II.2. Evidence from researcher interactions with human participants

Forum rules

To download the working group's draft report, select the "DRAFT REPORT" announcement. Please provide comments or other feedback on the draft via the first topic-thread "Comments on Draft Report ..." You may also continue to view and add to the earlier threads. Please log in first to have your post be attributable to you. Anonymous posts will display only after a delay to allow for administrator review. Contributors agree to the QTD Terms of Use.

Anastasia Shesterinina
Yale University
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:51 am

Introduction

PostMon Sep 05, 2016 8:32 pm

Transparency in human subjects research is one of the most sensitive questions raised by the QTD. Research process transparency and especially data access pose considerable demands for scholars and intersect in complex ways with other values, above all the ethics of research.

In the threads that follow, we invite a broad research community to deliberate about the costs and benefits, to scholars and to the profession, of transparency in human subjects research. We invite contributors to provide examples of concrete challenges and trade-offs from their own and/or other research.

Our focus is on transparency with respect to research produced through interactions with human participants, including interviews, surveys, and participant observation, all of which are widely employed by political scientists across a broad range of issue-areas and in many subfields of the discipline.

Post Reply


Return to “II.2. Evidence from researcher interactions with human participants”