This week’s readings have me thinking about the ethical issues of research activities involving human subjects and how they relate to federal and University policy. One line stood out in particular : “The scientific value of the research does not in any way trump the rights of the participants” (UofT guidelines). So what exactly are these rights and how might they apply to my choice of research? Even though all of the guiding principles in the Tri-Council Policy Statement apply, I found the following particularly important to my study:
-Respect for human dignity I feel that it is particularly important given that my study will handle ‘ability’ and ‘willingness’ to engage with new technology, seniors using this technology may experience a level of embarrassment, discomfort etc, so it would be important not to frame the study in such a way that they may feel a loss of dignity, for example, if library staff were to express their frustrations with a patron and their abilities.
-Respect for free and informed consent I feel that this is important in every study. I can’t help but think of Facebook again –although it’s a stretch to consider Facebook as solely a research mechanism, but I remember that agreement I signed ahead of time when I signed up, and now that I’ve left Facebook I am so upset that I didn’t read the agreement and that they still have all of my information on file, despite my deleting it, and are no doubt using it for secondary purposes. I guess what I’m trying to say is that yes, it’s my fault, but I also feel that they should have been more insistent that users read the policy. One click on an “I agree” statement is too easy. They could change this by having users click on every rule. I know, I know, they fulfilled their minimum requirements, and I’m just dreaming of a better world. Lol. I just think that for my study I will make sure participants read everything and know what they are getting into, and how their info will be collected and used. I feel that seniors are a vulnerable population and that they should receive special care. I’m not trying to stereotype; I would hope to treat all groups I research the same way. Yet, I don’t think there is anything wrong with giving that extra special care, just as one might with children, or ESL subjects etc. Some of these groups have special needs that clearly can’t be ignored). For my study I will send my participants home with an outline the information I’m collecting and the way it will be used. I will also go over it with them in person to ensure they know what they are getting into and any repercussions the study might have.
-Respect for vulnerable persons I feel that my group of participants are a vulnerable population and will therefore take extra care to ensure that they are given respect, attention and care. I believe there is even a stronger need to be aware of ethics with these types of special groups. Having worked with them in the past I have some awareness of the kinds of abuses that can go on, including neglect, verbal abuse, placing them in vulnerable situations, and I will keep this in the forefront of my mind while conducting my research.
-Respect for privacy and confidentiality I will ensure the let them know ahead of time what part of my study could potentially be released to the public to affect public policy and library activities. I will reassure them that this study will offer them anonymity and that none of their personal information will be disclosed. If I need to disclose some personal information I will let them know prior to engaging in the study. If I come across any personal information I would like to disclose after having conducted some of the research I will be sure to ask permission.
I imaging that ethics will involve a lot of paperwork. I will make sure that the consent forms I write will be written in understandable language and that the information will be clear. I will also ensure that I go over this information with the participants to confirm that they understand what is involved.
I believe that when they are referring to rights they are containing it within documented rights charters, including, but not limited to, The Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Declaration of Human Rights. Generally when broadly stated as 'rights', that is what is implied.
Similar to my comment about children, a certain amount of personal agency should always be recognized by researchers. In the case of Facebook (drawing from you statement above), they give you the personal agency to make the choice to either read or not read and then agree or disagree. As researchers we can send information packages with them but we can't force them to read it. We have to cover our bases and then hope that they follow through. Just as we have to respect that they may pull out and leave the study at a stand still.
Always interesting to read about the more tacit elements underpinning a successful outcome, no matter the endeavour. The opening observation by Knight in the section “Being Pragmatic” was easily appreciated but still worth stating: that research reports often belie the struggles that challenged a research effort, with a writing style suggesting a highly scripted effort that began with formulation of a research question, and ended with analysis, followed by the documentation of suggested findings.
The “Disclosure and Harm” section similarly offered what the uninitiated can easily appreciate as sound advice, especially when research involves face-to-face encounters:
• The balance between minimizing risks concerning a traumatizing experience for the participant (e.g. unpleasant memories) with the desire for unguarded disclosure • The likelihood of challenges concerning suitable access to prospective participants • The obvious self interest in managing one’s detachment during the data collection effort
This week’s readings in Knight were particularly helpful. I enjoyed their advice on how to deal with nine common difficulties encountered during the research process. For instance, if I decide to use surveys, I will have to take into account that response feedback could be low. In this case, it is suggested that the target group could be extended. This would most likely mean that many of the survey questions would have to be redesigned. However, redesigning questions and changing the target group could completely alter the original scope of the research. In these cases, a different research method approach would likely have to be taken. Therefore, as Knight states, it is important to be flexible and recognize that what happens will often differ from what was originally expected.
I too found Knight's "Being Pragmatic" helpful, especially his assertion that most research projects will likely look different in reality than on paper, with unexpected challenges and limitations forcing researchers to adapt. This is the way it should be. After all, the research subject is supposed to be guiding us, not the other way around. Sticking too strictly to a predetermined method, even when it doesn't completely work in actual practice, might make for a good looking study, but it may not end up telling us much about the world. It seems to me that the whole purpose of research, social or otherwise, is to discern order in the seeming disorder (chaos, even) of the world we know. As researchers we must choose our methods very carefully, to the point of being willing to change them if the situation requires it. Otherwise, we risk IMPOSING order rather than detecting it, in which case we would learn much more about ourselves than the world we are seeking to observe. That world is a messy one, in constant flux. We should not expect our research to be much different.
Listening to Dean Sharpe speak to us about ethics, I too had a wake-up call (what other are calling an Aha! Moment, or “rubber hitting the road”. I felt the real-life implications of setting out to discover new information or insights by looking intimately at people’s beliefs or actions. I also felt the full import of what it means to make claims about that information, all the while respecting the trust of the participants, and reflecting their reality in a ways that they will relate to. This all caused me to look again at what I want to examine (new immigrants’ use of library websites) and how I can discover the ways that the sites are failing them, without making the participants feel like ‘failures’. Dean really raised the stakes for me.
Knight continues to fill in more of the grey areas, and sometimes he provides reassurance that my planned research is not completely ridiculous. This week, in going through the ‘common mishaps’ he managed to remind me that when small-scale studies are exploratory, it may not matter so much if some participants withdraw. I am beginning to understand that my research is exploratory – I’ll work with a very small number of newcomers, and the value of the research will not be to collect huge amounts of data that confirm a certain hypothesis, but rather to uncover as many ways as possible that library websites throw up obstacles for newcomers seeking information. Even one instance of difficulty of use will be meaningful – and if patterns do emerge, then further research of a slightly more “canonical” nature may be called for in future.
EtHiCs!
ReplyDeleteThis week’s readings have me thinking about the ethical issues of research activities involving human subjects and how they relate to federal and University policy. One line stood out in particular : “The scientific value of the research does not in any way trump the rights of the participants” (UofT guidelines). So what exactly are these rights and how might they apply to my choice of research? Even though all of the guiding principles in the Tri-Council Policy Statement apply, I found the following particularly important to my study:
-Respect for human dignity
I feel that it is particularly important given that my study will handle ‘ability’ and ‘willingness’ to engage with new technology, seniors using this technology may experience a level of embarrassment, discomfort etc, so it would be important not to frame the study in such a way that they may feel a loss of dignity, for example, if library staff were to express their frustrations with a patron and their abilities.
-Respect for free and informed consent
I feel that this is important in every study. I can’t help but think of Facebook again –although it’s a stretch to consider Facebook as solely a research mechanism, but I remember that agreement I signed ahead of time when I signed up, and now that I’ve left Facebook I am so upset that I didn’t read the agreement and that they still have all of my information on file, despite my deleting it, and are no doubt using it for secondary purposes. I guess what I’m trying to say is that yes, it’s my fault, but I also feel that they should have been more insistent that users read the policy. One click on an “I agree” statement is too easy. They could change this by having users click on every rule. I know, I know, they fulfilled their minimum requirements, and I’m just dreaming of a better world. Lol. I just think that for my study I will make sure participants read everything and know what they are getting into, and how their info will be collected and used. I feel that seniors are a vulnerable population and that they should receive special care. I’m not trying to stereotype; I would hope to treat all groups I research the same way. Yet, I don’t think there is anything wrong with giving that extra special care, just as one might with children, or ESL subjects etc. Some of these groups have special needs that clearly can’t be ignored). For my study I will send my participants home with an outline the information I’m collecting and the way it will be used. I will also go over it with them in person to ensure they know what they are getting into and any repercussions the study might have.
-Respect for vulnerable persons
I feel that my group of participants are a vulnerable population and will therefore take extra care to ensure that they are given respect, attention and care. I believe there is even a stronger need to be aware of ethics with these types of special groups. Having worked with them in the past I have some awareness of the kinds of abuses that can go on, including neglect, verbal abuse, placing them in vulnerable situations, and I will keep this in the forefront of my mind while conducting my research.
-Respect for privacy and confidentiality
I will ensure the let them know ahead of time what part of my study could potentially be released to the public to affect public policy and library activities. I will reassure them that this study will offer them anonymity and that none of their personal information will be disclosed. If I need to disclose some personal information I will let them know prior to engaging in the study. If I come across any personal information I would like to disclose after having conducted some of the research I will be sure to ask permission.
I imaging that ethics will involve a lot of paperwork. I will make sure that the consent forms I write will be written in understandable language and that the information will be clear. I will also ensure that I go over this information with the participants to confirm that they understand what is involved.
I believe that when they are referring to rights they are containing it within documented rights charters, including, but not limited to, The Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Declaration of Human Rights. Generally when broadly stated as 'rights', that is what is implied.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to my comment about children, a certain amount of personal agency should always be recognized by researchers. In the case of Facebook (drawing from you statement above), they give you the personal agency to make the choice to either read or not read and then agree or disagree. As researchers we can send information packages with them but we can't force them to read it. We have to cover our bases and then hope that they follow through. Just as we have to respect that they may pull out and leave the study at a stand still.
Always interesting to read about the more tacit elements underpinning a successful outcome, no matter the endeavour. The opening observation by Knight in the section “Being Pragmatic” was easily appreciated but still worth stating: that research reports often belie the struggles that challenged a research effort, with a writing style suggesting a highly scripted effort that began with formulation of a research question, and ended with analysis, followed by the documentation of suggested findings.
ReplyDeleteThe “Disclosure and Harm” section similarly offered what the uninitiated can easily appreciate as sound advice, especially when research involves face-to-face encounters:
• The balance between minimizing risks concerning a traumatizing experience for the participant (e.g. unpleasant memories) with the desire for unguarded disclosure
• The likelihood of challenges concerning suitable access to prospective participants
• The obvious self interest in managing one’s detachment during the data collection effort
This week’s readings in Knight were particularly helpful. I enjoyed their advice on how to deal with nine common difficulties encountered during the research process. For instance, if I decide to use surveys, I will have to take into account that response feedback could be low. In this case, it is suggested that the target group could be extended. This would most likely mean that many of the survey questions would have to be redesigned. However, redesigning questions and changing the target group could completely alter the original scope of the research. In these cases, a different research method approach would likely have to be taken. Therefore, as Knight states, it is important to be flexible and recognize that what happens will often differ from what was originally expected.
ReplyDeleteI too found Knight's "Being Pragmatic" helpful, especially his assertion that most research projects will likely look different in reality than on paper, with unexpected challenges and limitations forcing researchers to adapt. This is the way it should be. After all, the research subject is supposed to be guiding us, not the other way around. Sticking too strictly to a predetermined method, even when it doesn't completely work in actual practice, might make for a good looking study, but it may not end up telling us much about the world. It seems to me that the whole purpose of research, social or otherwise, is to discern order in the seeming disorder (chaos, even) of the world we know. As researchers we must choose our methods very carefully, to the point of being willing to change them if the situation requires it. Otherwise, we risk IMPOSING order rather than detecting it, in which case we would learn much more about ourselves than the world we are seeking to observe. That world is a messy one, in constant flux. We should not expect our research to be much different.
ReplyDeleteListening to Dean Sharpe speak to us about ethics, I too had a wake-up call (what other are calling an Aha! Moment, or “rubber hitting the road”. I felt the real-life implications of setting out to discover new information or insights by looking intimately at people’s beliefs or actions. I also felt the full import of what it means to make claims about that information, all the while respecting the trust of the participants, and reflecting their reality in a ways that they will relate to. This all caused me to look again at what I want to examine (new immigrants’ use of library websites) and how I can discover the ways that the sites are failing them, without making the participants feel like ‘failures’. Dean really raised the stakes for me.
ReplyDeleteKnight continues to fill in more of the grey areas, and sometimes he provides reassurance that my planned research is not completely ridiculous. This week, in going through the ‘common mishaps’ he managed to remind me that when small-scale studies are exploratory, it may not matter so much if some participants withdraw. I am beginning to understand that my research is exploratory – I’ll work with a very small number of newcomers, and the value of the research will not be to collect huge amounts of data that confirm a certain hypothesis, but rather to uncover as many ways as possible that library websites throw up obstacles for newcomers seeking information. Even one instance of difficulty of use will be meaningful – and if patterns do emerge, then further research of a slightly more “canonical” nature may be called for in future.