Thinking about my research and who and what it
may include and therefore affect, I need to ensure that I follow a clear
ethical code. Looking at several codes
of practice dedicated to research made me realise that the ethical boundaries
are wider than I first thought.
http://www.humanities.uct.ac.za/downloads/humanities/research/ethics/UCT_Humanities_Ethics_Guide.pdf
I had not really considered any problematic
scenarios with regard to publishing, for example, or a personal conflict of interest
with my own work, but I can see how they may become problematical, or at very
least would require consideration.
To me, ethical consideration is mostly common
sense and good manners, but there are wider parameters to consider than just
behaving in a professional manner. My
students and colleagues are all included in college safeguarding policies and
procedures, as well as disciplinary and harassment policies, so by default, as
a member of staff I have to abide by all college rulings. Naturally I would anyway but it could be
possible, I suppose, to harass someone who does not return a survey, or to
belittle their input. Horrifies me to
even write this, but I suppose it could happen. My intention is to conduct a positive, useful,
well intentioned inquiry that offers something in return to all participants
and the wider dance community. It is
also critical to ensure that everyone is aware that their input cannot be wrong…
that sort of judgement can be destructive, and in reality, no-one can give me
wrong information if they are telling me their lived experience. I have nothing to prove, but plenty to learn.
When approaching triangulation sources, I will
take the stance that I am setting out below, but will also have to be mindful
of any additional considerations that may arise out of them being off college
premises. For example I am CRB checked,
but would ask if I had to be accompanied if interviewing off site. I do not intend to engage with anyone under
16, but if my research takes me on that route I will insist on being
accompanied when interviewing. This
protects the participant and me.
As I am not researching personality or the
human psyche per se, there should not be anything within my inquiry that could
be detrimental to any person; however I will be mindful to ensure that the
contribution of all participants is valued, not judged, and obviously appreciated.
A ‘thank you’ along with a clear understanding
of the work and where it might be read goes a long way.
With regard to my personal choice of research,
I have constructed what I think is an appropriate ethical code to follow:
- Be explicit when asking for permission to use participant’s information. Better to be over clear than to keep anything from anyone
- Get written permission from everyone
- Show transcripts of interviews to participants so that they can change the wording if they feel misrepresented
- Ensure that appropriate explanations are offered when conducting surveys or interviews so that no-one feels that they are required to participate in something that is too challenging for them – a happy participant is one who does not feel undermined or confused by what they are required to do
- Stick to the guidelines of where I work, or to those of other institutions I may become engaged with
- Be open, patient, reliable, and non-judgemental in any interview or discourse with any participant
- Ensure that clear references are given to any quotes that are included
- Be mindful of how you criticise the work of others when writing a Literature Review – if you really believe you have a point to argue, remember a human has written it
- Be reliable – if you have booked an interview make sure you do not cancel
The above are 9 very basic tenets to follow. I am sure I will become aware of more as I progress.
