Qualitative Inquiry

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cannella, G. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Qualitative Inquiry, Vol. 10, No. 2, 235-245 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1077800403262375

Regulatory Power: Can a Feminist Poststructuralist Engage in Research Oversight?

Gaile S. Cannella

Texas A&M University

This personal narrative focuses on a specific experience with the regulation and potential discrediting of diverse forms of research—service as the chairperson of an institutional review board. An attempt to adjust to contemporary legislative expectations for the protection of human participants in research in one institutional setting is described. Because of the complex, ambiguous, multivocal, and political nature of research and research regulation, the author has come to believe that qualitative researchers who become informed critical activists regarding research ethics and regulation are immediately needed as voices in the construction of appropriate practices that would protect all those involved—subjects/participants, researchers, volunteer academic reviewers, individual informants, the general public—while at the same tiome facilitating respect for research diversity. Valued qualitative research constructs—emergence, reflexivity, and the recognition of power and political agendas that place ethical practice and research diversity at the forefront of public discourses—are discussed as essential to the critical regulation of research.

Key Words: institutional review boards • research regulation • research diversity


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Qualitative InquiryHome page
G. S. Cannella and Y. S. Lincoln
Predatory vs. Dialogic Ethics: Constructing an Illusion or Ethical Practice as the Core of Research Methods
Qualitative Inquiry, April 1, 2007; 13(3): 315 - 335.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Qualitative InquiryHome page
C. Halse and A. Honey
Rethinking Ethics Review as Institutional Discourse
Qualitative Inquiry, April 1, 2007; 13(3): 336 - 352.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Qualitative Social WorkHome page
N. K. Denzin
The First International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry
Qualitative Social Work, March 1, 2005; 4(1): 105 - 111.
[Abstract] [PDF]