远非中立：研究伦理委员会、跨学科和实地工作

IF 1.5 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY

Anthropology Today Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.1111/1467-8322.12876

Alexandra Halkias

{"title":"远非中立：研究伦理委员会、跨学科和实地工作","authors":"Alexandra Halkias","doi":"10.1111/1467-8322.12876","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p>This article critiques research ethics committees (RECs) for stifling social sciences research through rigid, one-size-fits-all ethics protocols. It highlights how these protocols, rooted in medical science perspectives, ignore the complexities of fieldwork, and prioritize institutional protection over knowledge advancement. The article illustrates the bureaucratic barriers to sociological and gender studies research through a case study involving fieldwork in a Greek hospital, showing how intersecting hierarchies in the field can render REC instruments invasive or moot. This article aims to enrich academic enquiry by acknowledging the diverse realities of research subjects and methodologies.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":46293,"journal":{"name":"Anthropology Today","volume":"40 2","pages":"21-24"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8322.12876","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Far from neutral: Research ethics committees, interdisciplinarity and fieldwork\",\"authors\":\"Alexandra Halkias\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1467-8322.12876\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n <p>This article critiques research ethics committees (RECs) for stifling social sciences research through rigid, one-size-fits-all ethics protocols. It highlights how these protocols, rooted in medical science perspectives, ignore the complexities of fieldwork, and prioritize institutional protection over knowledge advancement. The article illustrates the bureaucratic barriers to sociological and gender studies research through a case study involving fieldwork in a Greek hospital, showing how intersecting hierarchies in the field can render REC instruments invasive or moot. This article aims to enrich academic enquiry by acknowledging the diverse realities of research subjects and methodologies.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46293,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anthropology Today\",\"volume\":\"40 2\",\"pages\":\"21-24\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8322.12876\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anthropology Today\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8322.12876\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anthropology Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8322.12876","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

本文批判了研究伦理委员会（RECs）通过僵化、一刀切的伦理协议扼杀社会科学研究的做法。文章强调了这些植根于医学科学视角的规程如何忽视了实地工作的复杂性，如何将机构保护置于知识进步之上。文章通过一个涉及希腊医院实地调查的案例研究，说明了社会学和性别研究面临的官僚主义障碍，展示了实地调查中相互交织的等级制度如何使 REC 工具具有侵入性或无效性。本文旨在通过承认研究对象和方法的多样性现实，丰富学术研究。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Far from neutral: Research ethics committees, interdisciplinarity and fieldwork

This article critiques research ethics committees (RECs) for stifling social sciences research through rigid, one-size-fits-all ethics protocols. It highlights how these protocols, rooted in medical science perspectives, ignore the complexities of fieldwork, and prioritize institutional protection over knowledge advancement. The article illustrates the bureaucratic barriers to sociological and gender studies research through a case study involving fieldwork in a Greek hospital, showing how intersecting hierarchies in the field can render REC instruments invasive or moot. This article aims to enrich academic enquiry by acknowledging the diverse realities of research subjects and methodologies.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Anthropology Today ANTHROPOLOGY-

CiteScore

2.30

自引率

7.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Anthropology Today is a bimonthly publication which aims to provide a forum for the application of anthropological analysis to public and topical issues, while reflecting the breadth of interests within the discipline of anthropology. It is also committed to promoting debate at the interface between anthropology and areas of applied knowledge such as education, medicine, development etc. as well as that between anthropology and other academic disciplines. Anthropology Today encourages submissions on a wide range of topics, consistent with these aims. Anthropology Today is an international journal both in the scope of issues it covers and in the sources it draws from.