Methodological Challenges and Ethical Concerns of Researching Marginalized and Vulnerable Populations:

2017 ◽  
pp. 101-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel E. Martínez ◽  
Jeremy Slack ◽  
Prescott Vandervoet
Author(s):  
Eleanor Gordon

Abstract Ethical concerns associated with social science research are heightened in conflict-affected environments, due to increased insecurity and the vulnerability of many research participants. This article considers some of the main challenges faced by researchers in conflict-affected environments and how they can be addressed, focusing in particular on ethical and security challenges. It also considers other challenges, which are often overlooked, such as the epistemological and methodological challenges of acquiring knowledge in conflict-affected environments, where research participants may be from different cultures, may speak different languages, and may be deeply traumatized and distrustful of others. In such places, research participants may employ techniques to assuage or discourage the researcher, including projecting borrowed narratives or remaining silent. This article argues that navigating security and ethical challenges, attending to issues of power, and remaining genuinely self-reflective can help fulfill the optimal potential of research in conflict-affected environments, which is to challenge narratives that perpetuate conflict, harm, and insecurity and to contribute to a better understanding and, thus, response to the challenges of conflict and peacebuilding.


Author(s):  
Jonathan Ives

This chapter offers a reflection on some of the interconnected philosophical, ethical and methodological challenges that have arisen in the research on fatherhood and in response to scholarly engagements with fatherhood research. The case for research funding may be easier to make if the proposed research addresses a clear area of need and/or addresses issues in vulnerable populations. If there is resistance to fatherhood research, then, it is potentially influenced by the idea that fathers, as men, are already relatively advantaged, both socially and economically — and research that benefits an already advantaged group may be less important than research that benefits a more disadvantaged group. This depends, however, on who the putative beneficiaries of fatherhood research are.


2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wisdom K. Mprah

Background: Deafness is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. The different ways of perceiving and understanding deafness have practical implications for research with deaf people. Whilst the deaf community is not homogenous, it is generally distinct from the hearing population. Consequently, the appropriateness of applying research methods and informed concern processes designed for the hearing population in research with deaf people has been questioned.Objectives: This article reflected on some methodological challenges and ethical concerns arising from conducting a sexual and reproductive health needs assessment with deaf people in Ghana. The aim was to provide some perspectives on some of the challenges associated with doing research with deaf people.Method: The study was a two phase, sequential, mixed methods design, consisting of three focus groups to assist in the development of a survey and then the implementation of the survey for needs assessment data collection. The number of participants in the study was 179, consisting of 26 focus group participants: 7 executives of the Ghana National Association of the Deaf (GNAD), 10 male adults, and 9 female adults. There were 152 survey respondents (students, women and men) and one key informant. All participants, except the key informant, were deaf people.Results: The application of traditional research methods to studies involving deaf participants presents numerous methodological and ethical dilemmas associated mainly with deaf people’s unique cultural and linguistic characteristics.Conclusion: Research methods should not be taken as universal guidelines for conducting research in all settings because of differences in settings.


Author(s):  
Jonathan H. Marks

Social scientists describe reciprocity as prosocial behavior. Some philosophers argue it is a fundamental virtue. Subtle and fluent reciprocity between life partners may well be commendable. But reciprocity between institutions with divergent missions, purposes, or interests raises serious ethical concerns. In such cases, reciprocity may create subtle forms of influence that imperil institutional integrity. Ethical concerns are most acute when one institution has an obligation to protect the interests of third parties (especially vulnerable populations), and its reciprocal behavior adversely affects those third parties. When a public health agency partners with a corporation whose products or practices have adverse effects on health, asymmetric reciprocity may seriously undermine public health. The concept of stewardship can help public officials identify and address ethically problematic reciprocity.


2018 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 371-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucy Jordan ◽  
Cheryl Hiu-Kwan Chui ◽  
Stephen Larmar ◽  
Patrick O’Leary

Social work research concerns itself with vulnerable populations. Methodological challenges including accessing vulnerable populations are especially acute in developing countries where systematized data is often lacking. This article presents a pilot study using respondent-driven sampling to estimate the prevalence of children engaged in commercial sexual exploitation. The results are used to illustrate the feasibility of developing multi-sectoral collaborations to address issues among vulnerable populations. This study demonstrates that respondent-driven sampling is a strong design capable of producing prevalence estimates. Implications for international social workers in facilitating professional capacity building for effective planning, monitoring and reporting of social development projects are discussed.


2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 67-78
Author(s):  
Kyle A McGregor ◽  
James A Hall ◽  
David A Wilkerson ◽  
Larry W Bennett ◽  
Mary A Ott

Children’s and adolescents’ capacity to provide valid informed consent is one of the key ethical concerns in pediatric research. This review of adolescent vulnerability is presented to highlight the complex interplay between capacity and other forms of vulnerability. This review is offered as an interdisciplinary analysis to better understand why the study of vulnerable populations is critical to the ethical advancement of clinical research. Results from this analysis suggest the need for enhanced screening techniques as well as the utilization of specialized staff to identify and reduce the impact of different forms of vulnerability. These findings also provide insights into ways to ethically involve youth in complex biomedical research.


2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 923-937 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Murray ◽  
Meredith Nash

Photovoice and photo-elicitation are two common methods of participant photography used in health research. Although participatory photography has many benefits, this critical reflection provides fellow researchers with insights into the methodological and ethical challenges faced when using such methods. In this article, we critically reflect on two studies that used participatory photography in different cultural contexts. The first study used photo-elicitation to investigate mothers’ experiences of infant settling in central Vietnam. The second study used photovoice to explore pregnant embodiment in Australia. Following a discussion of the literature and a detailed overview of the two studies, we examine the methodological challenges in using participant photography before, during and after each study. This is followed by a discussion of ethical concerns that arose in relation to the burden of participation, confidentiality, consent, and the photographing of families and children. To conclude, we highlight implications for using participatory photography in other settings.


2002 ◽  
Vol 117 (2) ◽  
pp. 114-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martha M McKinney ◽  
Katherine M Marconi ◽  
Paul D Cleary ◽  
Jennifer Kates ◽  
Steven R Young ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document