Research ethics are an integral part of the research process and are not limited to institutionalized regulatory procedures. While there is no standard formula for ethical reflexivity and practice, the question arises as to how research ethics can be taught as part of a curriculum for qualitative research. The approach taken here is one of learning by doing. Sociology students were trained to pursue a research question and reflect on ethical aspects of their experiences. Their research projects explored the meaning of a trial against a neo-Nazi group in Munich, Germany. In teams, the students conducted qualitative interviews on how members of local communities viewed the trial. The students’ questions and learning experiences regarding research ethics are analyzed. Key topics of discussion include informed consent, researcher subjectivity, and the de/merits of ethics codes and guidelines. Recommendations are drawn for teaching research ethics in qualitative methods training in the future.
BachrachS. (2004). Introduction. In BachrachS. D.KuntzD. (Eds.), Deadly medicine: Creating the master race (pp. 1-13). Washington, DC: U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.
3.
BahnS.WeatherillP. (2012). Qualitative social research: A risky business when it comes to collecting “sensitive” data. Qualitative Research, 13, 19-35.
4.
BaumrindD. (1964). Some thoughts on ethics of research: After reading Milgram’s “Behavioral study of obedience.”American Psychologist, 19, 421-423.
BreuerF.SchreierM. (2010). Lehren und Lernen qualitativer Forschungsmethoden [Teaching and learning qualitative research methods]. In MeyG.MruckK. (Eds.), Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie (pp. 408-420). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
BurawoyM. (2005). For public sociology. American Sociological Review, 70, 4-28.
9.
CannellaG. S.LincolnY. S. (2007). Predatory vs. dialogic ethics: Constructing an illusion or ethical practice as the core of research methods. Qualitative Inquiry, 13, 315-335.
10.
CannellaG. S.LincolnY. S. (2011). Ethics, research regulations and critical social science. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 81-89). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
ChenailR. J. (2012). A compendium of teaching and learning qualitative research resources. Qualitative Research Resource Series, 1(2), 1-28. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/teaching_2012.pdf
13.
ChristiansC. G. (2011). Ethics and politics in qualitative research. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 61-80). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
14.
DeißlerS. (2013). Geschichtslosigkeit als Gegenwartsproblem: Ein Schlaglicht auf die epistemologische Dimension der Debatte um den Ort des Nationalsozialismus in der Soziologie [Lack of history as a contemporary problem: Spotlighting the epistemological dimension of the debate surrounding the place of National Socialism in sociology]. Soziologie, 42, 127-146.
15.
DenzinN. K. (2010). The qualitative manifesto: A call to arms. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
16.
DenzinN. K.GiardinaM. D. (2007). Introduction: Ethical futures in qualitative research. In DenzinN. K.GiardinaM. D. (Eds.), Ethical futures in qualitative research: Decolonizing the politics of knowledge (pp. 9-44). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
17.
EisenhartM.JurowS. (2011). Teaching qualitative research. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 699-714). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
18.
EllisC. (2007). Telling secrets, revealing lives: Relational ethics in research with intimate others. Qualitative Inquiry, 13, 3-29.
19.
FlickU.BauerM. (2004). Qualitative Forschung lehren [Teaching Qualitative Research]. In FlickU.von KardorffE.SteinkeI. (Eds.), Qualitative Forschung. Ein Handbuch (pp. 600-614). Reinbek bei Hamburg, Germany: Rowohlt.
20.
FlickU.von KardorffE.SteinkeI. (2004). Was ist qualitative Forschung? Einleitung und Überblick [What is qualitative research? Introduction and overview]. In FlickU.von KardorffE.SteinkeI. (Eds.), Qualitative Forschung. Ein Handbuch (pp. 13-29). Reinbek bei Hamburg, Germany: Rowohlt.
21.
FlickerS.TraversR.GutaA.McDonaldS.MeagherA. (2007). Ethical dilemmas in community-based participatory research: Recommendations for institutional review boards. Journal of Urban Health, 86, 478-493.
22.
German Sociological Association & Professional Association of German Sociologists. (2014). Ethik-Kodex der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie (DGS) und des Berufsverbands Deutscher Soziologinnen und Soziologen (BDS) [Code of ethics of the German Sociological Association (DGS) and the Professional Association of German Sociologists (BDS)]. Retrieved from http://www.soziologie.de/de/die-dgs/ethik-kommission/ethik-kodex.html
23.
GoffmanE. (1989). On fieldwork. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 18, 123-132.
24.
HopfC. (1991). Zwischen Betrug und Wahrhaftigkeit: Fragen der Forschungsethik in der Soziologie [Between deception and veracity: Questions of research ethics in sociology]. Soziologie, 2, 174-191.
25.
HopfC. (2004). Forschungsethik und qualitative Forschung [Research ethics and qualitative research]. In FlickU.von KardorffE.SteinkeI. (Eds.), Qualitative Forschung. Ein Handbuch (pp. 589-600). Reinbek bei Hamburg, Germany: Rowohlt.
IphofenR. (2011). Ethical decision making in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 11, 443-446.
28.
IslamN. (2000). Research as an act of betrayal: Researching race in an Asian community in Los Angeles. In TwineF. W.WarrenJ. W. (Eds.), Racing research, researching race: Methodological dilemmas in critical race studies (pp. 35-66). New York: New York University Press.
29.
IsraelM.HayI. (2006). Research ethics for social scientists: Between ethical conduct and regulatory compliance. London, England: SAGE.
30.
JonesJ. (1993). Bad blood: The Tuskegee syphilis experiment. New York, NY: Free Press.
KiegelmannM. (2010). Ethik [Ethics]. In MeyG.MruckK. (Eds.), Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie (pp. 382-394). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
KöttigM. (2004). Lebensgeschichten rechtsextrem orientierter Mädchen und junger Frauen: Biographische Verläufe im Kontext der Familien- und Gruppendynamik [Life histories of extreme right-wing girls and young women: Biographical trajectories in the context of family and group dynamics]. Gießen, Germany: Psychosozialverlag.
35.
KruseV. (2013). Soziologie als Fortschrittsprozess? Zur historisch-sozialen Bedingtheit soziologischer Wissensproduktion—Neue Publikationen zur Geschichte der Soziologie [Sociology as a process of progress? Sociohistorical conditioning of knowledge production in sociology - Recent publications on the history of sociology]. Soziologische Revue, 36, 33-43.
36.
LamnekS. (1992). Zur Genesis und Geltung des Deutschen Ethik-Kodex: Eine qualitative Längsschnittuntersuchung [On the generation and acceptance of the German code of ethics: A qualitative longitudinal study]. Sozialwissenschaften und Berufspraxis, 15(3), 249-268.
37.
LamnekS. (1994). Konfliktregelung im außerrechtlichen Raum. Ein Jahr Arbeit der Ethik-Kommission [Managing conflict in the extrajudicial realm. One year of work of the ethics committee]. Soziologie, 2, 22-42.
38.
MacaulayA.DelormierT.McComberA. M.CrossE. J.PotvinL. P.ParadisG.. . . DesrosierS. (1998). Participatory research with native community of Kahnawake creates innovative code of research ethics. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 89, 105-108.
39.
MilgramS. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371-378.
40.
MilgramS. (1964). Issues in the study of obedience: A reply to Baumrind. American Psychologist, 19, 848-852.
41.
OellersC.WegnerE. (2009). Does Germany need a (new) research ethics for the social sciences? (RatSWD Working Paper No. 86). Berlin, Germany: Rat für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsdaten. Retrieved from http://www.ratswd.de/download/RatSWD_WP_2009/RatSWD_WP_86.pdf
PerryK. H. (2011). Ethics, vulnerability and speakers of other languages: How university IRBs (do not) speak to research involving refugee participants. Qualitative Inquiry, 17, 899-912.
44.
RosenthalG. (2011). Interpretative Sozialforschung: Eine Einführung [Interpretative social research: An introduction]. Weinheim, Germany: Juventa
45.
SchefferT.SchmidtR. (2013). Public Sociology: Eine praxeologische Reformulierung [Public sociology: A praxeological reformulation]. Soziologie, 42, 255-270
46.
SchminckeI.SiriJ. (Eds.). (2013). NSU-Terror: Ermittlungen am rechten Abgrund [NSU terror: Investigations at the right-wing abyss]. Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript.
47.
ShehadehN. (2013). Eine Soziologie des Rassismus: Nicht mehr als ein Anästhetikum [A sociology of racism: Nothing more than an anesthetic]. In SchminckeI.SiriJ. (Eds.), NSU-Terror. Ermittlungen am rechten Abgrund (pp. 179-182). Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript.
48.
SiriJ. (2014). Wie aus Menschen,Döner‘ warden: Gedanken zur Analyse einer gesellschaftlichen Ausschreitung [How people are made into “döner”: Thoughts about analyzing a social outrage]. In LöwM. (Ed.), Vielfalt und Zusammenhalt. Dokumentation des 36. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie [CD-Rom]. Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS.
49.
StuweW.TimaeusE. (1980). Bedingungen für Artefakte in Konformitätsexperimenten: Der Milgram-Versuch [Conditions for artifacts in experiments on conformity: The Milgram experiment]. In BungardW. (Ed.), Die gute Versuchsperson denkt nicht (pp. 237-250). Munich, Germany: Urban & Schwarzenberg.
50.
TilleyL.WoodthorpeK. (2011). Is it the end for anonymity as we know it? A critical examination of the ethical principle of anonymity in the context of 21st century demands on the qualitative researcher. Qualitative Research, 11, 197-212.
51.
van den HoonaardW. C. (2002). Introduction: Ethical norming and qualitative research. In van den HoonaardW. C. (Ed.), Walking the tightrope: Ethical issues for qualitative researchers (pp. 3-16). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
52.
van den HoonaardW. C. (2011). The seduction of ethics: Transforming the social sciences. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
53.
von UngerH. (2014). Forschungsethik in der Methodenlehre: Erfahrungen aus einem Soziologie-Seminar [Research ethics in methods training: Experiences from a seminar in sociology]. In von UngerH.NarimaniP.M’BayoR. (Eds.), Forschungsethik in der qualitativen Forschung: Reflexivität, Perspektiven, Positionen [Research ethics in qualitative research: Reflexivity, perspectives, positions] (pp. 209-230). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS.
54.
von UngerH.NarimaniP. (2012). Ethische Reflexivität im Forschungsprozess: Herausforderungen in der Partizipativen Forschung [Ethical reflexivity in the research process: Challenges in participatory research] (WZB Discussion Paper SPI 2012–304). Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung. Retrieved from http://bibliothek.wzb.eu/pdf/2012/i12-304.pdf
55.
von UngerH.NarimaniP.M, BayoR. (2014). Einleitung [Introduction]. In von UngerH.NarimaniP.M’BayoR. (Eds.), Forschungsethik in der qualitativen Forschung: Reflexivität, Perspektiven, Positionen [Research ethics in qualitative research: Reflexivity, perspectives, positions] (pp. 1-14). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS.
