In the Picture or Off the Wall? Ethical Regulation, Research Habitus, and Unpeopled Ethnography

Abstract

This article focuses on two unintended consequences of ethical regulation of social enquiry: the exclusion of participants and, subsequently, a transformation of research practice. An ethnography of corridor life in a large university building forms the basis of the discussion. Originally intended as a pilot for a broader study of informal networks of power, the project’s aim seemed unachievable. External ethical bureaucracy engendered an overdeveloped sensitivity to doing wrong, resulting in a bizarre form of reflexivity. The first consequence of ethical constraint is, paradoxically, the exclusion of participants and their worlds, as research projects are ever more tightly framed. However, forced to reflect on her research habitus, the author discovered that a conventional qualitative research focus on participants’ narrative/biographic accounts and face-to-face interaction can be similarly restrictive. In conclusion, the author discusses how practicing an unpeopled ethnography can open up space for democratic, innovative research within the confines of current ethical regulation.

Research ethics committees: values and power in higher education

“…It is accepted that, ultimately, responsibility for ethical practice lies with researchers (ESRC, 2005 and2010;Richardson and McMullan, 2007 (Truman, 2003;Graham et al, 2007;Hurdley, 2010;Grinyer, 2004) but who cannot participate in the ethical review process unless they make a post hoc formal complaint to the university or to a funding body. Without their involvement it is difficult to understand their experiences, perceptions and interests (Kent et al, 2002:11).…”

“…Although both of us have been interviewed by others, neither has had the experience of substantial involvement in a research project as a participant. In the rare cases where participants' views have been explored (Truman, 2003;Graham et al, 2007;Hurdley, 2010;Grinyer, 2004), it is clear that participants have much to say for themselves and a more nuanced view of ethical practice than is recognised by RECs. Further work needs to be done to explore ways of incorporating participants' opinions into the research governance process.…”

On Being Let Loose in the Field: The Execution of Professional Ethics

“…; Truman ; Graham et al . ; Hurdley ). Said's () work on orientalism is instructive as it highlights how colonial power, conquest and control have shaped the study, research and conceptualisation of colonised persons as others, inferior and deficit.…”

“…250-259 in Hammersley andTraianou 2011). This is further complicated as the notion of what is ethical can be different for different communities (Kent et al 2002;Truman 2003;Graham et al 2007;Hurdley 2010). Said's (1995) work on orientalism is instructive as it highlights how colonial power, conquest and control have shaped the study, research and conceptualisation of colonised persons as others, inferior and deficit.…”

The Power of Corridors: Connecting Doors, Mobilising Materials, Plotting Openness

“…Thefieldnotes, interview recordings, photographs and soundscapes were analysed through a process of listening, looking and reading, during which I identified emergent themes. Due to the limitations of the ethical framework within which the research was carried out, and how this affected data collection, analysis and future research agenda, the methodological discussion deserves space of its own, in this article's ‘twin’ paper (Hurdley, under review; see also Cannella and Lincoln, 2007). The principal point is that, such was the constraint on analysing interview data and face‐to‐face interaction, that my interpretive focus was turned very deliberately towards materiality as organisational practice.…”