Consenting to the Consent Form

Abstract

Grounded in the author's dissertation study, this article presents the negotiations of the formal and informal expectations arising out of interpretations of the consent form. These negotiations disrupt the structure of qualitative inquiry and its associated guidelines for academic rigor, trustworthiness, and transferability. If the understanding of the consent form and its meaning is contingent and permanently deferred, then how does the relationship between the researcher and the researched inform de/colonizing methodologies? Using a vignette, the author explores how member checks and re-presentation are affected by the intersection of colonizing and decolonizing epistemologies within the current context of troubled “scientific” inquiry. She also discusses how a fluid process of consenting, insider-outsider kinship relations between the researcher and the researched, and the inadequacy of Western structures of inquiry open up alternate spaces of discussion for scientific inquiry that is responsive to the space of blurred relationships, messy methodology, and collaborative designs often present in qualitative research.

Keywords

ethics de/colonizing transnational qualitative methods

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abu-Lughod, L. (1992). Writing women's worlds: Bedouin stories. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Behar, R. (1993). Translated woman: Crossing the border with Esperanza's story. Boston: Beacon Press.

Bhattacharya, K. , & Preissle, J. (2003). Ethics and research interviewing. Paper presented at the American Educational Studies Association , Mexico City.

Bloch, M. (2004). A discourse that disciplines, governs, and regulates: The National Research Council's report on scientific research in education . Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 96—110.

Butler, J. (1992). Contingent foundations: Feminism and the question of “postmodernism.” In J. Butler & J. W. Scott (Eds.), Feminists theorize the political (Vol. 167—173, pp. 3—19). New York: Routledge.

Chaudhry, L. (2000). Researching “my people,” researching myself; fragments of a reflexive tale. In E. A. St. Pierre & W. S. Pillow (Eds.), Working the ruins: Feminist poststructural research and practice in education (pp. 96—113). New York: Routledge.

Chow, R. (1992). Postmodern automatons. New York: Routledge.

deMarrais, K.B. (1998). Inside stories: Qualitative research reflections . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Flannery, M.C. (2001). Quilting: A feminist metaphor for scientific inquiry . Qualitative Inquiry, 7(5), 628—645.

10.

Grewal, I. , & Kaplan, C. (Eds.). (1994). Postmodernity and transnational feminist practices. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

11.

Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

12.

Klor de Alva, J.J. (1995). The postcolonization of the (Latin) American experience . In G. Prakash (Ed.), After colonialism: Imperial histories and postcolonial displacements (pp. 241-275). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

13.

Kothari, B. , Vijaya, P.G. , Chand, S. , Sharma, R. , Kalro, A.H. , & Gupta, P. (2000). Savouring Rajasthan's Shiksha Karmi in a remote village: The prospect of dismantling the student-teacher divide. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 19(5), 407—417.

14.

Lather, P. (2004). This IS your father's paradigm: Government intrusion and the case of qualitative research in education. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 15—34.

15.

Lincoln, Y.S. , & Cannella, G.S. (2004). Qualitative research, power, and the radical right. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(2), 175—201.

16.

National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. Committee on scientific principles for education research ( R. J. Shavelson & L. Towne, Eds.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

17.

Minh-ha, T.T. (1989). Woman, native, other: Writing postcoloniality and feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

18.

Mohanty, C.T. (1991). Under Western eyes: Feminist scholarship and colonial discourses. In C. T. Mohanty , A. Russo , & L. Torres (Eds.), Third World women and the politics of feminism (pp. 51—80). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

19.

Narayan, U. (1997). Dislocating cultures: Identities, traditions, and Third-World feminisms. New York: Routledge.

20.

Popkewitz, T.S. , & Brennan, M. (1998). Foucault's challenge: Discourse, knowledge, and power in education. New York: Teachers College Press.

21.

Smith, L.T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. New York: Zed Books.

22.

St. Pierre, E.A. (2004). Refusing alternatives: A science of contestation . Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 130—139.

23.

van den Hoonaard, W.C. (2002). Walking the tightrope: Ethical issues for qualitative researchers. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

24.

Visweswaran, K. (1993). Predicaments of the hyphen. In S.A.D. Collective (Ed.), Our feet walk the sky: Women of the South Asian diaspora (pp. 301—319). San Francisco : Aunt Lute Books.

25.

Visweswaran, K. (1994). Fictions of feminist ethnography. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.