The Professor’s Dilemma: When Japanese University Research Ethics Committee Guidance Hinders Qualitative Inquiry in Partnership with People
Location
1047
Format Type
Event
Format Type
Paper
Start Date
January 2019
End Date
January 2019
Abstract
Japanese universities have only recently introduced research ethics committees (RECs) in social science disciplines. Without considering the growing literature claiming that qualitative research can be hindered by RECs, my university now requires all postgraduate students to obtain REC approval if they plan to conduct research on human subjects. This places me, as a professor of social work, in a dilemma: although the REC’s guidance can hinder qualitative research projects, I am required to tell my students to follow their guidance. In this paper, I share my experience of helping a student get REC approval and discuss the problems we faced. My concerns can be summarized as follows: first, cultural differences between Japan and the West are ignored in the REC approval process. For example, in a high-context culture such as Japan’s, any written contract between a researcher and a research participant tends to be considered a mere formality. Second, the authoritative approach of RECs can intimidate both researchers and research participants. Third, in my student’s case, her participants were social activists with Alzheimer’s disease who wanted to be involved in the research process as research partners. The REC, however, classified her research participants as vulnerable.
Keywords
Ethics, University Research Ethics Committee, Japan, High-Context Culture, Social Activists
The Professor’s Dilemma: When Japanese University Research Ethics Committee Guidance Hinders Qualitative Inquiry in Partnership with People
1047
Japanese universities have only recently introduced research ethics committees (RECs) in social science disciplines. Without considering the growing literature claiming that qualitative research can be hindered by RECs, my university now requires all postgraduate students to obtain REC approval if they plan to conduct research on human subjects. This places me, as a professor of social work, in a dilemma: although the REC’s guidance can hinder qualitative research projects, I am required to tell my students to follow their guidance. In this paper, I share my experience of helping a student get REC approval and discuss the problems we faced. My concerns can be summarized as follows: first, cultural differences between Japan and the West are ignored in the REC approval process. For example, in a high-context culture such as Japan’s, any written contract between a researcher and a research participant tends to be considered a mere formality. Second, the authoritative approach of RECs can intimidate both researchers and research participants. Third, in my student’s case, her participants were social activists with Alzheimer’s disease who wanted to be involved in the research process as research partners. The REC, however, classified her research participants as vulnerable.
Comments
Breakout Session F