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 Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
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 Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Koro-Ljungberg, M.
Right arrow Articles by Kmiec, C.
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?

The Technologies of Normalization and Self

Thinking About IRBs and Extrinsic Research Ethics With Foucault

Mirka Koro-Ljungberg

University of Florida

Marco Gemignani

Duquesne University

Cheri Winton Brodeur

University of Florida

Cheryl Kmiec

University of Florida

In this article, the authors discuss the technologies of normalization and self in relation to ethics and the problematization of extrinsic research ethics. They argue that institutional review boards (IRBs) and other similar institutional mechanisms promote extrinsic forms of ethics that are exemplified through institutionalized structures such as (a) the Belmont Report, (b) IRB protocol, (c) informed consent, and (d) localized interpretations of IRB rules and regulations. However, at the same time, institutional normalization enables researchers and participants to construct themselves as ethically responsible participants through resistance and critical reflection. Such "care of the self" and critical awareness of dominant discourses and regimes of power and knowledge are essential to the development and practice of research that is ethical, free, and responsive. Finally, the authors conclude that the discussions about researchers' ethical decision making and freedom of choice need to be separate from discussions related to researchers' compliance, duties, and institutional responsibilities.

Key Words: normalization • IRB • ethics • Foucault

Qualitative Inquiry, Vol. 13, No. 8, 1075-1094 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1077800407308822
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?