Com 473--Baldwin—Communication—Illinois State University
Updated 09/09/09
Ethics, Evaluation
ROLE
OF THE “SELF” IN QUALITATIVE INQUIRY
Note: Notes from first reading,
Lincoln & Guba, Ch. 8, appear on last week’s webpage.
Let the figure guide you! P. 188, Figure 8:1.
Start there, and be able to describe the various terms and how they might (or
might not) apply to your project.
At a deeper level, see if you can get a feel for L&G’s ontological,
epistemological, and axiological assumptions (oh joy!)
ETHICS
Is it Ethical? [see subset]
SMITH,
1990
Define
ethics
--what
are some of the cases he mentions?
--what
might be unethical about these cases?
--what
guideline does Smith propose?
--how
would it be applied in above cases?
--why
does it become important to ask WHY I want to do a study?
--what
is the link b/t “paradigm” and ethics? CHOICE (p. 146)
WALK A DECISION THROUGH
Brody model p. 147!!!
--what
are some special ethical considerations brought by Qualitative Research, both
in method and in paradigm? e.g., “informed consent,” “anonymity” “right to
withdraw,” length of time, nature of info, emergent design, admission of
values, valuing of participants’ opinions, subjective framework (ideographic)
and “difference”nature of knowledge and “tentative
statement”
HOUSE:
3 values
·
mutual respect
·
noncoercion
·
support for
democratic values/institutions
How
might each of these relate to qualitative research in ways that are different
from (or similar to) more quantitative studies? (Think, for example, are there different ethical implications in any of these
dimensions as it relates to an ethnography of communication than it would to an
experiment or a survey study?
Goodall: Writing the New Ethnography (Ch. 5: Ethics) [Notes Baldwin may bring to class!]
This
is a new reading for our class in F 08. What does it add to your understanding
of the considerations gained from other readings. Pay
special attention to the bulleted list of considerations pp. 153-154.
Goodall introduces the “politics of representation” (p. 156)? What does this
phrase mean?
He
discusses “who owns the right to this story” (p. 158). How might this apply to
your own study?
What
is the ethical issue of “referencing” (p. 161)? How might this apply to your
study?
New ethnographies and ethics? (p. 164 ff)—This will make
more sense after we discuss ethnography as a method… So save 164 to the end for
later. J
Ethical Considerations:
“All
the usual suspects”
anonymity/confidentiality
freedom to
participate, from coercion
no harm to
“subjects” (now—participants)
plagiarism
New
or revised issues
Why do the study? (your
values!)
Entry issues?
Value to P? reimbursement? Use of time?
Data collection?
(how informed is informed consent?); role vis-à-vis
the participants?
Power issues?
Transcription?
Exit issues?
Negotiating meanings/outcomes with
participants?
Reporting of data: differences? Homogeneity? Accuracy of account?
Narratives & confidentiality
“Ownership” of the data
Key
quote: “Making the ethical reasoning conscious and explicit is a very powerful
means for improving the kind of ethnical reasoning that is usually done in
human affairs” (Smith, 1990, p. 149).
Questions:
1)
What language to put the interview data in?
2)
Publishing findings that disagree with participants?
3)
Publishing findings that paint P’s in a negative light? (e.g., reading their
interviews critically?)
4)
Observing/hiding crime? (
5)
Who owns the data (Navajo study)
Ethics Case Study:
1. Maquiladora:
A multinational organization has hired you to do in-depth interviews and focus
groups to determine the most important work values among the Mexican workers.
In return for the report that you give to the regional CEO and administrators,
you will receive the right to produce a research report for conference and
publication.
2. Public Relations Analysis: A company
has hired you to do PR research on public’s perception of issues and of the
company. You are going to work with marketing to develop a series of messages
that portray the company in a positive light. However, through the course of
your research, you find out that the company is really corrupt, uses unfair
(racist and sexist labor practices), and is not sensitive to the environment.
However, you have already received big bucks for your participation in the
project so far…
3. That Abortion Issue: You feel
strongly about the abortion issue (one side or the other—you pick). You decide
to do some ethnographic research in clinics that support the “other side,” to
show how they are deceptive and manipulative. In order to do this research, you
pose as an employee to go “undercover.”
4. Studying an Academic Department: You
decide to study the culture of an academic department, including rules,
meanings, and so on. You gain access through the gatekeeper—the chair of the
department. You do observation, ethnographic, and in-depth interviews and find
out that some people have some very negative perceptions of the climate and
tell you so in confidence. The chair has
asked for a copy of your report. You have quotations from the interviews, but
you have been sure to change all of the names.
Doing
Good Research:
Using
Lincoln
& Guba’s Chapter 11, list some things you can
do as you plan and collect your data that will help your study better meet
their standards of good qualitative research. Be sure to mention which aspect of good research it will address (p. 290).
Focused
questions on reading:
1. What are the four traditional standards
of evaluation in the “conventional” paradigm?
·
·
·
·
2. What are some of the limitations that
might apply to each [Note: I found L&G’s explanation of the various things
that might work against each of the standards and the relationship between
certain standards to be clearer than some of what I have read in the
quantitative literature!]
3. What are the four “new” standards L&G
suggest in response to the traditional. How is each
defined? (NOTE: For a more concise def than offered in this
chapter, you may want to look to Ch. 8 on-line reading, p. 218).
·
·
·
·
What
arguments do they give in support of these standards as equally or more
acceptable than conventional criteria? Give your own evaluation of the authors’
stance: What seem to be their underlying ontological and epistemological
assumptions, and how do these guide their view of acceptable criteria?
4. Develop a grid that shows the steps that
one might use to meet each standard, as well as possible dangers.
Yes, the authors provide their own [Table 11.12—which is really a figure rather
than a table by APA standards], but you will benefit by constructing your own.
5. What is the role of dialogue with peers
and journaling in developing and maintaining the worth of your project?
6. What are some disclaimers or boundaries
that L&G offer re: the standards and steps to meet them (pp. 328-331)?
·
Who is the determiner of trustworthiness? (The audience? The
participants? Others?)
·
How should we conceptualize the meeting of trustworthiness criteria?
That is, can we say, simply that a study “does” or “doesn’t” meet the
standards? At which point can we determine that a given study is “trustworthy”?
[P.S. Based on our other readings, must naturalists still be as defensive about
their position as L&G propose in 1985?]
·
How, exactly, is the meeting of the trustworthiness criteria to be “operationalized”
·
At what stage of your inquiry do the criteria become relevant? In other
words, is “worth” something that occurs in the conceptualization of a project,
in the data collection and analysis, or in the write-up?
·
To what degree should we formalize or reify these standards and steps?
7. To what degree will L&G’s standards
and steps be appropriate to your project? [Note: Part of this will
depend upon the degree to which you subscribe to their underlying assumptions
about the world, see Q. 3 above]
A Case Study of Worth--COM 473—Baldwin
The Situation: You work for Human Resources for a Chrysalis,
Inc.—a large tractor manufacturing company in
Your assignment: You want to conduct an interview study of employees to learn more about their perceptions on the two points above. The key question for this exercise: What steps will you take to make sure that your final study is “rigorous” and meets acceptable standards for qualitative research?
Of course, you will want to consider your audience. Since they come from a primarily quantitative and scientific management background, you will need to address the criteria of your project in a way that they will understand. But since Lincoln and Guba are “naturalists,” you may find that not all of their solutions pertain to your study!
A Case Study of Worth--COM 473—Baldwin
The Situation: You work for Human Resources for a Chrysalis,
Inc.—a large tractor manufacturing company in
Your assignment: You want to conduct an interview study of employees to learn more about their perceptions on the two points above. The key question for this exercise: What steps will you take to make sure that your final study is “rigorous” and meets acceptable standards for qualitative research?
Of course, you will want to consider your audience. Since they come from a primarily quantitative and scientific management background, you will need to address the criteria of your project in a way that they will understand. But since Lincoln and Guba are “naturalists,” you may find that not all of their solutions pertain to your study!