Ethics review and freedom of information requests in qualitative research

Freedom of information (FOI) requests are increasingly used in sociology, criminology and other social science disciplines to examine government practices and processes. University ethical review boards (ERBs) in Canada have not typically subjected researchers’ FOI requests to independent review, al...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kevin Walby, Alex Luscombe
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2018-10-01
Series:Research Ethics Review
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016117750208
id doaj-c61717c7bfac4d80a0b4558541c62ad5
record_format Article
spelling doaj-c61717c7bfac4d80a0b4558541c62ad52020-11-25T03:26:53ZengSAGE PublishingResearch Ethics Review1747-01612047-60942018-10-011410.1177/1747016117750208Ethics review and freedom of information requests in qualitative researchKevin WalbyAlex LuscombeFreedom of information (FOI) requests are increasingly used in sociology, criminology and other social science disciplines to examine government practices and processes. University ethical review boards (ERBs) in Canada have not typically subjected researchers’ FOI requests to independent review, although this may be changing in the United Kingdom and Australia, reflective of what Haggerty calls ‘ethics creep’. Here we present four arguments for why FOI requests in the social sciences should not be subject to formal ethical review by ERBs. These four arguments are: existing, rigorous bureaucratic vetting; double jeopardy; infringement of citizenship rights; and unsuitable ethics paradigm. In the discussion, we reflect on the implications of our analysis for literature on ethical review and qualitative research, and for literature on FOI and government transparency.https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016117750208
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Kevin Walby
Alex Luscombe
spellingShingle Kevin Walby
Alex Luscombe
Ethics review and freedom of information requests in qualitative research
Research Ethics Review
author_facet Kevin Walby
Alex Luscombe
author_sort Kevin Walby
title Ethics review and freedom of information requests in qualitative research
title_short Ethics review and freedom of information requests in qualitative research
title_full Ethics review and freedom of information requests in qualitative research
title_fullStr Ethics review and freedom of information requests in qualitative research
title_full_unstemmed Ethics review and freedom of information requests in qualitative research
title_sort ethics review and freedom of information requests in qualitative research
publisher SAGE Publishing
series Research Ethics Review
issn 1747-0161
2047-6094
publishDate 2018-10-01
description Freedom of information (FOI) requests are increasingly used in sociology, criminology and other social science disciplines to examine government practices and processes. University ethical review boards (ERBs) in Canada have not typically subjected researchers’ FOI requests to independent review, although this may be changing in the United Kingdom and Australia, reflective of what Haggerty calls ‘ethics creep’. Here we present four arguments for why FOI requests in the social sciences should not be subject to formal ethical review by ERBs. These four arguments are: existing, rigorous bureaucratic vetting; double jeopardy; infringement of citizenship rights; and unsuitable ethics paradigm. In the discussion, we reflect on the implications of our analysis for literature on ethical review and qualitative research, and for literature on FOI and government transparency.
url https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016117750208
work_keys_str_mv AT kevinwalby ethicsreviewandfreedomofinformationrequestsinqualitativeresearch
AT alexluscombe ethicsreviewandfreedomofinformationrequestsinqualitativeresearch
_version_ 1724590804690796544