The ethics of metaphor as a research tool

Abstract

The interpretive and subjective nature of qualitative research has led to growing utilization of arts-based strategies for data collection, analysis and dissemination. The defining characteristic of all such strategies is that they are largely subjective and intended to invoke personal responses in the 'audience.' Following that direction, many qualitative researchers are using metaphor to capture themes emerging from their analysis. In this article, we explore ethical aspects of using metaphor in describing results of qualitative health research and illustrate some of the complexities using a case study of research conducted by one of the authors. Our analysis is designed to sensitize researchers and ethics reviewers to some unique ethical issues inherent to this approach towards data analysis and presentation. Issues related to participant dignity, respect and vulnerability led us to suggest that researchers should take these points into consideration in designing their research and seeking informed consent. Metaphors can be linguistic devices, but also conceptual aids that help develop patterns in analysis or that facilitate re-interpretation. However, there is a thin line between artistic licence for better expression and distorting the participants' actual experience and meanings. Researchers, and reviewers, must be aware of the danger to participant dignity and integrity when aesthetics overshadow actuality. The use of metaphor may also trigger tensions between researchers and participants, especially if member checking is used. The implications of participant withdrawal must be considered and conveyed to ethics reviewers and participants. It is important to have a plan in place for dealing with some of these issues. These should be detailed in the proposal and communicated to participants. Institutional

Den vetenskapande socialtjänsten

“…Anpassningen av steget anonym delning gjordes för att bättre passa studiens sammanhang och förutsättningar. När det gäller de forskningsetiska aspekterna var gruppen av medarbe-tare för liten för att det skulle gå att genomföra en anonymisering med enskilda citat, därav användes metaforer (Manhas & Oberle 2015).…”

“…Tidigare forskning visar att metaforer kan hjälpa till att förstå essensen av varje praktik eller aktör, dess antagande, beteenden och rådande värderingar (Carpenter 2008). Metaforen växer fram organiskt över en längre tid och kan sedan visa på skillnader, likheter och lyfta fram ett centralt tema som berättelsen tolkas utifrån (Manhas & Oberle 2015). I korthet illustrerades metaforen om en roddbåt med ledningen i. Ledningen skulle navigera sig fram mellan de utmaningar som synliggjorts.…”

Conceptualizing Change in Communication Through Metaphor

“…First, important characteristics of scientific research relate to comparability, reliability, and validity, which is why various scholars have called for a standard, reliable, and valid method of metaphor identification (Pragglejaz Group, 2007;Steen et al, 2010b). Second, interpretation and reinterpretation of discourse by researchers may in itself also lead to change, in that researchers' reinterpretation may be different from the experience of the speakers in the discourse (Manhas & Oberle, 2015). To make identification of metaphors as objective as possible, current identification procedures like the Metaphor Identification Procedure (MIP, Pragglejaz Group, 2007) and its updated version MIP-VU (Steen et al, 2010b) suggest using standardized reference works (e.g., dictionaries) as aids when identifying metaphors.…”