[Interpretationandmethods] What do we owe our participants?

[Ed Schatz]

Dvora,

Interesting interview that touches on a variety of issues. I would take up
two things. 

 

First, on epistemology: isn't a researcher who operates at close range with
people being studied and who simultaneously acknowledges (not just
perfunctorily, but really acknowledges) her/his impact on these people also
much more likely to have his/her truth claims be influenced by them? That
is, if you are embedded in human relationships with the people you study,
doesn't it become difficult NOT to imbibe, at least to some degree, their
perspectives? 

 

Second, "giving back" is obviously a crucial and largely ignored aspect of
research. But my own sense (others probably disagree) is that we need to
remember that this is not the normal giving back that one would find in
ordinary human relationships. The researcher, in addition to being embedded
in human relationships with people being studied and subject to the norms
that govern those interactions, is also embedded in a research community
which has different norms and imperatives. So, if I choose, for example, to
pay someone for her participation in a research project, this needs to be
balanced against norms in the scholarly community (e.g., is paying for
information appropriate? Is the quality of the information provided affected
by payment?) and the norms in other, overlapping communities (e.g., if I pay
for someone to participate, what does this do to scholars-perhaps local
scholars, if we are talking about developing countries-who don't have access
to funds to pay for participation? Would "driving up the price" for
participation be justified?). In the end, therefore, I think that the
"giving back" might look pretty watered down.

 

Monetary payments, I think, are rare (and for good reason). Giving back can
thus take on a variety of forms, but again, I sense that it would be
difficult to imagine giving back in ways that would equal what our
interlocutors have given us in the first place.

 

Just a few hurried thought. Now back to grading...

Ed

 

 

 

 

  _____  

From: interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu
[mailto:interpretationandmethods-bounces at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu] On Behalf Of
Dvora Yanow
Sent: April 19, 2008 11:54 AM
To: interpretationandmethods at malagigi.cddc.vt.edu
Subject: [Interpretationandmethods] What do we owe our participants?

 

Colleagues, and especially those doing ethnographic, participant-observer,
interview or other interactive research or who are interested in research
regulation such as that conducted by 'institutional review boards' in the
US:

Here's a link to a series of 4 exchanges between a journalist and a social
scientist that begin exploring the question, What do we owe our [to put it
crudely; not their terms] data sources?

http://www.slate.com/id/2183149/entry/2183160/

Venkatesh's comments about the presence of the researcher, for me, stop
short:  he frames his response entirely in terms of having an impact on
others, not in terms of positionality and 'truth claims' -- tho he may be
responding within the frame of Kotlowitz's questions and comments.

Ed Schatz, Tim Pachirat, Dorian Warren, others -- any comments?

Dvora Yanow



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://malagigi.cddc.vt.edu/pipermail/interpretationandmethods/attachments/20080424/031097f8/attachment.html