首页> 外文期刊>Developing world bioethics >GETTING PERSONAL: ETHICS AND IDENTITY IN GLOBAL HEALTH RESEARCH
【24h】

GETTING PERSONAL: ETHICS AND IDENTITY IN GLOBAL HEALTH RESEARCH

机译:获得个人:全球卫生研究中的道德和身份

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Researcher identity affects global health research in profound and complex ways. Anthropologists in particular have led the way in portraying the multiple, and sometimes tension-generating, identities that researchers ascribe to themselves, or have ascribed to them, in their places of research. However, the central importance of researcher identity in the ethical conduct of global health research has yet to be fully appreciated. The capacity of researchers to respond effectively to the ethical tensions sur-rounding their identities is hampered by lack of conceptual clarity, as to the nature and scope of the issues involved. This paper strives to provide some clarification of these ethical tensions by considering researcher identity from the perspective of (1) Guillemin and Heggen's (2009) key distinction between procedural ethics and ethics in practice, and (2) our own distinction between perceptions of identity that are either symmetrical or asymmetrical, with the potential to shift research relationships toward greater or lesser ethical harmony. Discussion of these concepts is supported with ethnographic examples from relevant literature and from our own (United States (US) Government-funded) research in South Africa. A preliminary set of recommendations is provided in an effort to equip researchers with a greater sense of organization and control over the ethics of researcher identity. The paper concludes that the complex construction of researcher identity needs to be central among the ethical concerns of global health researchers, and that the conceptual tools discussed in the paper are a useful starting point for better organizing and acting on these ethical concerns.
机译:研究人员身份以深刻和复杂的方式影响全球健康研究。特别是人类学家尤其导致描绘了研究人员归于自己的多个,有时张力产生的身份,或者在他们的研究之地归于他们。然而,研究人员身份在全球卫生研究道德行为中的核心重要性尚未得到完全赞赏。通过缺乏概念清晰度,研究人员有效地应对伦理张力的伦理紧张局势的能力受到概念清晰度的阻碍,以及所涉及的问题的性质和范围。本文通过考虑(1)Guillemin和Heggen(2009)的角度来看,通过在实践中程序伦理和道德的关键区分的角度来看,通过考虑研究员认同来提供一些阐释这些道德紧张局势,(2)我们自己的身份看法之间的差异是对称的或不对称的,有可能转变研究关系更大或更小的道德和谐。对这些概念的讨论得到了来自相关文献的民族志法和我们自己的(美国(美国)政府资助的)研究。提供了一套初步的建议,以努力为研究人员提供更大的组织感和控制研究员身份的道德。本文的结论是,研究人员认同的复杂建设需要成为全球卫生研究人员的道德问题的核心,而本文讨论的概念工具是更好地组织和行动这些道德问题的有用起点。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号