Perhaps the most unique feature of ethnographic fieldwork is the distinctive form of relationality it entails, where the ethnographer's identity as a researcher is not fixed in the way typical of most other forms of research. In this paper, I explore how this ‘undesigned relationality’ is understood, both in procedural ethics frameworks and by the different disciplines that have come to claim a stake in the ‘method’ itself. Demonstrating that the ethical issues it entails are primarily conceptualized via the lens of the ‘dual role’, I use this as a means of exploring the ideal relationship between researcher and subject that procedural ethics frameworks are premised upon. I go on to explore the epistemological differences in ways that ethnographers themselves understand and respond to the multiple forms of relationality that characterize fieldwork and the challenge this poses to the possibility of a pan-disciplinary consensus on ethnographic research ethics.
Bell K (2014) Resisting commensurability: against informed consent as an anthropological virtue. American Anthropologist 116(3): 511–522.
2.
Bell K (2016) The more things change, the more they stay the same: the TCPS2 and the institutional ethical oversight of social science research in Canada. In van den Hoonaard W and Hamilton A (eds) The Ethics Rupture. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, pp. 189-205.
3.
Bell K (2017) Health and Other Unassailable Values: Reconfigurations of Health, Evidence and Ethics. London: Routledge.
4.
Bell K (2018) Whatever happened to the ‘social’ science in Social Science & Medicine? On golden anniversaries and gold standards. Social Science & Medicine 214: 162–166.
5.
BernardHR (2013) Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 2nd edn, Los Angeles: SAGE.
6.
BieloJS (2015) Anthropology of Religion: The Basics, London: Routledge.
7.
BlackmanS (2007) ‘Hidden ethnography’: Crossing emotional borders in qualitative accounts of young people's lives. Sociology41(4): 699–716.
8.
BlommaertJJieD (2010) Ethnographic Fieldwork: A Beginner's Guide, Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
9.
BoskCL (2001) Irony, ethnography, and informed consent. In: HoffmasterB (ed.) Bioethics in Social Context, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, pp. 199–220.
10.
BriggsCL (1986) Learning How to Ask: A Sociolinguistic Appraisal of the Role of the Interview in Social Science Research, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11.
BrinkPJEdgecombeN (2003) What is becoming of ethnography?Qualitative Health Research13(7): 1028–1030.
12.
CarrierJ (2006) Fieldwork on urban male homosexuality in Mexico. In: HobbsBWrightR (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Fieldwork, London: SAGE, pp. 171–184.
13.
CassellJJacobsSE (1987) Handbook on Ethical Issues in Anthropology, Washington, DC: American Anthropological Association.
14.
CastañedaQE (2007) Ethnography in the forest: An analysis of ethics in the morals of anthropology. Cultural Anthropology21(1): 121–145.
15.
ChurchillLR (1980) Physician-investigator/patient-subject: Exploring the logic and the tension. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy5(3): 215–224.
16.
CicourelAV (1964) Method and Measurement in Sociology, Glencoe: Free Press of Glencoe.
17.
CicourelAV (1973) Cognitive Sociology: Language and Meaning in Social Interaction, Middlesex: Penguin.
18.
CIHR, NSERC & SSHRC (Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada) (2014) Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans. Ottawa: Secretariat on Responsible Conduct of Research.
19.
CliffordJMarcusGE (1986) Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, Berkeley: University of California Press.
20.
DubishJ (1995) Lovers in the field: Sex, dominance, and the female anthropologist. In: KulickDWillsonM (eds) Taboo: Sex, Identity and Erotic Subjectivity in Anthropological Fieldwork, London: Routledge, pp. 29–50.
21.
Evans-PritchardEE (1973) Some reminiscences and reflections on fieldwork. Journal of the Anthropological Society of Oxford4(1): 1–12.
22.
FabianJ (1983) Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes Its Object, New York: Columbia University Press.
23.
FabianJ (2007) Memory Against Culture: Arguments and Reminders, Durham: Duke University Press.
24.
FineGA (1993) Ten lies of ethnography: Moral dilemmas of field research. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography22(3): 267–294.
25.
GalliherJBrekhusWKeysDP (2004) Laud Humphreys: Prophet of Homosexuality and Sociology, Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
26.
GarfinkelH (1967) Studies in Ethnomethodology, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
27.
GarfinkelH (2002) Ethnomethodology's Program: Working out Durkheim's Aphorism, Lanham: Rowan and Littlefield.
28.
Gay y BlascoP (2011) Agata's story: Singular lives and the reach of the ‘Gitano law’. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (NS)17: 445–461.
29.
Gay y BlascoP (2017) Doubts, compromises, and ideals: Attempting a reciprocal life story. Anthropology and Humanism42(1): 91–108.
30.
Gay y BlascoPHernándezLDLC (2012) Friendship, anthropology. Anthropology and Humanism37(1): 1–14.
31.
GeertzC (1968) Thinking as a moral act: Ethical dimensions of anthropological fieldwork in the New States. The Antioch Review28(2): 34–59.
32.
GoodBJ (1994) Medicine, Rationality and Experience: An Anthropological Perspective, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33.
HumphreysL (1970) Tearoom Trade: Homosexual Encounters in Public Places, London: Falling Wall Press.
34.
KapfererB (2007) Anthropology and the dialectic of the Enlightenment: A discourse on the definition and ideals of a threatened discipline. The Australian Journal of Anthropology18(1): 72–96.
35.
KatzJCsordasTJ (2003) Phenomenological ethnography in sociology and anthropology. Ethnography4(3): 275–88.
36.
KulickDWillsonM (1995) Taboo: Sex, Identity and Erotic Subjectivity in Anthropological Fieldwork, London: Routledge.
37.
LedermanR (2006) The perils of working at home: IRB ‘mission creep’ as context and content for an ethnography of disciplinary knowledges. American Ethnologist33(4): 482–491.
38.
LedermanR (2007) Comparative ‘research’: A modest proposal concerning the object of ethics regulation. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review30(2): 305–327.
39.
LedermanR (2013) Ethics: Practices, principles, and comparative perspectives. In: CarrierJGGewertzDB (eds) The Handbook of Sociocultural Anthropology, London: Bloomsbury, pp. 588–611.
40.
LedermanR (2016) Fieldwork double-bound in human research ethics review: Disciplinary competence, or regulatory compliance and the muting of disciplinary values. In: Van Den HoonaardWCHamiltonA (eds) The Ethics Rupture: Exploring Alternatives to Formal Research Ethics Review, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, pp. 43–72.
41.
Lederman R (2017) Deception and objectivity in the social and behavioral sciences. Paper prepared for the Fakery, Insincerity, and the Anthropology of Humbuggery workshop, convened by Giovanni Da Col and Theodoros Kyriakides. Capri, Italy, September 2017.
42.
MagoldaP (2000) Being at the wrong place, wrong time: Rethinking trust in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice39(3): 138–145.
43.
MannayDMorganM (2015) Doing ethnography or applying a qualitative technique? Reflections from the ‘waiting field’. Qualitative Research15(2): 166–182.
44.
MatebeniZ (2014) My best participants' informed consent. In: PoselDRossFC (eds) Ethical Quandaries in Social Research, Capetown, South Africa: HSRC Press, pp. 111–124.
45.
MoermanD (2002) Meaning, Medicine and the ‘Placebo Efect’, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46.
NicholsJ (2015) The Canadian model: A potential solution to institutional review board overreach. Journal of Academic Freedom6: 1–13.
47.
OakleyA (1981) Interviewing women: A contradiction in terms? In: RobertsH (ed.) Doing Feminist Research, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 30–61.
48.
O'Connell DavidsonJ (2008) If no means no, does yes mean yes? Consenting to research intimacies. History of the Human Sciences21: 49–67.
PRE (Panel on Research Ethics) (2014) Course on Research Ethics. Retrieved from: http://tcps2core.ca/welcome.
51.
PrusR (1996) Symbolic Interaction and Ethnographic Research: Intersubjectivity and the Study of Human Lived Experience, Albany: State University of New York Press.
52.
RynkiewichMASpradleyJP (1976) Ethics and Anthropology: Dilemmas in Field Work, New York: Wiley.
53.
SimpsonB (2011) Ethical moments: Future directions for ethical review and ethnography. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute17: 377–393.
54.
SimpsonE (2016) Is anthropology legal? Earthquakes, blitzkrieg, and ethical futures. Focaal: Journal of Global and Historical Anthropology74: 113–128.
55.
StaceyJ (1988) Can there be a feminist ethnography?Women's Studies International Forum11(1): 21–27.
56.
TavoryITimmermansS (2009) Two cases of ethnography: Grounded theory and the extended case method. Ethnography10(3): 243–263.
57.
TolichMSmithBP (2014) Evolving ethics envy: New Zealand sociologists reading the Canadian Tri-Council Policy Statement: ‘Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans’. Kōtuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences9(1): 1–10.
58.
WardleJGay y BlascoP (2011) Ethnography and an ethnography in the human conversation. Anthropologica53(1): 117–127.
59.
WaxML (1977) On fieldworkers and those exposed to fieldwork: Federal regulations and moral issues. Human Organization36(3): 321–328.
60.
WaxML (1995) Informed consent in applied research: A comment. Human Organization54(3): 330–331.
61.
WeemsL (2006) Unsettling politics, locating ethics: Representations of reciprocity in postpositivist inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry12(5): 994–110.
62.
WolcottHF (1999) Ethnography: A Way of Seeing, Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
63.
WolpePR (1998) The triumph of autonomy in American bioethics: a sociological view. In: DeVriesRSubediJ (eds) Bioethics and Society: Constructing the Ethical Enterprise, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, pp. 38–59.
64.
WynnLL (2011) Ethnographers' experiences of institutional ethics oversight: Results from a quantitative and qualitative survey. Journal of Policy History23(1): 94–114.
