Brear Michelle
1 University of the Free State, Phuthaditjaba, South Africa.
2 Monash University, Australia.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2018 Oct;13(4):311-322. doi: 10.1177/1556264618761268. Epub 2018 Mar 13.
In community-based participatory research (CBPR), community-level consent is assumed to enhance ethical rigor, when obtained prior to individual informed consent. However, community leaders' permission to conduct research may influence individuals' agency to decline participation. This article presents findings of a Bourdieusian analysis of ethnographic data documenting CBPR in rural Swaziland. The findings reveal that the "symbolic power" of leaders who provide community-level consent constrains individual agency and reproduces existing relations of power, if individual informed consent is simply a procedure. However, when informed consent is a process that introduces notions of autonomy and rights, it can disrupt power relations. Implications for ethical CBPR practice, and ethnography's value for developing theory from real-world research ethics practice, are discussed.
在基于社区的参与式研究(CBPR)中,若在个体知情同意之前获得社区层面的同意,则被认为可增强伦理严谨性。然而,社区领袖对开展研究的许可可能会影响个体拒绝参与的自主性。本文呈现了一项对记录斯威士兰农村地区CBPR的民族志数据进行布迪厄式分析的结果。研究结果表明,如果个体知情同意仅仅是一个程序,那么提供社区层面同意的领袖的“象征权力”会限制个体自主性,并再现现有的权力关系。然而,当知情同意是一个引入自主性和权利观念的过程时,它可以打破权力关系。文中还讨论了对符合伦理的CBPR实践的启示,以及民族志对于从现实世界的研究伦理实践中发展理论的价值。