Moralism and research ethics: a Machiavellian perspective

Hammersley, Martyn; Traianou, Anna

doi:10.1080/13645579.2011.562412

Cited by 66 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Answering this question will engage with how processes more generally can be justified (rather than how they come to be taken as justified ) 11 i This form of the question cannot be lightly dismissed despite attempts to do so, for example, by branding research ethics governance an indefensible form of ‘moralism’ 7. How to answer this question lies at the heart of the current paper.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) Framework for Research Ethics6 is perhaps the paradigmatic example in the UK, and was a key driver for research ethics review of social research within UK universities 7. This document requires researchers to uphold ethical principles including informed consent, confidentiality, avoidance of harm and conflict of interest declarations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

In defence of governance: ethics review and social research

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a growing body of literature that has sought to undermine systems of ethical regulation, and governance more generally, within the social sciences. In this paper, we argue that any general claim for a system of research ethics governance in social research depends on clarifying the nature of the stake that society has in research. We show that certain accounts of this stake-protecting researchers' freedoms; ensuring accountability for resources; safeguarding welfare; and supporting democracy-raise relevant ethical considerations that are reasonably contested. However, these accounts cannot underpin a general claim in favour of, or against, a system of research ethics governance. Instead, we defend governance in social research on the grounds that research, as an institutionalised form of enquiry, is a constitutive element of human flourishing, and that society ought to be concerned with the flourishing of its members. We conclude by considering the governance arrangements that follow from, and are justified by, our arguments.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In defence of governance: ethics review and social research

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There has been increased interest in the potential ethical issues involved in research generally (Hammersley and Traianou 2011), and online consumer research more specifically. Some scholars assert that people's lives are no longer completely private or anonymous (Zwick and Dholakia 2004), while others suggest that consumers have "willingly giv[en] up the naïve awareness that they are not being watched" (Fitchett and Lim 2008, 138).…”

Section: Consumers and Online Research Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Edwards and Mauthner (2002) and Doucet and Mauthner (2002), thinking from caring means focusing on care and responsibility instead of abstract ethical rules about rights, duties or outcomes. Focus is placed on the dialogical and relational interdependence between the researcher and participants, as well as their contextual and situational responsibilities to one another (Hammersley and Traianou 2011). This includes reciprocity and reflexivity through acknowledging, rather than eliding, the researcher's and participants' values, feelings, and emotions, as well as the power issues in researcher-participant relationships.…”

Section: Consumers and Online Research Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, participants wanted to be credited, by researchers, for the content they create on certain social media (Whiteman 2012 Linda's quote highlights the need to make transparent, collaborative and responsible decisions about research participants' subjectivities (Morrow et al 2015). It and also emphasises the need for researchers to act with care and responsibility in co-negotiating dialogical, interdependent relationships with participants (Hammersley and Traianou 2011;Edwards and Mauthner 2002). Indeed, participants openly stated that as long as they are informed of how their content and data will be used, they may even approve of disclosing their real names (as opposed to online pseudonyms) for research purposes, in cases where content is creative.…”

Section: Fluidly Caring About Anonymity and Consentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Consumers' Concerns with How They Are Researched Online

Moraes¹

2017

Business and Professional Ethics Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increased consumer usage of the internet has highlighted a number of problematic online marketing practices, including the use of online platforms to research consumers without full consumer awareness. Despite current debates regarding online research ethics from a marketing perspective, scant research has been published on consumers' concerns with how they are researched online, which is a knowledge gap this paper seeks to address through qualitative research with UK consumers. This is an important yet neglected topic, given that consumer voices have been under-represented in the online research ethics debate over the years. The paper makes a significant theoretical contribution as it extends the ethics of care and responsibility to an online context, which can frame ongoing online research ethics discussions where problematic power asymmetries may exist between researchers and consumers.

show abstract