Critical Prison Research and University Research Ethics Boards: Homogenization of Inquiry and Policing of Carceral Knowledge

This article illustrates how authoritative regulatory practices that research ethics boards may deploy when assessing non-traditional social research may pave the way to a homogenization of inquiry and forms of policing of knowledge. The authors sought institutional ethics clearance from multiple re...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors:	Gillian Balfour, Joane Martel
Format:	Article
Language:	English
Published:	Oñati International Institute for the Sociology of Law 2018-06-01
Series:	Oñati Socio-Legal Series
Subjects:	Canada critical research Indigenous prison research ethics Canadá investigación crítica indígenas cárcel ética de la investigación
Online Access:	http://opo.iisj.net/index.php/osls/article/view/903

id	doaj-f8e0d0b76a6b413c84263617eead80f8
record_format	Article
spelling	doaj-f8e0d0b76a6b413c84263617eead80f82020-11-25T00:39:53ZengOñati International Institute for the Sociology of LawOñati Socio-Legal Series2079-59712018-06-0182225246750Critical Prison Research and University Research Ethics Boards: Homogenization of Inquiry and Policing of Carceral KnowledgeGillian Balfour0Joane Martel1Trent UniversityUniversité LavalThis article illustrates how authoritative regulatory practices that research ethics boards may deploy when assessing non-traditional social research may pave the way to a homogenization of inquiry and forms of policing of knowledge. The authors sought institutional ethics clearance from multiple research ethics boards in the case of a critically-oriented participatory action-based study with formerly incarcerated persons in Canada. Evidence is provided from two case studies. Two unexpected challenges were encountered from research ethics board members. The first challenge was related to the board’s stereotypical bias about the violent potential of former prisoners (as co-researchers and participants). The second challenge was related to an overly cautious interpretation of federal ethical guidelines leading to the exclusion of Indigenous peoples from the project. Both challenges have in common that they point to research ethics boards’ possible role in the policing of knowledge which may jeopardize researchers’ ability to engage in critical scholarship. <br /><br /> El artículo ilustra las prácticas regulatorias autoritarias que los comités de ética en investigación pueden adoptar, y cómo éstas allanan el camino a la homogeneización de las indagaciones y a la vigilancia sobre la producción de conocimiento. Se exhiben pruebas de dos estudios de caso en los cuales los miembros del comité se toparon con situaciones que no esperaban. La primera estaba relacionada con el sesgo típico de los comités sobre el potencial violento de antiguos reclusos, y la segunda, con una interpretación excesivamente prudente de directrices éticas federales, lo cual desembocó en la exclusión de personas indígenas del proyecto. Ambas situaciones señalan al posible rol de los comités de ética como vigilantes de la producción de conocimiento, algo que podría poner en peligro la capacidad de los investigadores para realizar una labor académica crítica.<br /><br /> <strong>DOWNLOAD THIS PAPER FROM SSRN:</strong> <a href="http://ssrn.com/abstract=3139559" target="_blank">http://ssrn.com/abstract=3139559</a>http://opo.iisj.net/index.php/osls/article/view/903Canadacritical researchIndigenousprisonresearch ethicsCanadáinvestigación críticaindígenascárcelética de la investigación
collection	DOAJ
language	English
format	Article
sources	DOAJ
author	Gillian Balfour Joane Martel
spellingShingle	Gillian Balfour Joane Martel Critical Prison Research and University Research Ethics Boards: Homogenization of Inquiry and Policing of Carceral Knowledge Oñati Socio-Legal Series Canada critical research Indigenous prison research ethics Canadá investigación crítica indígenas cárcel ética de la investigación
author_facet	Gillian Balfour Joane Martel
author_sort	Gillian Balfour
title	Critical Prison Research and University Research Ethics Boards: Homogenization of Inquiry and Policing of Carceral Knowledge
title_short	Critical Prison Research and University Research Ethics Boards: Homogenization of Inquiry and Policing of Carceral Knowledge
title_full	Critical Prison Research and University Research Ethics Boards: Homogenization of Inquiry and Policing of Carceral Knowledge
title_fullStr	Critical Prison Research and University Research Ethics Boards: Homogenization of Inquiry and Policing of Carceral Knowledge
title_full_unstemmed	Critical Prison Research and University Research Ethics Boards: Homogenization of Inquiry and Policing of Carceral Knowledge
title_sort	critical prison research and university research ethics boards: homogenization of inquiry and policing of carceral knowledge
publisher	Oñati International Institute for the Sociology of Law
series	Oñati Socio-Legal Series
issn	2079-5971
publishDate	2018-06-01
description	This article illustrates how authoritative regulatory practices that research ethics boards may deploy when assessing non-traditional social research may pave the way to a homogenization of inquiry and forms of policing of knowledge. The authors sought institutional ethics clearance from multiple research ethics boards in the case of a critically-oriented participatory action-based study with formerly incarcerated persons in Canada. Evidence is provided from two case studies. Two unexpected challenges were encountered from research ethics board members. The first challenge was related to the board’s stereotypical bias about the violent potential of former prisoners (as co-researchers and participants). The second challenge was related to an overly cautious interpretation of federal ethical guidelines leading to the exclusion of Indigenous peoples from the project. Both challenges have in common that they point to research ethics boards’ possible role in the policing of knowledge which may jeopardize researchers’ ability to engage in critical scholarship. <br /><br /> El artículo ilustra las prácticas regulatorias autoritarias que los comités de ética en investigación pueden adoptar, y cómo éstas allanan el camino a la homogeneización de las indagaciones y a la vigilancia sobre la producción de conocimiento. Se exhiben pruebas de dos estudios de caso en los cuales los miembros del comité se toparon con situaciones que no esperaban. La primera estaba relacionada con el sesgo típico de los comités sobre el potencial violento de antiguos reclusos, y la segunda, con una interpretación excesivamente prudente de directrices éticas federales, lo cual desembocó en la exclusión de personas indígenas del proyecto. Ambas situaciones señalan al posible rol de los comités de ética como vigilantes de la producción de conocimiento, algo que podría poner en peligro la capacidad de los investigadores para realizar una labor académica crítica.<br /><br /> <strong>DOWNLOAD THIS PAPER FROM SSRN:</strong> <a href="http://ssrn.com/abstract=3139559" target="_blank">http://ssrn.com/abstract=3139559</a>
topic	Canada critical research Indigenous prison research ethics Canadá investigación crítica indígenas cárcel ética de la investigación
url	http://opo.iisj.net/index.php/osls/article/view/903
work_keys_str_mv	AT gillianbalfour criticalprisonresearchanduniversityresearchethicsboardshomogenizationofinquiryandpolicingofcarceralknowledge AT joanemartel criticalprisonresearchanduniversityresearchethicsboardshomogenizationofinquiryandpolicingofcarceralknowledge
_version_	1725292592752492544

Critical Prison Research and University Research Ethics Boards: Homogenization of Inquiry and Policing of Carceral Knowledge

Similar Items