IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v255y2020ics0277953620301994.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Writing to template: Researchers’ negotiation of procedural research ethics

Author

Listed:
  • Chiumento, Anna
  • Rahman, Atif
  • Frith, Lucy

Abstract

This qualitative study examines researchers' views of research ethics in everyday global mental health research practice. We present data from a multi-site study conducted in 2014-15 involving 35 individual in-depth interviews that explore researchers' perceptions of procedural ethics in research conducted in South Asia. We examine how researchers' negotiate ethical procedures, and consider the impact this has on ethical practice. This study foregrounds researchers' pivotal role in procedural research ethics: they produce ethical documents including research protocols and informed consent forms; engage in ethical review; and apply ethical documents to research practice. We apply the analytical framework of boundary objects to show the active work that ethical documents simultaneously enable and inhibit as researchers and ethical review boards apply these as templates for interaction. This analysis shows how the documents required by procedural ethics processes facilitate representations of research that are generalised, standardised, and abstracted from the situated context in which they are applied. Researchers' engagement with these standardised forms cannot prepare them for potential ethical issues in research practice. These templates therefore act as ideal constructions of what research ethics could be, documenting moral intent that researchers draw upon to translate into practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Chiumento, Anna & Rahman, Atif & Frith, Lucy, 2020. "Writing to template: Researchers’ negotiation of procedural research ethics," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:255:y:2020:i:c:s0277953620301994
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112980
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953620301994
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112980?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Miller, Tina & Boulton, Mary, 2007. "Changing constructions of informed consent: Qualitative research and complex social worlds," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(11), pages 2199-2211, December.
    2. Guta, Adrian & Nixon, Stephanie A. & Wilson, Michael G., 2013. "Resisting the seduction of “ethics creep”: Using Foucault to surface complexity and contradiction in research ethics review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 301-310.
    3. Simpson, Bob & Khatri, Rekha & Ravindran, Deapica & Udalagama, Tharindi, 2015. "Pharmaceuticalisation and ethical review in South Asia: Issues of scope and authority for practitioners and policy makers," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 247-254.
    4. Isto Huvila, 2011. "The politics of boundary objects: Hegemonic interventions and the making of a document," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(12), pages 2528-2539, December.
    5. Molyneux, Sassy & Geissler, P. Wenzel, 2008. "Ethics and the ethnography of medical research in Africa," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 685-695, September.
    6. Isto Huvila, 2011. "The politics of boundary objects: Hegemonic interventions and the making of a document," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(12), pages 2528-2539, December.
    7. Dixon-Woods, Mary & Angell, Emma & Ashcroft, Richard E. & Bryman, Alan, 2007. "Written work: The social functions of Research Ethics Committee letters," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 792-802, August.
    8. Boulton, Mary & Parker, Michael, 2007. "Informed consent in a changing environment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(11), pages 2187-2198, December.
    9. Kingori, Patricia, 2013. "Experiencing everyday ethics in context: Frontline data collectors perspectives and practices of bioethics," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 361-370.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hutchinson, Eleanor & Nayiga, Susan & Nabirye, Christine & Taaka, Lilian & Staedke, Sarah G., 2018. "Data value and care value in the practice of health systems: A case study in Uganda," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 123-130.
    2. Charlie Mayor & Lyn Robinson, 2014. "Ontological realism and classification: Structures and concepts in the Gene Ontology," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 65(4), pages 686-697, April.
    3. Saario, Sirpa & Hall, Christopher & Peckover, Sue, 2012. "Inter-professional electronic documents and child health: A study of persisting non-electronic communication in the use of electronic documents," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(12), pages 2207-2214.
    4. Putniņa, Aivita, 2013. "Bioethics and power: Informed consent procedures in post-socialist Latvia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 340-344.
    5. Matthijs J Janssen & Joeri Wesseling & Jonas Torrens & K Matthias & Caetano Penna & Laurens Klerkx, 2023. "Missions as boundary objects for transformative change: understanding coordination across policy, research, and stakeholder communities," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(3), pages 398-415.
    6. Watson, Sharon, 2022. "‘Don't cross the line, you're a researcher and not an educator’: Incorporating indigenous researchers' moral perspectives to improve ethical protocols in health research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    7. Secko, David M. & Preto, Nina & Niemeyer, Simon & Burgess, Michael M., 2009. "Informed consent in biobank research: A deliberative approach to the debate," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 781-789, February.
    8. Tengbeh, Angus Fayia & Enria, Luisa & Smout, Elizabeth & Mooney, Thomas & Callaghan, Mike & Ishola, David & Leigh, Bailah & Watson-Jones, Deborah & Greenwood, Brian & Larson, Heidi & Lees, Shelley, 2018. "“We are the heroes because we are ready to die for this country”: Participants' decision-making and grounded ethics in an Ebola vaccine clinical trial," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 203(C), pages 35-42.
    9. Querubin S. Yap & Jon K. Webber, 2015. "Developing Corporate Culture In A Training Department: A Qualitative Case Study Of Internal And Outsourced Staff," Review of Business and Finance Studies, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 6(1), pages 43-56.
    10. Kingori, Patricia, 2013. "Experiencing everyday ethics in context: Frontline data collectors perspectives and practices of bioethics," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 361-370.
    11. Panter-Brick, Catherine & Eggerman, Mark, 2018. "The field of medical anthropology in Social Science & Medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 233-239.
    12. Madelaine Saginur, 2014. "From Research “Involving” Humans to Research “Affecting” Humans: A Proposal for a Principled Expansion of Research Ethics’ Jurisdiction to Create Traction for a Philosophy of Technology," Laws, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-20, August.
    13. Heimer, Carol A., 2013. "‘Wicked’ ethics: Compliance work and the practice of ethics in HIV research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 371-378.
    14. James, Myfanwy & Kasereka, Joseph Grace & Kasiwa, Benjamin & Kavunga-Membo, Hugo & Kambale, Kasonia & Grais, Rebecca & Muyembe-Tamfum, Jean-Jacques & Bausch, Daniel G. & Watson-Jones, Deborah & Lees, , 2023. "Protection, health seeking, or a laissez-passer: Participants’ decision-making in an EVD vaccine trial in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 323(C).
    15. Kamat, Vinay R., 2014. "Fast, cheap, and out of control? Speculations and ethical concerns in the conduct of outsourced clinical trials in India," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 48-55.
    16. True, Gala & Alexander, Leslie B. & Fisher, Celia B., 2017. "Supporting the role of community members employed as research staff: Perspectives of community researchers working in addiction research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 67-75.
    17. Olga Kolotouchkina & Monica Viñarás-Abad & Luis Mañas-Viniegra, 2023. "Digital Ageism: Emerging Challenges and Best Practices of Age-Friendly Digital Urban Governance," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(3), pages 6-17.
    18. Reynolds, Lindsey & Cousins, Thomas & Newell, Marie-Louise & Imrie, John, 2013. "The social dynamics of consent and refusal in HIV surveillance in rural South Africa," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 118-125.
    19. Virginia Mapedzahama & Tinashe Dune, 2017. "A Clash of Paradigms? Ethnography and Ethics Approval," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(1), pages 21582440176, March.
    20. Karl-Axel Lindgren & Tim Lang, 2022. "Understanding the policy discourse within the formulation of the 2013 Indian National Food Security Act," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 14(5), pages 1159-1173, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:255:y:2020:i:c:s0277953620301994. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.