativity and its effects in knowledge production for social work.

New materialisms have informed an array of creative methodologies, inviting scholars to rethink ethics in the practices of research with children. Participating in this rethinking, this study elaborates on ethical practices in creative research where new materialist and arts-based methodologies intra-act with children and the sensitivities of gender and power in young peer cultures. Drawing on experiences from the authors' creative workshops, this paper investigates how new materialist creative practice allows children to explore and communicate their experiences of gender and power in safe and enabling ways. The authors suggest expanding their ethical practice by composing ethically sustainable encounters for children to engage with experiences of and visions for their peer cultures. They close by discussing practices for responding to the inherent un/safety of addressing gender and sexual abuses of power and for enabling microprocesses of change to -- as a matter of sustainability -- transform oppressive peer cultures towards social justice.

It is widely assumed that researchers must normally secure informed consent from participants if research is to be ethical. But what exactly are people being asked to consent to? Most obviously, it is to supplying, or providing access to, data; but are they also agreeing that this data can be used in any way relevant to the research, or do they retain a right to control its use? A third question is: are they consenting to themselves being included within the focus of study, so that asking for consent amounts to assigning a right not to be researched? A further question concerns whether there can be group rights not to supply data, to control the use of data, and/or not to be researched? Such claims have been made by spokespersons for the disabled, indigenous groups, commercial organisations, governments, and religious cults. Justifications for these various rights usually appeal to the principle of autonomy, in one form or another. Yet this principle, being universal, must also apply to researchers themselves. So, does this imply that researchers have a right to carry out research? As this makes clear, there are conflicting rights-claims around research. This paper will examine these and their implications.

It appears that the practice of giving cash or gift vouchers to research participants is becoming increasingly common; however, this practice has received little attention from social researchers. Paying participants has implications in terms of the ethical requirement for consent and may have consequences in terms of recruitment for research projects and for the data collected. In this paper I consider how these issues arose in a research project with lone mothers and the way in which offering payments might help with gaining access to participants. I argue that the possible impact of making payments to research participants should be considered in research accounts and the possible impacts of payments should be more widely debated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reviews the currently rapid changes in research ethics governance affecting many kinds of social research. Arguments for and against single‐discipline and multidisciplinary research ethics committees will be considered, with examples of how medical and social research ethics can inform one another. We conclude that the use of multidisciplinary research ethics committees, guidance and governance can be an effective and necessary part of social research methodology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes a UK based longitudinal qualitative study following approximately 100 young people over 9 years. It provides an overview of the research design, methods of data collection and analysis as well as reflecting on the strengths and weaknesses of the strategies employed. We focus on the value of a devolved research design, complementary cross-section and temporal analytic approaches and the effects of being involved in a longitudinal study on researchers and participants. The paper aims to contribute to a growing understanding of the practical, ethical and epistemological challenges presented by longitudinal qualitative methods, and highlights those challenges that are specific to this method as well as those which are amplified by this kind of approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we discuss the unique influences of ethics assessment procedures on comparative qualitative research. These influences are particularly pronounced when researchers are from different disciplines and in different countries. Focusing on our experience conducting a study on the perceptions of young people regarding HIV/AIDS in two countries (Italy and Canada), we describe the impact of the ethics assessment procedures in our respective countries on recruitment, sampling and comparability of findings. We also raise issues related to differences in ethics assessment processes from a disciplinary perspective. We conclude by suggesting that our theory of technique approach, which focuses on studying how the choices made in research implementation influence the study findings, should be extended to include the impact of ethics assessment procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent perspectives in childhood research have tended to emphasise the use of participatory techniques as a method of reducing the unequal power balance between researcher and researched. Increasingly researchers have been concerned with developing inclusive and participatory, young people centred methodologies which place their voices at the centre of the research process. But is the ideal of young people's active involvement in the research process truly achievable or desirable with socially excluded young people in practice? This article reflects on a range of ethical, methodological and practical issues which arose from a study which investigtaed the lives of a group of young women who were excluded from secondary school. The article concludes with reflections on the necessity to overcome such difficulties for the production of in-depth data on some of the most vulnerable, socially excluded young people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patterns of research governance are changing rapidly in the field of social research. In current debates about these changes one issue of particular concern is the impact that new patterns of research governance will have on the quality of the data collected. The ‘optimistic’ scenario on this issue is that more ethical research practice will lead to better‐quality data, but a more ‘pessimistic’ scenario exists in which the unintended outcome is poorer‐quality data. Drawing on material from a study of researchers’ experiences of dealing with the process of gaining informed consent from research participants, this article identifies the various ways in which the researchers position themselves in relation to the competing ‘optimistic’ and ‘pessimistic’ scenarios. It concludes by seeking to develop a synthesis of the two positions in which ethical research practice is treated neither as an automatic guarantee of, nor as an inevitable obstacle to, the collection of good‐quality data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]