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 Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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 Boser, S.
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?

Power, Ethics, and the IRB

Dissonance Over Human Participant Review of Participatory Research

Susan Boser

Indiana University of Pennsylvania

Participatory research operates in a complex, dynamic social milieu and seeks to share the power inherent in knowledge generation with community partners. Institutional review boards (IRBs), however, typically operate from a framework that assumes asymmetrical power relations, hierarchically structured. This article argues that these differing assumptions regarding power contribute to the challenges participatory researchers experience in obtaining IRB approval. Furthermore, the application of the conventional IRB framework in reviewing the ethics of participatory inquiry can itself harm human participants in such projects by limiting the participants' field of choices. This article addresses these challenges, presenting a framework that draws on the literature on power to consider the ethical questions involved in participatory research partnerships. It also describes some ways in which power imbalance might manifest within a participatory research project, and between a project and an IRB, and offers specific strategies for addressing this.

Key Words: ethics • participatory research • institutional review board • IRB • power

References

  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. ( 2002, June). Community-based participatory research conference summary. Retrieved January 4, 2007, from http://www.ahrq.gov/about/cpcr/cbpr/cbpr1.htm
  • Attwater, R. (1999). Pragmatist philosophy and soft systems in an upland Thai catchment. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 16(4), 299-309.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Boser, S. (2006). Ethics and power in community-based participatory research. Action Research, 4(1), 9-21.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Brown, E.R., Holtby, S., Zahnd, E., & Abbott, G.B. (2005). Community-based participatory research in the California Health Interview Survey. Prevention of chronic disease. Retrieved January 4, 2007, from http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/
  • Brydon-Miller, M., & Greenwood, D. (2006). A re-examination of the relationship between action research and human subjects review processes. Action Research, 4(1), 117-128.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Christians, C.G. (2000). Ethics and politics in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 133-155). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Community Campus Partnerships for Health. ( 2007). Transforming communities and higher education. Retrieved March 19, 2007, fromhttp://www.ccph.info:80/
  • Denzin, N.K. (1997). Interpretive ethnography: Ethnographic practices for the 21st century. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • DePoy, E., & Hartman, A. (1999). Critical action research: A model for social work knowing. Social Work, 44(6), 560-570.[Web of Science]
  • Feroz, B. (2006, May). Reflections on ethical challenges for a doctoral student: A participatory action research dissertation and institutional review board. Paper presented at the meeting of the Second International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Urbana-Champaign, IL.
  • Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Gaventa, J., & Cornwall, A. (2001). Power and knowledge. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice (pp. 70-80). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Greenwood, D., & Levin, M. (1998). An introduction to action research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Guba, I., & Lincoln, Y. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Guillemim, M., & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, reflexivity and "ethically important moments" in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(2), 261-280.[Abstract]
  • Hayward, C.R. (1998). De-facing power. Polity, 31(1), 1-22.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Karlberg, M. (2004). Beyond the culture of contest. Oxford, UK: George Ronald.
  • Kemmis, S. (2001). Exploring the relevance of critical theory for action research: Emancipatory action research in the footsteps of Jürgen Habermas. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice (pp. 70-80). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Krizek, R., & Turner, P. (2006, May). Infiltrating the IRB. Paper presented at the meeting of the Second International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Urbana-Champaign, IL.
  • Lincoln, Y. (2001). Engaging sympathies: Relationships between action research and social constructivism. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice (pp. 124-144). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Lukes, S. (2005). Power: A radical view (2nd ed.). Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Morton, A. (1999). Ethics in action research. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 12(2), 219-222.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • National Institute for Environmental Health. ( 2000, May). Successful models of community-based participatory research: A final report. Retrieved January 4, 2007, from http://www.niehs.nih.gov/translat/cbr-final.pdf
  • National Institutes of Health. (2006). Research on ethical issues in human subjects research (R01, PA-06-369). Retrieved January 4, 2007, from http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-06-369.html
  • Office for Human Subject Review Protection. (n.d.). IRB guidebook. Retrieved January 4, 2007, from http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/irb/irb_guidebook.htm
  • Punch, M. (1994). Politics and ethics in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 83-97). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Quigley, D. (2003). Conference report: Dialogues for improving research ethics in environmental and public health. Syracuse, NY: Collaborative for Research Ethics in Environmental Health.
  • Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (Eds.). (2001). Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Rowan, J. (2000). Research ethics. International Journal of Psychotherapy, 5(2), 103-112.
  • Schwandt, T. (2006, May). The pressing need for ethical education: A commentary on the growing IRB controversy. Paper presented at the meeting of the Second International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Urbana-Champaign, IL.
  • Stringer, E. (1999). Action research in action (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
  • Taylor, P., & Boser, S. (2006). Power and transformation in higher education institutions: Challenges for change. In R. Eyben, C. Harris, & J. Pettit (Eds.), Exploring power for change (IDS Bulletin 37(6), pp. 111-121). Brighton, UK: IDS.
  • Viswanathan, M., Ammerman, A., Eng, E., Gartlehner, G., Lohr, K.N., Griffith, D., et al. (August, 2004). Community-based participatory research: Assessing the evidence (Summary, Evidence Report, Technology Assessment No. 99; AHRQ Publication 04-E022-1). Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
  • Williamson, G.R. (2002). Illustrating the ethical dimensions of action research. Nurse Researcher, 10(2), 38-50.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Williamson, G.R., & Prossner, S. (2002). Action research, ethics and participation. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 40(5), 587-594.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

Qualitative Inquiry, Vol. 13, No. 8, 1060-1074 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1077800407308220


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 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]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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 Boser, S.
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?