ABSTRACT

Although educational researchers will acknowledge that they have a moral imperative to avoid harming their participants whilst carrying out research, it does not necessarily mean that they can describe the nature of what this harm might be or how it can be recognised and so avoided. This is particularly important for those working with vulnerable participants, yet there is limited specificity within the educational literature as to what constitutes harm in such a setting. The article addresses this by de-constructing ethical dilemmas that arose during a research study that was carried out among adult students who had mental health problems, in England. The article outlines how these dilemmas were resolved safely due to preparation before the interviews; the ‘ethical triage’ employed in the interviews; and the reflexivity practised after the interviews. The article proposes that the issue of defining harm and how to recognise and avoid it, needs to be discussed more among educational researchers and those writing ethical guidelines, especially in relation to interviewing vulnerable participants. Not only will this help to better prepare researchers for when ethical dilemmas arise, but will also promote equity and access to participating in research, for those considered to be vulnerable.

摘要

尽管教育研究人员承认他们在进行研究时有避免伤害参与者的道德义务，但这并不一定意味着他们可以描述这种伤害可能是什么的性质或如何识别并避免伤害。这对于那些与弱势参与者一起工作的人来说尤其重要，但教育文献中关于在这种情况下什么构成伤害的具体性有限。这篇文章通过解构在英格兰有心理健康问题的成年学生中进行的一项研究中出现的道德困境来解决这个问题。文章概述了如何通过面试前的准备安全解决这些困境；访谈中采用的“道德分类”；以及面试后的反思。文章提出，需要在教育研究人员和编写道德准则的人员中更多地讨论定义伤害以及如何识别和避免伤害的问题，尤其是在采访弱势参与者时。这不仅有助于研究人员在出现道德困境时更好地做好准备，而且还将促进被视为弱势群体的公平和参与研究的机会。