Thinking/writing within and outside the IRB box
Ethical disruptions of data in qualitative research
Prompted by shared discussions about our doctoral research, this paper focuses on two tensions we identified when applying to our university’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). The first tension relates to our discomfort with the assumptions about research participants as articulated in the IRB application. We detail how one of us sought to work with/in but also outside of the constraints we discuss. The second tension takes us into a more experimental space. We write ‘outside’ of the IRB boxes as a form of critique, but also as a way to produce more affirmative ways of thinking about what else can be thought and done within university IRB structures. We focus in particular on the ways that “data” is contained within IRB boxes. We conclude by offering some additional questions that this process of thinking/writing together have generated.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).