2010
DOI: 10.1080/09518398.2010.492813
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Everyday ethics: reflections on practice

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
44
0
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
44
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Taken as a whole, they give us an ethical direction in which to aim our on-the-spot decisions. They do not, however, as numerous researchers have attested (Hammersley 2009, Homan 2005, McFee 2009, Rossman and Rallis 2010, Ryen 2004), answer all questions or prepare us for all eventualities. We must, therefore, find a way to uphold the spirit of ethical principles when their particularities fail us.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Taken as a whole, they give us an ethical direction in which to aim our on-the-spot decisions. They do not, however, as numerous researchers have attested (Hammersley 2009, Homan 2005, McFee 2009, Rossman and Rallis 2010, Ryen 2004), answer all questions or prepare us for all eventualities. We must, therefore, find a way to uphold the spirit of ethical principles when their particularities fail us.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…The perspective suggesting that online research presents new contexts to traditional ethical questions rather than entirely new questions is often accepted; such traditional issues include confidentiality, informed consent, and considerations about harm and burden (Eynon, Fry, & Schroeder, 2008). Rossman and Rallis (2010) lament that issues involving ethical research practice have been reduced to compliance with mandates from Institutional Review Boards, or similar organisations, which are often distanced from on-the-ground perspectives in the social and behavioural fields.…”
Section: Research Ethics: Core Issues and Principlesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, the principle of justice ensures that both selection and receipt of benefit should be equitable and that procedures are nonexploitative. Only through a morally reasoned relationship between the evaluator and the participants can the dimensions, parameters, and expectations of these principles be ethically defined, negotiated, and shared (see, for example, Hemmings, 2006;Rallis, 2010;Rallis, Rossman, & Gajda (2007); and Rossman & Rallis, 2010 for further discussion of ethical practice and moral principles).…”
Section: From Data To Use: Trust Transparency and Everyday Ethical mentioning
confidence: 99%