Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Qualitative Inquiry
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 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 Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Marzano, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Informed Consent, Deception, and Research Freedom in Qualitative Research

Marco Marzano

University of Bergamo, Italy

Does there exist only one, universally valid, research ethic? Are informed consent and ethical committees the best means to ensure the moral correctness of research? Again, what consequences ensue from the introduction of these instruments for the freedom of research and the quality of its results? This article addresses these issues by first recounting an ethnography conducted by its author in the oncology department of a large Italian hospital. To carry out his research the author initially had to conceal his identity and the purpose of his presence from the patients. Only later was this mode of conducting his fieldwork abandoned. The rest of the article compares this experience with very different ones reported by a number of American ethnographers. The article concludes by examining problems, such as the influence of the cultural context on the ethnographer's moral choices, or the value of informed consent and ethical committees, in the light of the empirical materials previously presented.

Key Words: cancer • ethnography • informed consent • IRB • research ethics

Qualitative Inquiry, Vol. 13, No. 3, 417-436 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1077800406297665
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Qualitative ResearchHome page
C. Baarts
Stuck in the middle: research ethics caught between science and politics
Qualitative Research, September 1, 2009; 9(4): 423 - 439.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Qualitative Social WorkHome page
E. Renold, S. Holland, N. J. Ross, and A. Hillman
`Becoming Participant': Problematizing `Informed Consent' in Participatory Research with Young People in Care
Qualitative Social Work, December 1, 2008; 7(4): 427 - 447.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Qualitative InquiryHome page
J. A. Schlosser
Issues in Interviewing Inmates: Navigating the Methodological Landmines of Prison Research
Qualitative Inquiry, December 1, 2008; 14(8): 1500 - 1525.
[Abstract] [PDF]