Abstract
Ethical dilemmas are often not discussed in the dissemination of educational research. While the ethical guidelines for research seem clear at first glance, a closer look at the intimate nature of qualitative research reveals that there are many ambiguities or ‘grey’ areas where researchers must rely on their personal value systems. This article discusses the challenges faced by an experienced educator, although novice researcher, in considering the ethical parameters of her own research with adolescents with hearing loss. In particular, the grey ethical areas identified by the researcher include: (a) vulnerable population; (b) researcher role confusion; (c) consent; (d) privacy, confidentiality, and anonymity; as well as (e) the nature of risk. Based on the author’s own reflections on beginning the research process, the article presents possible pitfalls and ways of overcoming the possibility of becoming immobilized by the ethical enigmas of research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adler, P.A. and Adler, P. (2002). Do university lawyers and the police define research values?, In Will C. van den Hoonaard (Eds.), Walking the Tightrope: Ethical Issues for Qualitative Researchers, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Beattie, R.G. (1998). Ethics in deafness: Another interesting thought – That’s two!, Canadian Association of Educators of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing 24(2/3), 69–71.
Bell, L. and Nutt, L. (2002). Divided loyalities, divided expectations: Research ethics, Professional and occupational responsibilities, In M. Mauthner, M. Birch, J. Jessop, and T. Miller (Eds.), Ethics in Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Boman, J. and Jevne, R. (2000). Pearls, pith, and provocation: Ethical evaluation in qualitative research, Qualitative Health Research 10(4), 547–554.
Branson, J. and Miller, D. (2002). Damned for their difference: The cultural construction of Deaf people as disabled. Washington, District of Columbia: Gallaudet University Press.
Christians, C.G. (2005). Ethics and politics in qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3rd ed., Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Easterbrooks, S.R. and Baker, S. (2002). Language Learning in Children Who Are Deaf and Hard of Hearing. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Eder, D. and Corsaro, W. (1999). Ethnographic studies of children and youth: Theoretical and ethical issues, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 28(5), 520–531.
Ensign, J. (2003). Ethical issues in qualitative health research with homeless youths, Journal of Advanced Nursing 43(1), 43–50.
Flexer, C. (1999). Facilitating Hearing and Listening in Young Children, 2nd ed. San Diego, California: Singular.
Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
Government of Canada (1998). Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical conduct for research involving humans.(with 2000, 2002 and 2005 amendments) Ottawa: Public Works and Government Services Canada. http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/English/policystatement.cfm.
Government of Canada (2004). Giving Voice to the Spectrum. Report of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Ethics Special Working Committee to the Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics. Ottawa: Public Works and Government Services Canada.
Gregory, I. (2003). Ethics in Research. London, UK: Continuum.
Haggerty, K.D. (2004). Ethics Creep: Governing social science research in the name of ethics, Qualitative Sociology 27, 391–414.
Harrington, M. (2003). Hard of hearing students in the public schools: Should we be concerned?, Volta Voices, Nov.–Dec., 18–22.
Hawkins, D.R. (1995). Power vs Force: The Hidden Determinants of Human Behaviour. Sedona, Arizona: Veritas.
Johnson, T. (2004). W(h)ither the Deaf community? Population, genetics, and the future of Australian Sign Language, American Annals of the Deaf 149(2), 75–90.
Lane, H., Hoffmeister, R. and Bahan, B. (1996). A Journey Into the Deaf- World. California: Dawn Sign.
Mac Dougall, J.C. (2004). Irreconcilable differences: The education of deaf children in Canada, Education Canada 44(1), 16–26.
Marschark, M. (1997). Raising and Educating a Deaf Child: A Comprehensive Guide to The Choices, Controversies and Decisions Faced by Parents and Educators. New York: Oxford University Press.
Marschark, M., Lang, H.G., and Albertini, J.A. (2002). Educating Deaf Students: From Research to Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.
Marziano, N.K., Casalotti, S.O., Portelli, A.E., Becker, D.L., and Forge, A. (2003). Mutations in the gene for connexin 26 (GJB2) that cause hearing loss have a dominant negative effect on connexin 30. Human Molecular Genetics 12(8) On-line: http://hmg.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/12/8/805 Accessed November 21, 2005.
Miller, T. and Bell, L. (2005). Consenting to what? Issues of access, gate-keeping and ‘informed’ consent, In M. Mauthner, M. Birch, J. Jessop and T. Miller (Eds.), Ethics in Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Rager, K.B. (2005). Self-care and the qualitative researcher: When collecting data can break your heart. Educational Researcher 34(5), 23–27.
Schirmer, B. R. (2001). Psychological, Social, and Educational Dimensions of Deafness. Needham Heights, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Snyder, L. (2002). Confidentiality and anonymity: Promises and practices. In Will C. van den Hoonaard (Ed.), Walking the Tightrope: Ethical Issues for Qualitative Researchers. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Somerville, M. (2000). The Ethical Canary: Science, Society and the Human Spirit. Toronto: Penguin.
Swain, J. Heyman, B. and Gillman, M. (1998). Public research, private concerns: Ethical issues in the use of open-ended interviews with people who have learning difficulties. Disability and Society 13(1), 21–36.
Thompson, S.A. (2002). My research friend? My friend the researcher? My friend, my researcher? Mis/informed consent and people with developmental disabilities. In Will C. van den Hoonaard (Ed.), Walking the Tightrope: Ethical Issues for Qualitative Researchers. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
van den Hoonaard, W.C. (2002). Introduction: Ethical norming and qualitative research, In Will C. van den Hoonaard (Ed.), Walking the Tightrope: Ethical Issues for Qualitative Researchers, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
van den Hoonaard, W.C. (2003). Is anonymity an artifact in ethnographic research?, Journal of Research Ethics 1, 141–151.
Weinberg, M. (2001). Biting the hand that feeds you and other feminist dilemmas in Fieldwork, In Will C. van den Hoonaard (Ed.), Walking the Tightrope: Ethical Issues for Qualitative Researchers, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kennedy, J.E. Grey Matter: Ambiguities and Complexities of Ethics in Research. J Acad Ethics 3, 143–158 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-006-9011-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-006-9011-7