|
Post by Yes she did on Feb 15, 2014 10:42:59 GMT -5
Look at Appendix 2: Methodology in Blee's _Inside Organized Racism: Women in the Hate Movement_.
|
|
|
Post by Dude, IRB on Feb 17, 2014 21:52:30 GMT -5
One of the key issues with covert ethnography is that it prevents research subjects from having the ability to complain about researcher conduct or perceptions, not to mention concerns of reputational harms and risks that are not clear because you haven't revealed yourself. And covert ethnography is not just a difficult ethical area for your specific research and the need to treat research subjects fairly. You can catch flak from other people in the discipline might not approve, if for example, you end up burning a field site by destroying trust and making it impossible for other people to gain access to the research site. (I'm thinking of a specific example from econ soc, but I'll let someone else add it here.)
Overall, I don't think "but IRB is haarrrdd" is a valid excuse for doing an end run around the rules. People with reasoned arguments for doing covert research are one thing, but inability to complete the forms is another form of laziness. Thinking of down the road, it's not exactly the impression of a rigorous, systematic researcher that you'll want to be making for reviewers and hiring committees.
|
|
IRB Approved Exceptions
Guest
|
Post by IRB Approved Exceptions on Feb 17, 2014 23:43:10 GMT -5
Yes, Kathy Blee is an interesting example, because she both was open about her researcher status and topic, as well as the fact that her opinions differed strongly from her interviewees...which actually garnered her additionally interesting data. On the other hand Pete Simi's ethnography among white supremacists required that he appear to be sympathetic to the cause. I don't know that all of his research subjects knew that he was studying them, but many did. I think each approach is appropriate in different scenarios, all of which one should at least be able to make a reasoned argument for.
Leaving aside issues of IRB overreach (which I think are very real); though it is probably unlikely that covert research would be approved, I don't know that it is impossible, and perhaps someone here can think of a helpful example of one that was. At any rate, I do imagine that under current standards, any covert research would still have to be approved by an IRB and that exception to informed consent allowed. Long shot as it might be, it could be the best path to pursue in some cases.
|
|