Culturally responsive relational reflexive ethics in research: the three rs

Abstract

Culturally responsive, Ethics, IRB, Relational, Reflexive,

Negotiating ‘ethically important moments’ in research with young people: reflections of a novice researcher

“…Homan (2005, p. 208), who suggests that 'we recognize a moral position in the established professional guidelines, not by looking at them but by looking through them', advises that rather than starting with formal rules, we ought to begin with the principles or moral values we seek to honour. Lahman et al (2011) stress the importance of researchers thinking through the ethical stance to which they wish to aspire prior to embarking on research (such as virtue ethics, feminist ethics, relational ethics, etc.). They further contend that a researcher's ethics are socially constructed during the various stages of the research process.…”

“…We suggest that a better understanding of the various ethical stances and the thinking behind them may have prepared Claire to make more informed decisions during the ethically important moments she encountered. Lahman et al (2011) propose culturally responsive relational reflexive ethics (CRRRE) as an ethical stance useful to all research in all situations. This amalgam ethical stance is particularly useful as it incorporates various ethical stances and weds these to ongoing ethical reflexivity.…”

“…We find this ethical stance particularly useful for the research context described in this paper. In describing its various elements, Lahman et al (2011) specifically mention that the responsive nature of CRRRE requires that a researcher not shy away from such actions as allowing a participant to leave the research situation, a caution that speaks directly to Moment 2 in this paper. Further, they give an example of a focus group with young people in which one young person's mention that he was gay elicited giggles from other participants.…”

“…Although she had pondered ethics on a personal level in her own life, her engagement with research ethics had not gone beyond an understanding of the standard procedural issues of autonomy, justice, informed consent, confidentiality, right to privacy, deception and protection from harm (Sparkes & Smith, 2014). Neither had she interrogated the various 'aspirational ethical stances' she might take in approaching the research situation, listed by Lahman, Geist, Rodriguez, Graglia, & DeRoche (2011, p. 1400 as including relational ethics, feminist ethics, virtue ethics, narrative ethics, covenantal ethics, ethics in practice, caring ethics and situational ethics. Claire approached the interview situation wishing only to abide by the spirit of procedural ethics, showing respect and humility, and hoped that the young people would be willing to share their thoughts and experiences with her.…”

Culturally Responsive Focus Groups: Reframing the Research Experience to Focus on Participants

“…Morgan (2002), in an article on the development of focus groups, stated, "the goal should be not only to use [the focus group] method, but to develop it as well" (p. 157). Therefore, our purpose in this article is to illuminate the importance of using culturally responsive research practices (Lahman, Geist, Rodriguez, Graglia, & DeRoche, 2011) to guide qualitative methodology and, in particular, for focus group development. Borrowing from the context of teaching and learning, the term culturally responsive, refers to instructional strategies which center "equitable social power or cultural wealth" (Ginsberg & Wlodkowski, 2009, p. 23) within the learning environment.…”