Are there risks in qualitative research?
Qualitative Health Research; Thousand Oaks; Jan 2001; Janice M Morse;
Volume: 11
Issue: 1
Start Page: 3-4
ISSN: 10497323
Subject Terms: Research
Risk assessment
Abstract:
Morse discusses the two types of risks in qualitative research. There are potential risks to investigators inherent in fieldwork, such as safety, and in working with qualitative data, such as emotional distress, and there are also risks in that the investigators must take to do excellent innovative and creative work.
Full Text:
Copyright Sage Publications, Inc. Jan 2001
I am fascinated with the different perceptions of risk in qualitative research. Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) differ in their requirements for review of qualitafive proposals that vary from expedited review (indicating that the risks for participants are no greater than in everyday life) to full review (implying that there may be some risk of harm to participants). In the 10 years of publication of QHR, some authors have referred to the potential risks to investigators inherent in fieldwork (mainly to physical safety [see, e.g., Patterson, Gregory, & Thorne, 1999]) and in working with qualitative data (mainly emotional distress [see, e.g., Gregory, Russell, & Phillips, 1997]). However, we have been silent about the risk to participants-possibly because if the principles of informal consent are adhered to and promises of anonymity and confidentiality respected, the risks are very low indeed. There is certainly a need for a survey of qualitative researchers to answer this question and to determine what the risks and the rates of their occurrence are.
There are a second type of risks in qualitative research that are sometimes discussed and are most interesting. These are the risks inherent in good qualitative inquiry itself-the risks that the investigators must take to do excellent innovative and creative work. ("You are studying WHAT?") Risky research requires the researcher to take the chance of venturing into new territory that can provide new perspectives. Slowly or suddenly, it changes the direction of social sciences, the way we view certain topics-from approaches to therapies, our notions of health or illness, and so forth. The area selected may be fruitful, have insurmountable problems, or not be as interesting as was first imagined. The risks may be high professionally. It is easier to move along with the status quo, to get funded applying for mainstream priorities, and to get published submitting articles on fashionable topics. Let's face it, when we propose new approaches, our peers may not like to see their models becoming outdated, clinicians may be reluctant about changing their practices, or educators resistant to revising their courses.
There are risks in using qualitative methods. Many students determined to use the new paradigm find themselves in a position without any qualitative expertise in their department. They may find themselves instructing their committee on the principles of qualitative inquiry or being forced to compromise their design and knowingly violate qualitative principles, such as principles of sampling.
Qualitative researchers, both novice and experienced, are constantly taking risks in processes of data gathering. When doing participant observation, good qualitative researchers know that excellent data may only be collected if the researchers themselves are on the periphery of a group. It feels awkward not fitting in, not really belonging. Rosalie Wax (1971) noted many years ago that unless researchers can abide feeling awkward, out of place, embarrassed, and being treated like a fool, they "ought to think twice" (p. 370) about doing fieldwork. It takes a large amount of skill and a lot of tact to ask certain kinds of questions, to risk rejection or refusal from the participants, or to receive their admiration, respect, and expectation that you will become a part of their support group or a part of their family, yet necessarily decline such invitations.
We need to reflect on risk and risky behaviors more, for it is accepting and taking risks that makes qualitative inquiry worthwhile. We need to be more public with our failures and our weaknesses, for by considering what we did not or could not do, we also bring about change, make qualitative research stronger, and become better researchers.
[Reference]
Gregory, D., Russell, C. K., & Phillips, L. R. (1997). Beyond textual perfection: Transcribers as vulnerable persons. Qualitative Health Research, 7(4), 294-300.
Patterson, B. L., Gregory, D., & Thorne, S. (1999). A protocol for researcher safety. Qualitative Health Research, 9(2), 259-296.
Wax, R. H. (1971). Doing fieldwork: Warnings and advice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[Author note]
JANICE M. MORSE
Editor
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Basic
Guided
Advanced
Natural language
Publication
Personal names
Locations & places
Companies
Subjects
Marked list & durable links
Results List
Recent searches
Volume: 11
Issue: 1
Start Page: 3-4
ISSN: 10497323
Subject Terms: Research
Risk assessment
Abstract:
Morse discusses the two types of risks in qualitative research. There are potential risks to investigators inherent in fieldwork, such as safety, and in working with qualitative data, such as emotional distress, and there are also risks in that the investigators must take to do excellent innovative and creative work.
Full Text:
Copyright Sage Publications, Inc. Jan 2001
I am fascinated with the different perceptions of risk in qualitative research. Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) differ in their requirements for review of qualitafive proposals that vary from expedited review (indicating that the risks for participants are no greater than in everyday life) to full review (implying that there may be some risk of harm to participants). In the 10 years of publication of QHR, some authors have referred to the potential risks to investigators inherent in fieldwork (mainly to physical safety [see, e.g., Patterson, Gregory, & Thorne, 1999]) and in working with qualitative data (mainly emotional distress [see, e.g., Gregory, Russell, & Phillips, 1997]). However, we have been silent about the risk to participants-possibly because if the principles of informal consent are adhered to and promises of anonymity and confidentiality respected, the risks are very low indeed. There is certainly a need for a survey of qualitative researchers to answer this question and to determine what the risks and the rates of their occurrence are.
There are a second type of risks in qualitative research that are sometimes discussed and are most interesting. These are the risks inherent in good qualitative inquiry itself-the risks that the investigators must take to do excellent innovative and creative work. ("You are studying WHAT?") Risky research requires the researcher to take the chance of venturing into new territory that can provide new perspectives. Slowly or suddenly, it changes the direction of social sciences, the way we view certain topics-from approaches to therapies, our notions of health or illness, and so forth. The area selected may be fruitful, have insurmountable problems, or not be as interesting as was first imagined. The risks may be high professionally. It is easier to move along with the status quo, to get funded applying for mainstream priorities, and to get published submitting articles on fashionable topics. Let's face it, when we propose new approaches, our peers may not like to see their models becoming outdated, clinicians may be reluctant about changing their practices, or educators resistant to revising their courses.
There are risks in using qualitative methods. Many students determined to use the new paradigm find themselves in a position without any qualitative expertise in their department. They may find themselves instructing their committee on the principles of qualitative inquiry or being forced to compromise their design and knowingly violate qualitative principles, such as principles of sampling.
Qualitative researchers, both novice and experienced, are constantly taking risks in processes of data gathering. When doing participant observation, good qualitative researchers know that excellent data may only be collected if the researchers themselves are on the periphery of a group. It feels awkward not fitting in, not really belonging. Rosalie Wax (1971) noted many years ago that unless researchers can abide feeling awkward, out of place, embarrassed, and being treated like a fool, they "ought to think twice" (p. 370) about doing fieldwork. It takes a large amount of skill and a lot of tact to ask certain kinds of questions, to risk rejection or refusal from the participants, or to receive their admiration, respect, and expectation that you will become a part of their support group or a part of their family, yet necessarily decline such invitations.
We need to reflect on risk and risky behaviors more, for it is accepting and taking risks that makes qualitative inquiry worthwhile. We need to be more public with our failures and our weaknesses, for by considering what we did not or could not do, we also bring about change, make qualitative research stronger, and become better researchers.
[Reference]
Gregory, D., Russell, C. K., & Phillips, L. R. (1997). Beyond textual perfection: Transcribers as vulnerable persons. Qualitative Health Research, 7(4), 294-300.
Patterson, B. L., Gregory, D., & Thorne, S. (1999). A protocol for researcher safety. Qualitative Health Research, 9(2), 259-296.
Wax, R. H. (1971). Doing fieldwork: Warnings and advice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[Author note]
JANICE M. MORSE
Editor
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Basic
Guided
Advanced
Natural language
Publication
Personal names
Locations & places
Companies
Subjects
Marked list & durable links
Results List
Recent searches
Komentar