Ethical Relations

1. Ethical Relations Jenny Graham, Ini Grewal, Jane Lewis Presentation to the ESRC Research Methods Festival July 2006

2. Coverage of talk • introduction to the study • conceptions of ethics • the decision-making process and information needs • the centrality of the interview interaction • managing information disclosure • the footprint of the interview • discussion points

3. Introduction

4. Ethical Relations Aim • to explore research participants’ ethical requirements Design • literature review • following up 10 participants in each of 5 NatCen studies • in-depth interviews, purposive sampling, analysed using Framework

5. The main studies

6. Conceptions of ethics

7. Conceptualising ethics • choice between framing through- researcher conceptions- participant conceptions • middle position taken- explore participant conception of ethics - explore experience of participating in research esp aspects key to researcher conception of ethics- explore fit with participant concept of ethics

8. Operationalising our approach: the interview structure • meaning of ethics • application to research context • reconstruction of interview- significant, positive and negative features • walk through research process- experiences, reactions, requirements- important aspects to get right, advice would give • summarising most important aspects • (where possible) relating back to initial concept of ethics

9. Initial conceptions of ethics • varying degrees of familiarity and clarity • key components:- respect- morality, integrity, probity- beyond self-interest- processual

10. knowing what to expect clarity about purpose legitimacy and safety independence voluntariness confidentiality rapport and behaviour scope to withhold, control, end self-expression respect for privacy management of distress use made accuracy and lack of bias feedback Experiential concepts of ethics

11. Decision-making and information needs

12. Process of decision-making • typically swift decision at first contact • little evidence of weighing up pros and cons, benefit and harm • 4 decision-making pathways- motivation- absence of disinclination- reassurance or persuasion- sense of compulsion

13. A relationship of trust • worthwhile purpose • will be heard and acted on • genuine and confidential • can withhold • boundaries respected • assumptions readily formed • little understanding of nature of interview interaction • more information needs in retrospect

14. Centrality of the interview interaction

15. Centrality of the interview • centrality of the interviewer-participant interaction • central to being ‘comfortable’ • implications for the data given

16. Central features of the interview • interviewer behaviour and characteristics in relation to the participant • gender matching and information exchange not emphasised • views and feelings about the questions asked • relevance • clarity • whether represent views/areas viewed as important • interaction between these elements

17. Managing information disclosure

18. Preparation for the interview and limiting disclosure • concerns re privacy • emphasis in participant recall on the voluntary nature of answering questions • and yet.. • rare to prepare what areas not going to discuss • if thought given prior to interview is about ‘performance’

19. Limiting disclosure during the interview • rare in practice • type of information withheld during interview: • financial, relationships, health & wellbeing • reasons for withholding • relevance • sensitivity/intrusiveness • lack of trust in confidentiality

20. Strategies employed to withhold information • Qualitative • giving outline, no detail • ‘rigging’ • talking ‘off the record’ • Survey • choosing ‘none of the above’ • explicit in ‘don’t want to answer’

21. Facilitators to withholding • information in advance re question areas • assertion/reassurance that info giving voluntary • quality of interaction with the interviewer • not being asked to explain lack of disclosure • being in own home/territory • personal confidence

22. Pressures against withholding • value of study (ends justifying means) • commitment/obligation/manners • previously disclosed • demonstrating openness • passive construction of role • voluntary nature of disclosure - symbolic versus literal • ‘beguiling’?

23. Interview aftermath: the ‘footprint’ of participation

24. The ‘footprints’ • Positive • value of contribution • validation of experience • increased awareness and understanding • enhanced view of self • Negative • reliving past difficult experiences • mental ‘cost’ of participation • view of self or responses • concern over purpose, usefulness or confidentiality

25. Weighing up positive and negative footprints Positive Negative absence of footprint footprint footprint Perceived value of research. Based on: understanding expectations perceived and reflections and on ‘change capability’ of research - from the relevance of questions and topic coverage

26. Key emergent issues

27. Key emergent issues • is this ethics? • supporting decision-making and preparation • facilitating management of information disclosure • comparisons with framework of ethics from researcher perspective and ethics procedures • the passive construction of the process • requirements on funders • balancing ethics with the need for robust and rigorous information