Ethics as Epistemology: Rethinking Research on Children and Families through Care, Reflexivity, and Relational Practice.

IF 1.4 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL
Bhavna Negi, Shashi Shukla, Deepti Gupta, Mila Tuli, Nandita Chaudhary
{"title":"Ethics as Epistemology: Rethinking Research on Children and Families through Care, Reflexivity, and Relational Practice.","authors":"Bhavna Negi, Shashi Shukla, Deepti Gupta, Mila Tuli, Nandita Chaudhary","doi":"10.1007/s12124-026-10017-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research with children and families is shaped by epistemic assumptions, methodological choices and ethical responsibilities. Each of these influence how human lives are rendered knowable. This paper examines the ethical and epistemological foundations of research practice by drawing on empirical work conducted across three distinct contexts from India: street dwelling Pamaria families, children in government school classrooms, and the seasonal life worlds of Agariya salt-pan workers. Across these settings, research emerges not as a neutral process of data collection but as a relational, interpretive and ethically charged encounter. The paper advances four interrelated commitments for research in the human sciences. Ethics is approached as epistemic ground rather than procedural compliance; Care is a foundational stance that structures attentiveness and humility; Methodology is understood as emergent and responsive to fluid and often precarious conditions, and Reflexivity is positioned as an ongoing ethical practice that shapes interpretation and representation. Together these commitments reframe research as a situated process of co-presence and meaning-making rather than extraction. While some of these may already be a part of global research, it is critical to acknowledge that such practices are not the norm across diverse geographical settings. By foregrounding relational ethics, care and epistemic responsibility, the paper contributes to debates in cultural psychology and research on how knowledge about children and families can be produced.</p>","PeriodicalId":50356,"journal":{"name":"Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science","volume":"60 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-026-10017-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research with children and families is shaped by epistemic assumptions, methodological choices and ethical responsibilities. Each of these influence how human lives are rendered knowable. This paper examines the ethical and epistemological foundations of research practice by drawing on empirical work conducted across three distinct contexts from India: street dwelling Pamaria families, children in government school classrooms, and the seasonal life worlds of Agariya salt-pan workers. Across these settings, research emerges not as a neutral process of data collection but as a relational, interpretive and ethically charged encounter. The paper advances four interrelated commitments for research in the human sciences. Ethics is approached as epistemic ground rather than procedural compliance; Care is a foundational stance that structures attentiveness and humility; Methodology is understood as emergent and responsive to fluid and often precarious conditions, and Reflexivity is positioned as an ongoing ethical practice that shapes interpretation and representation. Together these commitments reframe research as a situated process of co-presence and meaning-making rather than extraction. While some of these may already be a part of global research, it is critical to acknowledge that such practices are not the norm across diverse geographical settings. By foregrounding relational ethics, care and epistemic responsibility, the paper contributes to debates in cultural psychology and research on how knowledge about children and families can be produced.

作为认识论的伦理学:通过关怀、反身性和关系实践对儿童和家庭的再思考研究。
对儿童和家庭的研究受到认知假设、方法选择和伦理责任的影响。每一个都影响着人类生命如何变得可知。本文通过借鉴在印度三个不同背景下进行的实证工作,考察了研究实践的伦理和认识论基础:帕玛利亚街头居住家庭、公立学校教室里的儿童以及阿加里亚盐田工人的季节性生活世界。在这些环境中,研究不是作为一个中立的数据收集过程出现的,而是作为一种关系、解释和伦理上的接触。本文提出了人文科学研究的四个相互关联的承诺。伦理被视为认知基础,而非程序遵从;关心是构建专注和谦逊的基本立场;方法论被理解为对流动和不稳定条件的紧急响应,反身性被定位为一种持续的道德实践,它塑造了解释和表现。总之,这些承诺将研究重新定义为一个共同存在和意义创造的过程,而不是提取。虽然其中一些可能已经成为全球研究的一部分,但重要的是要承认,这些做法并不是跨不同地理环境的规范。通过强调关系伦理、关怀和认知责任,本文有助于文化心理学的辩论和关于如何产生关于儿童和家庭的知识的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
16.70%
发文量
66
期刊介绍: IPBS: Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science is an international interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the advancement of basic knowledge in the social and behavioral sciences. IPBS covers such topics as cultural nature of human conduct and its evolutionary history, anthropology, ethology, communication processes between people, and within-- as well as between-- societies. A special focus will be given to integration of perspectives of the social and biological sciences through theoretical models of epigenesis. It contains articles pertaining to theoretical integration of ideas, epistemology of social and biological sciences, and original empirical research articles of general scientific value. History of the social sciences is covered by IPBS in cases relevant for further development of theoretical perspectives and empirical elaborations within the social and biological sciences. IPBS has the goal of integrating knowledge from different areas into a new synthesis of universal social science—overcoming the post-modernist fragmentation of ideas of recent decades.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书