Broadhead Robert S
University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA.
Int J Drug Policy. 2008 Jun;19(3):235-7; discussion 246-7. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2008.02.014.
Serious methodological and ethical flaws are detailed in an ethnographic study of a respondent-driven sampling (RDS) project for drug users in Chicago. The study is also disconnected from the larger social context within which the project operated, and from the existing literature on human-subject problems the author claims he "discovered" about RDS - problems common to traditional outreach projects that researchers have known about and managed successfully for years. Due to an admitted bias in the author's sampling, and an eagerness to accept respondents' claims uncritically, the author's results are not generalizeable to RDS projects operating in other cities, in Chicago itself, or even to the specific project studied.
一项针对芝加哥吸毒者的应答驱动抽样(RDS)项目的人种学研究详细阐述了严重的方法学和伦理缺陷。该研究也与项目运作所处的更广泛社会背景脱节,与作者声称他“发现”的关于RDS的人体研究问题的现有文献脱节——这些问题是传统外展项目常见的问题,研究人员多年来已经了解并成功解决。由于作者抽样中存在公认的偏差,以及急于不加批判地接受受访者的说法,作者的研究结果无法推广到在其他城市开展的RDS项目、芝加哥本身的项目,甚至无法推广到所研究的具体项目。