Competing ethical communities and a researcher's dilemma: The case of a sexual harasser

Qualitative Inquiry

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 292-315

  Dougherty, Debbie S ^a   Atkinson, Joshua ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

^b SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Ethical communities; Ethics; Research and ethics

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645684365     PISSN: 10778004     EISSN: 15527565     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1077800405284369     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Arendell, T. (1997). Reflections on the researcher-researched relationship: A woman interviewing men. Qualitative Sociology, 20, 341-368.
2. Arnett, R. C. (1986). Communication and community: Implications of Martin Buber's dialogue. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
3. Arnett, R. C. (1997). Communication and community in an age of diversity. In J. M. Makau & R. C. Arnett (Eds.), Communication in an age of diversity (pp. 27-47). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
4. Arnett, R. C. (2002). Paulo Freire's revolutionary pedagogy: From a story-centered to a narrative-centered communication ethic. Qualitative Inquiry, 8, 489-510.
5. Babbie, E. (1989). The practice of social research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
6. Berryman-Fink, C., & Riley, K. V. (1997). The role of gender and feminism in perceptions of sexual and sexually harassing communication. Women's Studies in Communication, 20, 24-44.
7. Bloche, M. (1998). Beyond consent. In D. Weisstub (Ed.), Research on human subjects: Ethics, law and social policy (pp. 44-55). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
8. Booth-Butterfield, M. (1989). Perceptions of harassing communication as a function of locus of control, work force participation, and gender. Communication Quarterly, 37, 262-275.
9. Buzzanell, P. M. (2004). Revisiting sexual harassment in academe: Using feminist ethical and sensemaking approaches to analyze macro discourse and micropractices of sexual harassment. In P. M. Buzzanell, H. Sterk, & L. H. Turner (Eds.), Gender in applied contexts (pp. 25-46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10. Charvet, J. (1995). The idea of an ethical community. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
11. Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12. Denzin, N. (1997). Interpretive ethnography: Ethnographic practices for the 21st century. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13. Dougherty, D. (1999). Dialogue through standpoint: Understanding women's and men's standpoints of sexual harassment. Management Communication Quarterly, 12, 436-468.
14. Dougherty, D., & Krone, K. (2000). Overcoming the dichotomy: Cultivating standpoints in organizations through research. Women's Studies in Communication, 23, 16-39.
15. Edwards, R., & Mauthner, M. (2002). Ethics and feminist research: Theory and practice. In M. Mauthner, M. Birch, J. Jessop, & T. Miller (Eds.), Ethics in qualitative research (pp. 14-31). London: Sage.
16. Frey, L., Botan, C., Friedman, P., & Kreps, G. (1991). Investigating communication: An introduction to research methods. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
17. Garlick, R. (1994). Male and female responses to ambiguous instructor behaviors. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 30, 135-158.
18. Gergen, K. J., & Gergen, M. M. (1991). Toward reflexive methodologies. In F. Steier (Ed.), Research and reflexivity (pp. 76-96). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19. Green, G., Barbour, R. S., Barnard, M., & Kitzinger, J. (1993). "Who wears the trousers?" Sexual harassment in research settings. Women's Studies International Forum, 16, 627-637.
20. Hallstein, L. (1999). A postmodern caring: Feminist standpoint theories, revisioned caring, and communication ethics. Western Journal of Communication, 63, 32-56.
21. Hemphill, M. R., & Pfeiffer, A. L. (1986). Sexual spillover in the workplace: Testing the appropriateness of male-female interaction. Women's Studies in Communication, 9, 52-56.
22. Jaggar, A. (1994). Introduction: Living with contradictions. In A. Jaggar (Ed.), Living with contradictions in feminist social ethics (pp. 1-17). Boulder, CO: Westview.
23. Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
24. Lindlof, T., & Taylor, B. (2002). Qualitative communication research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25. Little, M., Jordens, C., & Sayers, E. (2003). Health communication. Communication Abstracts, 26, 485.
26. May, S., & Mumby, D. K. (Eds.). (2005). Engaging organizational communication theory and research: Multiple perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27. Mongeau, P. A., & Blalock, J. (1994). Student evaluations of instructor immediacy and sexually harassing behaviors: An experimental investigation. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 22, 256-272.
28. Muto, J. (1993). "Who's that in my bed?": The strange bedfellows made by the politics of applied qualitative research. In S. Herndon & G. Kreps (Eds.), Qualitative research: Applications in organizational communication (pp. 19-28). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
29. Neuman, W. (1997). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
30. National Institutes of Health. (1995, March 2). Guidelines for the conduct of research involving human subjects at the National Institutes of Health. Retrieved January 17, 2004, from http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/ guidelines.php3
31. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
32. Rachels, J. (2003). The elements of moral philosophy (4th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
33. Reinard, J. (1998). Introduction to communication research. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
34. Reynolds, P. D. (1982). Ethics and social science research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
35. Rothman, J. (1998). Bringing ethics to human experimentation: The American experience. In D. Weisstub (Ed.), Research on human subjects: Ethics, law and social policy (pp. 35-43). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
36. Steier, F. (1991). Introduction: Research as self-reflexivity, self-reflexivity as social process. In F. Steier (Ed.), Research and reflexivity (pp. 1-11). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37. Steiner, L. (1997). A feminist schema for analysis of ethical dilemmas. In F. Casmiek (Ed.), Ethics in intercultural and international communication (pp. 59-88). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
38. Thacker, R. A., & Gohmann, S. F. (1993). Male/female differences in perceptions and effects of hostile environment sexual harassment: Reasonable assumptions? Public Personnel Management, 22, 461-472.
39. Vrinda, D. (2002). Why should a knower care? Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy, 17, 34.
40. Weisstub, D. (1998). Roles in clinical and research ethics. In D. Weisstub (Ed.), Research on human subjects: Ethics, law and social policy (pp. 56-72). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
41. Winfield, R. (2001). Autonomy and normativity. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.