IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v595y2004i1p249-263.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bureaucracies of Mass Deception: Institutional Review Boards and the Ethics of Ethnographic Research

Author

Listed:
  • Charles L. Bosk

    (The Leonard Davis Institute for Health Services Research, Department of Medical Sociology at the University of Pennsylvania)

  • Raymond G. De Vries

    (St. Olaf College in Northfield, Minnesota)

Abstract

Ethnographers have long been unhappy with the review of their research proposals by institutional review boards (IRBs). In this article, we offer a sociological view of the problems associated with prospective IRB review of ethnographic research. Compared with researchers in other fields, social scientists have been less willing to accommodate themselves to IRB oversight; we identify the reasons for this reluctance, and in an effort to promote such accommodation, we suggest several steps to reduce the frustration associated with IRB review of ethnographic research. We conclude by encouraging ethnographers to be alert to the ways the procedural and bureaucratic demands of IRBs can displace their efforts to solve the serious ethical dilemmas posed by ethnography.

Suggested Citation

  • Charles L. Bosk & Raymond G. De Vries, 2004. "Bureaucracies of Mass Deception: Institutional Review Boards and the Ethics of Ethnographic Research," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 595(1), pages 249-263, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:595:y:2004:i:1:p:249-263
    DOI: 10.1177/0002716204266913
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716204266913
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0002716204266913?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Scott Burris, 2008. "Regulatory innovation in the governance of human subjects research: A cautionary tale and some modest proposals," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(1), pages 65-84, March.

    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:sae:anname:v:595:y:2004:i:1:p:249-263. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.