Renegade Researchers, Radical Religions, Recalcitrant Ethics Boards: Towards the “McDonaldization” of Social Research in North America
Journal: Fieldwork in Religion
Since the rise of the new “ethics culture” in the USA and Canada, there has been a noticeable decline in field research on new, controversial religions and social movements. This study examines some of the new administrative obstacles to research, as experienced by twelve researchers in the course of negotiations with their ethics boards (“REBs” in Canada, “IRBs” in the U.S.) for ethics approval regarding projects involving “human subjects”. The twelve informants’ critiques of their ethics committees, conveyed in interviews, fall into eight categories: (1) unnecessary delays; (2) poor communication skills; (3) excessive concern for potential risk; (4) impeding spontaneity and flexibility in field research; (5) secrecy, immunity and lack of accountability; (6) the hierarchical relationship; (7) REBs exceeding their mandate; (8) disregard for the well-being of human subjects. On the basis of these interviews (and previous studies), the strategic responses of North American researchers to obstacles posed by ethics committees might be analyzed as corresponding to four types: capitulation, adjustment, resistance and reform. While capitulation appears to be a common response among graduate students, resistance appears to be widely practised among experienced researchers, who cooperate deceptively through “benign fabrication” or “gamesmanship”. This study explores the implications of the rise of this rapidly evolving “moral bureaucracy”, criticized by scholars for inhibiting field research through the delaying or halting of research projects, distorting methodologies, and discouraging initiative and originality. Finally, it is argued that the ethical concern for potential harm to human subjects must be balanced with the right of minority groups to be heard; to tell “their side of the story”.
Author: Susan J. Palmer
Adler, Patricia A., and Peter Adler
2002 Do University Lawyers and the Police Define Research Values? In Walking the Tightrope: Ethical Issues for Qualitative Researchers, edited by Will C. van den Hoonaard, 34–42. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Balch, Robert W., and Stephan Langdon
1998 How the Problem of Malfeasance Gets Overlooked in Studies of New Religions: An Examination of the AWARE Study of the Church Universal and Triumphant. In Wolves within the Fold, edited by Anson Shupe, 191–211. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
1984 The Making of a Moonie. London: Blackwell.
2003 The Scientific Study of Religion: You Must be Joking! In Cults and New Religious Movements: A Reader, edited by Lorne L. Dawson, 7–25. Malden, MA and Oxford: Blackwell.
1979 De la séduction. Paris: Éditions Galilée.
Beckford, James A.
1999 The Mass Media and New Religious Movements. In New Religious Movements: Challenge and Response, edited by Jamie Cresswell and Bryan Wilson, 103–20. New York: Routledge.
1972 “The Cult, the Cultic Milieu and Secularization”: A Sociological Yearbook of Religion in Britain. London: SCM Press.
Carter, Lewis F.
1990 Charisma and Control in Rajneeshpuram: The Role of Shared Values in the Creation of a Community. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2019 Falun Gong’s Attack on Academic Freedom. In Enlightened Martyrdom: The Hidden Side of Falun Gong, edited by James R. Lewis, ch. 9. Sheffield: Equinox eBooks.
Feeley, Malcolm M.
2007 Legality, Social Research, and the Challenge of Institutional Review Boards. Law and Society Review. November: 757–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5893.
1980 Histoire de la sexualité I: La volonté de savoir. Paris: Gallimard.
1974 Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper & Row.
Haggerty, Kevin D.
2004 Ethics Creep: Governing Social Science Research in the Name of Ethics Qualitative Sociology 27(4): 391–414.
Kent, Stephen A., and Theresa Krebs
1998 When Scholars Know Sin: Alternative Religions and their Academic Supporters. Skeptic Magazine 6(3): 36–44.
Lewis, James R. (ed.)
2009 Scientology. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331493.001.0001
Lincoln, Yvonna S., and William G. Tierney
2004 Qualitative Research and Institutional Review Boards. Qualitative Inquiry 10(2): 219–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800403262361
Michalos, Alex C.
2001 Ethics Counselors as a New Priesthood. Journal of Business Ethics 29(1/2), Sixth Annual International Conference Promoting Business Ethics, January: 3–17.
Palmer, Susan J.
2001 Caught Up in the Cult Wars: Confessions of a Canadian Researcher. In Misunderstanding Cults, Searching for Objectivity in a Controversial Field, edited by Benjamin Zablocki and Thomas Robbins, 99–122. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442677302-006
Palmer, Susan, and Liselotte Frisk
1947 The Theory and Practice of Gamesmanship, or The Art of Winning Games without Actually Cheating. London: Rupert Hart-Davis.
1993 The McDonaldization of Society. New York: Tower Books.
1988 Cults, Converts and Charisma. New York: Sage.
Shupe, Anson, and Susan E. Darnell
2006 Agents of Discord. New Brunswick and London: Transaction Publishers.
1996 The Historical Roots and Contemporary Tendencies in Participatory Research: Implications for Practice.” In Participatory Research in Health: Issues and Experience, edited by K. de Koning and M. Martin, 19–26. London: Zed Books.
van den Hoonaard, Will C.
2011 The Seduction of Ethics: Transforming the Social Sciences. Toronto: University of Toronto.
1977 The Road to Total Freedom: A Sociological Analysis of Scientology. New York: Columbia University Press.