Reflections on the researcher-participant relationship and the ethics of dialogue.
Research concerned with human beings is always an interference of some kind, thus posing ethical dilemmas that need justification of procedures and methodologies. It is especially true in social work when facing mostly sensitive populations and sensitive issues. In the process of conducting a research on the emotional life histories of Israeli men who batter their partners, some serious ethical questions were evoked such as (a) Did the participants really give their consent? (b) What are the limits of the researcher-participants relationship and who decides them? (c) For whom is the study beneficial? and (d) To what degree did the methodology fit with the participants? In this article, I discuss the Socratic idea of truth revealed through dialogue and the idea of reciprocity that was developed in Buber's (1949) ethics of dialogue and Habermas' (1990) communicative ethics. The 3 essential conclusions drawn from the ethical questions raised and the discussion of the thinkers that are mentioned previously are (a) dialogical methodology is ethically justified; (b) dynamic interactions give a more holistic perspective of the human nature, thus enriching the field; and (c) through dialogical methodology both researcher and participant profit from growth of knowledge, which is a key for empowerment and change.
Yassour-Borochowitz
Dalit
D
Department of Sociology and Human Services, Emek Yezreel College, 19300, Israel. dality@yvc.ac.ul
D022126:Access to Information / Q000941:ethics; D035841:Behavioral Research / Q000941:ethics*; D003142:Communication; D017579:Domestic Violence / Q000523:psychology*; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent; D007398:Interpersonal Relations; D007557:Israel; D008297:Male; D012107:Research Design; D035842:Research Subjects; D035844:Researcher-Subject Relations / Q000941:ethics*; D012947:Social Work / Q000941:ethics