Centering Practical Ethics in Writing Studies Research

Concomitant Ethics: Institutional Review Boards and Technical and Professional Communication's Social Justice Turn

“…For example, they noted that the templates and verbiage that IRBs provide for participant–audiences might not be best suited for all prospective participants, especially communities and individuals already marginalized by existing structures. Fortunately, these policies and proposed templates are simply “the floor” (for a discussion of this widely used frame, refer to Phelps, 2021a, pp. 99–100).…”

“…While criticism can be healthy, without effective strategies to engage with the policy and the people who implement it—and attempting to change the federal policy at this point is not an effective approach (Phelps, 2021a)—researchers merely cycle through criticism and perpetuate negative relationships and perceptions of those individuals who are tasked with ensuring the well-being and safety of participants. Whitney (2016) pointed out that IRBs are participant advocates.…”

“…The notion that IRBs are participant advocates, then, better recognizes their role and addresses—as Adams (2019) did in her discussion of feminist research in rhetoric and composition—continued concerns regarding IRBs’ perceived paternalism. This appeal to paternalism has been discharged elsewhere too (e.g., London, 2012; Phelps, 2021a; Saghai, 2018, p. 190). As we move into the 21st century, if TPC scholars are open to working with their IRBs, they may find opportunities to articulate and reflect on their own approach to justice.…”