Komplekse hensyn – mesoetiske udfordringer og håndteringer

Abstract

I denne artikel introduceres det forskningsetiske begreb mesoetik, der omhandler hensynet til de involverede organisationer og fag- og professionsgruppers omdømme, interesser og fremtidige virke. Begrebet er centralt ift. sociologisk og socialvidenskabelig forskning, da denne ofte fokuserer på organisationer og professioners virke. Det argumenteres, at inddragelse af et mesoetisk perspektiv kan bidrage til en mere detaljeret forståelse af de etiske hensyns kompleksitet ift. de berørte organisationer og professioner. Mesoetik supplerer de forskningsetiske begreber mikroetik (hensynet til de involverede enkeltpersoner) og makroetik (opmærksomheden omkring forskningens samfundsmæssige konsekvenser). Artiklen tager afsæt i det centrale og fortsat udbredte forskningsetiske princip »hensynet til de berørte parter«, samt idealet om uvildig og kritisk forskning. Begrebet og fænomenet mesoetik udfoldes gennem en kvalitativ analyse af socialvidenskabelige forskerstuderendes forskningsetiske praksis. Artiklen bidrager med ny viden ved at definere og analysere mesoetik i kvalitativ forskning, samt give indblik i socialvidenskabelige forskerstuderendes forskningsetiske praksis.

Negotiating conflicts of interest: working with multiple stakeholders

“…Finally, many of the doctoral students had thought carefully about how to present their critical findings in order not to expose or harm their stakeholders. They displayed the ambition to show a high level of thoroughness and transparency (Kristensen, 2018). For some this also involved an explicit strategy of seeking to be recognised as competent researchers or, conversely, avoiding being seen as too “critical” or “difficult”, and thus potentially complicating their future careers.…”

“…Although being potentially vulnerable in terms of position and status in the university system, the research participants are also knowledgeable and capable individuals with agency and power (Kristensen, 2018). The complex power and status relationship between the participants and I has been carefully negotiated to respect their personal and professional integrity whilst also fulfilling the aim of my research project (Kristensen, 2018). The participants’ identity has been anonymised and pseudonyms are used when mentioning names.…”

“…Hence, unlike in the abovementioned countries, Danish qualitative social research milieus are largely self-regulating. Our practice is based on methodological knowledge, historical practice and academic debate within our research fields (Hastrup, 2009), as well as international guidelines and research collaboration (Kristensen, 2018). Concurrently, researchers in Denmark are, of course, expected to adhere to other relevant legislation and norms for thorough and sound research.…”

“…Within critical, contemporary social research, qualitative research is seen as a socially situated activity formed in interaction with research participants. It often concerns personal and politically sensitive topics in areas subject to public attention (Vedel-Petersen, 1996; Kristensen, 2018), that is contested policy domains (Saltmarsh et al , 2011; Lancaster, 2017). It is neither seen as value neutral (Nyberg and Delaney, 2014) nor seen as conducted in a vacuum (Wallace and Sheldon, 2015).…”

Research ethics and organizations: the neglected ethics of organizational ethnography

“…The research may also involve critique and generate findings that potentially trouble and challenge those whom we study (Weinberg, 2002;Nyberg and Delaney, 2014). This is especially the case in so far as we often investigate socially and politically sensitive issues within contested policy domains, such as health, education and social work (Kristensen, 2018). Within these research fields, there are often different and potentially conflicting interests at play, and the stakes of the organizations and their members are high (Baarts, 2009;Bantjes and Swartz, 2018).…”