I.2. Research Ethics: Human Subjects and Research Openness

Forum rules

We encourage contributors to the Discussion Board to publicly identify by registering and logging in prior to posting. However, if you prefer, you may post anonymously (i.e. without having your post be attributed to you) by posting without logging in. Anonymous posts will display only after a delay to allow for administrator review. Contributors agree to the QTD Terms of Use.

Instructions
To participate, you may either post a contribution to an existing discussion by selecting the thread for that topic (and then click on "Post Reply") or start a new thread by clicking on "New Topic" below.

For instructions on how to follow a discussion thread by email, click here.

Elliot Posner
Case Western Reserve University
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 10:42 pm

Openness and Perceptions of Researcher Ties to US Intelligence and Other Agenices

PostSun Nov 06, 2016 4:09 pm

Some contributors (quoted below) have voiced concerns about the impact of increased openness on participants’ perceptions of researcher ties to US intelligence and other agencies. Is this something we should be thinking about here? What are the ethical issues?

A guest contributor wrote (on Tuesday, October 18, 2016 in II.2 Evidence from research interactions with human participants, “How and when can we make available, in part or in full, evidence from research with human participants?): “These concerns are all the more salient when a U.S.-based researcher conducts fieldwork in the Global South. Such data sharing requirements would only feed into the perception that one’s research is being conducted for the purposes of U.S. foreign policy or to gather intelligence for the CIA.”

Another guest contributor wrote (on October 25, 2016 in another thread [“Human Subjects and Research Openness: Tensions and Dilemmas”] of this forum): “Finally, I feel that a related issue of transparency in research regards the use of scholarly research from the Middle East. Extensive US involvement in the region means American researchers, particularly white boys with heavy accents in Arabic, are assumed to be CIA. It does not help that some scholars in the US do advise the US intelligence community. The discipline needs more discussion of these issues.”

Post Reply


Return to “I.2. Research Ethics: Human Subjects and Research Openness”