Interrogating the concept of vulnerability in social research ethics
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This paper examines the concept of vulnerability in the context of social research ethics. An ambiguity is noted in use of this term: it may refer to an incapacity to provide informed consent to participate in a research project, or it may imply heightened susceptibility to the risk of harm. It is pointed out that vulnerability is a matter of degree, and that there are different sources and types of harm, which must be taken into account in any judgment about whether additional precautions are required to protect particular categories of research participants. Furthermore, such judgments must be sensitive to the particular context in which research is taking place. This is one of several considerations that raise questions about the desirability of the sort of pre-emptive ethical regulation that has become institutionalized in many countries over the past few decades, a form that is more appropriate to medical rather than to social research. However, this is not to deny that a concern with the vulnerability of research participants is necessary on the part of social researchers. Furthermore, it must be recognized that researchers themselves may be vulnerable to harm in the research process. Finally, some discussion is provided of the way in which a concern with vulnerability can conflict with other considerations that researchers need to take into account in doing their work. The key point is that vulnerability is a complex and controversial concept, and it requires careful handling in thinking about social research ethics.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
By submitting his/her work to the Editorial Board, the author accepts, upon having his/her text recommended for publication, that Diametros applies the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license to the works we publish. Under this license, authors agree to make articles legally available for reuse, without permission or fees. Anyone may read, download, copy, print, distribute or reuse these articles without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author, as long as the author and original source are properly cited. The author holds the copyright without any other restrictions. Full information about CC-BY: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.
How to Cite
References
Alcadipani R., Hodgson, D. (2009), “By Any Means Necessary? Ethnographic Access, Ethics, and the Critical Researcher,” Tamara Journal 7 (4): 127–146.
Behar R. (1996), The Vulnerable Observer: Anthropology That Breaks Your Heart, Beacon, Boston.
Bloor N., Fincham B., Sampson H. (2010), “Unprepared for the Worst: Risks of Harm in Qualitative Research,” Methodological Innovations Online 5 (1): 45–55.
Boldt J. (2019), “The Concept of Vulnerability in Medical Ethics and Philosophy,” Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 14 (1): 1–8.
Borofsky R. (2005), Yanomami: The Fierce Controversy and What We Can Learn From It, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Bracken-Roche D., Bell E., Racine E. (2016), “The ‘Vulnerability’ of Psychiatric Research Participants: Why This Research Ethics Concept Needs To Be Revisited,” The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry/La Revue Canadienne de Psychiatrie 61 (6): 335–339.
Bracken-Roche D., Bell E., Macdonald M.E., Racine E. (2017), “The Concept of ‘Vulnerability’ in Research Ethics: an In-Depth Analysis of Policies and Guidelines,” Health Research Policy and Systems 15 (1): 8.
Bronfenbrenner U. (1952), “Principles of Professional Ethics: Cornell Studies in Social Growth,” The American Psychologist 7: 452–455.
Chantler-Hicks L. (2023), “Coroner calls for regulation of supported housing after London teen stabbed to death by fellow hostel resident,” The Standard, URL = https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-crime-stabbing-coroner-warning-supported-housing-regulation-teenager-hayes-b1063274.html [Accessed 15.04.2023].
Chevalier D. (2015), “‘You Are Not From Around Here, Are You?’: Getting Othered in Participant Observation,” [in:] Contributions from European Symbolic Interactionists: Reflections on Methods, Studies in Symbolic Interaction, Volume 44, T. Müller (ed.), Emerald, Bingley: 1–17.
DeBruin D. (2004), “Looking Beyond the Limitations of ‘Vulnerability’: Reforming Safeguards in Research,” American Journal of Bioethics 4 (3): 76–78.
van Dijk D. (2015), “Mission Impossible: Not Getting Emotionally Involved in Research Among Vulnerable Youth in South Africa,” [in:] Contributions from European Symbolic Interactionists: Reflections on Methods, Studies in Symbolic Interaction, Volume 44, T. Müller (ed.), Emerald, Bingley: 61–77.
Dingwall R. (2012), “How Did We Ever Get into This Mess: the Rise of Ethical Regulation in the Social Sciences,” [in:] Ethics in Social Research, K. Love (ed.), Sage, London: 3–26.
Dingwall R. (2016), “The Social Costs of Ethics Regulation,” [in:] The Ethics Rupture: Exploring Alternatives to Formal Research Ethics Review, W.C. van den Hoonaard, A. Hamilton (eds.), University of Toronto Press, Toronto: 25–42.
Dodds S. (2013), “Dependence, Care, and Vulnerability,” [in:] Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy, C. Mackenzie, W. Rogers, and S. Dodds (eds.), Oxford University Press, New York: 181–204.
Downey H., Hamilton K., Catterall M. (2007), “Researching Vulnerability: What about the Researcher?,” European Journal of Marketing 41: 734–739.
Economic and Social Research Council (2023), “Research with potentially vulnerable people,” URL = https://www.ukri.org/councils/esrc/guidance-for-applicants/research-ethics-guidance/research-with-potentially-vulnerable-people/ [Accessed 07.11.2023].
Farrell A. (ed.) (2005), Ethical Research with Children, Open University Press, Maidenhead.
Feinberg J. (1984), Harm to Others, Oxford University Press, New York.
Gilson E. (2014), The Ethics of Vulnerability, Routledge, London.
Goffman A. (2015), On the Run, Picador, New York.
Goodin R.E. (1985), Protecting the Vulnerable: A Reanalysis of Our Responsibilities, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Gordon B.G. (2020), “Vulnerability in Research: Basic Ethical Concepts and General Approach to Review,” Ochsner Journal 20 (1): 34–38.
Grek S. (2011), “Interviewing the Education Policy Elite in Scotland: a Changing Picture?,” European Educational Research Journal 10 (2): 233–241.
Grek S. (2021), “Researching Education Elites Twenty Years On. Sex, Lies and… Video Meetings,” [in:] Intimate Accounts of Education Policy Research: The Practice of Methods, C. Addey, N. Piattoeva, J. Law (eds.), Routledge, London: 16–31.
Hammersley M. (2009), “Against the Ethicists: on the Evils of Ethical Regulation,” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 12 (3): 211–225.
Hammersley M., Traianou A. (2012), Ethics in Qualitative Research, Sage, London.
Hammersley M., Atkinson P. (2019), Ethnography: Principles in Practice, Routledge, London.
van den Hoonaard W.C. (2011), The Seduction of Ethics: Transforming the Social Sciences, Toronto University Press, Toronto.
van den Hoonaard W.C. (2018), “The Vulnerability of Vulnerability: Why Social Science Researchers Should Abandon the Doctrine of Vulnerability,” [in:] The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Ethics, R. Iphofen, M. Tolich (eds.), Sage, London: 328–345.
van den Hoonaard W.C. (2020), “‘Vulnerability’ as a Concept Captive in Its Own Prison,” [in:] Handbook of Research Ethics and Scientific Integrity, R. Iphofen (ed.), Springer, Cham: 577–588.
Juritzen T.I., Grimen H., Heggen K. (2011), “Protecting Vulnerable Research Participants: A Foucault-Inspired Analysis of Ethics Committees,” Nursing Ethics 18 (5): 640–650.
Kim C.-Y. (2023), “In Control or at the Mercy of Others? The Role of Ethics Regulation and Power Dynamics in Online Data Collection with UK Secondary School Students,” unpublished paper.
Laar A. (2014), “Researcher Vulnerability: An Overlooked Issue in Vulnerability Discourses,” Scientific Research and Essays 9 (16): 737–743.
Lange M.M., Rogers W., Dodds S. (2013), “Vulnerability in Research Ethics: a Way Forward,” Bioethics 27 (6): 333–340.
Lee R.M. (1995), Dangerous Fieldwork, Sage, Thousand Oaks.
Lee R.M., Renzetti C.M. (1990), “The Problems of Researching Sensitive Topics: an Overview and Introduction,” American Behavioral Scientist 33 (5): 510–528.
Lee-Treweek G., Linkogle S. (eds.) (2000), Danger in the Field, Routledge, London.
Levine C., Faden R., Grady C. (2004), “The Limitations of ‘Vulnerability’ as a Protection for Human Research Participants,” The American Journal of Bioethics 4 (3): 44–49.
Liamputtong P. (2007), Researching the Vulnerable: A Guide to Sensitive Research Methods, Sage, London.
Lubet S. (2018), Interrogating Ethnography, Oxford University Press, New York.
Luna F. (2009), “Elucidating the Concept of Vulnerability: Layers Not Labels,” International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 2 (1): 121–139.
Luxardo N., Colombo G., Iglesias G. (2011), “Methodological and Ethical Dilemmas Encountered During Field Research of Family Violence Experienced by Adolescent Women in Buenos Aires,” The Qualitative Report 16 (4): 984–1000.
Lyng S. (1998), “Dangerous Methods: Risk Taking and the Research Process,” [in:] Ethnography on the Edge, J. Ferrell, M.S. Hamm (eds.), Northeastern University Press, Boston MA: 221–251.
MacIntyre A. (1999), Dependent Rational Animals, Open Court, Chicago.
Mackenzie C., Rogers W., Dodds S. (2013a), “Introduction,” [in:] Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy, C. Mackenzie, W. Rogers, S. Dodds (eds.), Oxford University Press, New York: 1–33.
Mackenzie C., Rogers W., Dodds S. (eds.) (2013b), Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy, Oxford University Press, New York.
Maillet P., Mountz A., Williams K. (2017), “Researching Migration and Enforcement in Obscured Places: Practical, Ethical and Methodological Challenges to Fieldwork,” Social & Cultural Geography 18 (7): 927–950.
Mao X. (2019), “A Levinasian Reconstruction of the Political Significance of Vulnerability,” Religions 10 (1): 1–11.
Mitchelson M.L. (2017), “Relational Vulnerability and the Research Process with Former Prisoners in Athens, Georgia (USA),” Social & Cultural Geography 18 (7): 906–926.
Morrow V., Richards M. (1999), “The Ethics of Social Research with Children: An Overview,” Children & Society 10 (2): 90–105.
Neal S., McLaughlin E. (2009), “Researching Up? Interviews, Emotionality and Policy-making Elites,” Journal of Social Policy 38 (4): 689–707.
Nordstrom C., Robben A.C.G.M. (1995), Fieldwork Under Fire, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Nortvedt P. (2003), “Subjectivity and Vulnerability: Reflections on the Foundation of Ethical Sensibility,” Nursing Philosophy 4 (3): 222–230.
Oxford English Dictionary, URL = https://www.oed.com/ [Accessed 15.04.2023].
Ozga J., Gewirtz S. (1994), “Sex, Lies & Audiotape: Interviewing the Education Policy Elites,” [in:] Researching Education Policy: Ethical and Methodological Issues, D. Halpin, B. Troyna (eds.), Falmer Press, London: 127–142.
Pickering L. (2019), “Paternalism and the Ethics of Researching with People Who Use Drugs,” [in:] The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Ethics, R. Iphofen, M. Tolich (eds.), Sage, London: 411–425.
Polychroniou A. (2022), “Towards a Radical Feminist Resignification of Vulnerability: A Critical Juxtaposition of Judith Butler’s Post-Structuralist Philosophy and Martha Fineman’s Legal Theory,” Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory 25 (2): 113–136.
Purcell E. (2013), “Narrative Ethics and Vulnerability: Kristeva and Ricoeur on Interdependence,” Journal of French and Francophone Philosophy – Revue de la philosophie française et de langue française 21 (1): 43–59.
Rogers W., Mackenzie C., Dodds S. (2012), “Why Bioethics Needs a Concept of Vulnerability,” International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 5 (2): 11–38.
Rustin M. (2010), “The Risks of Assessing Ethical Risks,” Sociological Research Online 15 (4): 18.
Sampson H. (2019), “‘Fluid Fields’ and the Dynamics of Risk in Social Research,” Qualitative Research 19 (2): 131–147.
Sampson H., Thomas, M. (2003), “Lone Researchers at Sea: Gender, Risk, and Responsibility,” Qualitative Research 3 (2): 165–189.
Schrag Z.M. (2010), Ethical Imperialism: Institutional Review Boards and the Social Sciences, 1965–2009, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
Schroeder D., Gefenas E. (2009), “Vulnerability: Too Vague and Too Broad?,” Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 18 (2): 113–121.
Sieber J.E. (1992), Planning Ethically Responsible Research: A Guide for Students and Internal Review Boards (Applied Social Research Methods Series), Sage, Thousand Oaks.
Sluka J.A. (2020), “Too Dangerous for Fieldwork? The Challenge of Institutional Risk-management in Primary Research on Conflict, Violence and ‘Terrorism’,” Contemporary Social Science 15 (2): 241–257.
Stark L. (2012), Behind Closed Doors. IRBs and the Making of Ethical Research, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Traianou A. (2023), “Research Ethics and the Vulnerability of Political Elites,” paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER), University of Glasgow, Glasgow 21–25 August.
Traianou A., Hammersley M. (2021), “Is There a Right Not To Be Researched? Is There a Right To Do Research? Some Questions About Informed Consent and the Principle of Autonomy,” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 24 (4): 443–452.
Wallis R. (1977), “The Moral Career of a Research Project,” [in:] Doing Sociological Research, C. Bell, H. Newby (eds.), Allen and Unwin, London: 149–167.
Warden T. (2013), “Feet of Clay: Confronting Emotional Challenges in Ethnographic Fieldwork,” Journal of Organizational Ethnography 2 (2): 150–172.
Wendler D. (2017), “A Pragmatic Analysis of Vulnerability in Clinical Research,” Bioethics 31 (7): 515–525.
Whitney S. (2023), From Oversight to Overkill: Inside the Broken System That Blocks Medical Breakthroughs – and How We Can Fix It, Rivertowns Books, Irvington.
Wiles R. (2003), What are Research Ethics?, Bloomsbury, London.
Wright K. (2015), “Are Children Vulnerable in Research?,” Asian Bioethics Review 7 (2): 201–213.