Advertisement

Engaging with Ethical Principles in Collecting Naturally Occurring Data

  • Nikki Kiyimba
  • Jessica Nina Lester
  • Michelle O’Reilly
Chapter

Abstract

Ethical considerations are crucial to any qualitative (and indeed quantitative) research project and undertaking qualitative research invokes some specific ethical concerns due to the nature of the data collection and analysis. Of course, as a field, health can be considered a sensitive topic for some, particularly in some areas more so than others. The chapter therefore explores some of the general ethical tensions that exist in qualitative health research, and explicates the more specific ethical arguments related to using naturally occurring data, its collection, analysis, and dissemination.

Keywords

Ethics Deontology Qualitative ethics Sensitive 

References

  1. Ashworth, P. (2003). The origins of qualitative psychology. In J. A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 4–25). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Committee on Bioethics. (1995). Informed consent, parental permission, and assent in pediatric practice. Pediatrics, 95(2), 314–317.Google Scholar
  3. Connolly, K., & Reilly, R. (2007). Emergent issues when researching trauma: A confessional tale. Qualitative Inquiry, 13(4), 522–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Convery, I., & Cox, D. (2012). A review of research ethics in Internet-based research. Practitioner Research in Higher Education, 6(1), 50–57.Google Scholar
  5. Corden, A., & Sainsbury, R. (2006). Exploring ‘quality’: Research participants’ perspectives on verbatim quotations. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 9(2), 97–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dickson-Swift, V., James, E., Kippen, S., & Liamputtong, P. (2006). Blurring boundaries in qualitative health research on sensitive topics. Qualitative Health Research, 16(6), 853–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dunn, L., Kim, D., Fellows, I., & Palmer, B. (2009). Worth the risk? Relationship of incentives to risk and benefit perceptions and willingness to participate in schizophrenia research. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 35(4), 730–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eastham, L. (2011). Research using blogs for data: Public documents or private musings? Research in Nursing and Health, 34, 353–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Etherington, K. (1996). The counsellor as researcher: Boundary issues and critical dilemmas. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 24, 339–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Etherington, K. (2001). Research with ex-clients: A celebration and extension of the therapeutic process. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 29(1), 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. European Commission. (2010). European textbook on ethics in research. Belgium: European Union.Google Scholar
  12. Eysenbach, G., & Till, J. (2001). Ethical issues in qualitative research on Internet communities. British Medical Journal, 323, 1103–1105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Flewitt, R. (2005). Conducting research with young children: Some ethical considerations. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), 553–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gallagher, M. (2008). ‘Power is not an evil’: Rethinking power in participatory methods. Children’s Geographies, 6(2), 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Garcia, A. C., Standlee, A., Bechkoff, J., & Cui, Y. (2009). Ethnographic approaches to the Internet and computer-mediated communication. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 38(1), 52–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Giordano, J., O’Reilly, M., Taylor, H., & Dogra, N. (2007). Confidentiality and autonomy: The challenge(s) of offering research participants a choice of disclosing their identity. Qualitative Health Research, 17(2), 264–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hart, N., & Crawford-Wright, A. (1999). Research as therapy, therapy as research: Ethical dilemmas in new-paradigm research. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 27(2), 205–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hazelgrove, J. (2002). The old faith and the new science: The Nuremberg Code and human experimentation ethics in Britain 1946–73. Social History of Medicine, 15, 109–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hedgecoe, A. (2009). “A form of practical machinery”: The origins of Research Ethics Committees in the UK, 1967–1972. Medical History, 53(3), 331–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Helps, S. (2017). The ethics of researching one’s own practice. Journal of Family Therapy, 39, 348–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Henderson, M., Johnson, N., & Auld, G. (2013). Silences of ethical practice: Dilemmas for researchers using social media. Educational Research and Evaluation, 19(6), 546–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Herring, A. (1996a). Linguistic and critical analysis of computer-mediated communication: Some ethical and scholarly considerations. The Information Society, 12(2), 153–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Herring, S. C. (1996b). Computer-mediated communication. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Herring, S. C. (2004). Computer-mediated discourse. In D. Tannen, D. Schiffrin, & H. Hamilton (Eds.), Handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 612–634). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  25. Hewitt, J. (2007). Ethical components of researcher-researched relationships in qualitative interviewing. Qualitative Health Research, 17(8), 1149–1159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hewson, C., & Buchanan, T. (2013). Ethics guidelines for Internet-mediated research. Leicester: The British Psychological Society.Google Scholar
  27. Hinton, D. (2013). Private conversations and public audiences: Exploring the ethical implications of using mobile telephones to reach young people’s lives. Young, 21(3), 125–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hudson, J., & Bruckman, A. (2004). “Go away”? Participant objections to being studied and the ethics of chatroom research. The Information Society, 20(2), 127–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hunter, D. (2008). The ESRC research ethics framework and research ethics review at UK universities: Rebuilding the tower of Babel REC by REC. Journal of Medical Ethics, 34(11), 815–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. James, T., & Platzer, H. (1999). Ethical considerations in qualitative research with vulnerable groups: Exploring lesbians’ and gay men’s experiences of healthcarea personal perspective. Nursing Ethics, 6(1), 73–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kitchener, K. (1988). Dual role relationshipsWhat makes them so problematic? Journal of Counseling and Development, 67, 217–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kozinets, R. (2010). Netnography: Doing ethnographic research online. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Markham, A. (2005). The politics, ethics, and methods of representation in online ethnography. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 793–820). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Markham, A., & Buchanan, E. (2015). Ethical considerations in digital research contexts. In J. Wright (Ed.), Encyclopedia for social & behavioral sciences (pp. 606–613). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mason, J. (2002). Researching your own practice: The discipline of noticing. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Mayer, M., & Till, J. (1996). The Internet: A modern Pandora’s box? Qualitative Life Research, 5, 568–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McKee, H. A., & Porter, J. E. (2009). Internet research: A rhetorical, case-based process. New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  38. McNeill, P. (1997). Paying people to participate in research: Why not? A response to Wilkinson and Moore. Bioethics, 11(5), 390–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Meredith, J., & Potter, J. (2014). Conversation analysis and electronic interactions: Methodological, analytic and technical considerations. In H. Lim & F. Sudweeks (Eds.), Innovative methods and technologies for electronic discourse analysis (pp. 370–393). Hersey, PA: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Monks, H., Cardoso, P., Papageorgiou, A., Carolan, C., Costello, L., & Thomas, L. (2015). Young people’s views regarding participation in mental health and wellbeing research through social media. The International Journal of Emotional Education, 7(1), 4–19.Google Scholar
  41. Moreno, M., Fost, N., & Christakis, D. (2008). Research ethics in the MySpace era. Pediatrics, 121(1), 157–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Morse, J., Niehaus, L., Varnhagen, S., Austin, W., & McIntosh, M. (2008). Qualitative researchers’ conceptualizations of the risks inherent in qualitative interviews. In N. Denzin & M. Giardina (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry and the politics of evidence (pp. 195–215). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  43. O’Reilly, M., & Kiyimba, N. (2015). Advanced qualitative research: A guide to contemporary theoretical debates. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  44. O’Reilly, M., & Parker, N. (2013). Unsatisfactory saturation: A critical exploration of the notion of saturated sample sizes in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 13(2), 190–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. O’Reilly, M., & Parker, N. (2014). Doing mental health research with children and adolescents: A guide to qualitative methods. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. O’Reilly, M., Parker, N., & Hutchby, I. (2011). Ongoing processes of managing consent: The empirical ethics of using video-recording in clinical practice and research. Clinical Ethics, 6, 179–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. O’Reilly, M., Dogra, N., Whiteman, N., Hughes, J., Eruyar, S., & Reilly, P. (2018). Is social media bad for mental health and wellbeing? Exploring the perspectives of adolescents. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 23 (4), 601–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Paulus, T., Lester, J. N., & Dempster, P. (2014). Digital tools for qualitative research. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Richards, H., & Schwartz, L. J. (2002). Ethics of qualitative research: Are there special issues for health services research? Family Practice, 19(2), 135–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sieber, J. (1992). Planning ethically responsible research: A guide for students and internal review boards. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Taylor, R. (2007). Reversing the retreat from Gillick? R (Axon) v secretary of state for health. Child and Family Law Quarterly, 19(1), 81–97.Google Scholar
  52. Zimmer, M. (2010). “But the data is already public”: On the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics and Information Technology, 12, 313–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikki Kiyimba
    • 1
  • Jessica Nina Lester
    • 2
  • Michelle O’Reilly
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Social and Political ScienceUniversity of ChesterChesterUK
  2. 2.School of EducationIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  3. 3.The Greenwood Institute of Child HealthUniversity of LeicesterLeicesterUK

Personalised recommendations