Qualitative research in sport sciences: is the biomedical ethics model applicable?

Steve Olivier, Lesley Fishwick

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Research in sports science has historically been grounded in positivist traditions. This means that ethics committees may not be adequately sensitized to the ethical problems posed by qualitative research. Qualitative researchers may thus be disadvantaged in the research approval process. Our paper argues that the traditional biomedical ethics model may not always be appropriate in evaluating qualitative proposals. Due to the nature of its methods, qualitative work may have emergent and ongoing ethical issues that require consultation and resolution. We argue that, contrary to the judgements of many ethics committees, methods such as deception and covert observation can be justified if certain conditions are met. In reaffirming a commitment to the overarching ethical principle of respect for persons, we conclude that researchers need to recognize and plan for ethical issues in their work. Likewise, ethics committees need to recognize that qualitative work poses unique problems, but that these need not necessarily be insurmountable obstacles to project approval.
Original languageEnglish
JournalForum, Qualitative Social Research
Volume4
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

sports science
qualitative research
moral philosophy
qualitative method
respect
commitment
human being

Keywords

  • ethics
  • quantitative research
  • qualitative research
  • ethics committees

Cite this

@article{2c0cb1aec8c043efa011a0135191fb9b,
title = "Qualitative research in sport sciences: is the biomedical ethics model applicable?",
abstract = "Research in sports science has historically been grounded in positivist traditions. This means that ethics committees may not be adequately sensitized to the ethical problems posed by qualitative research. Qualitative researchers may thus be disadvantaged in the research approval process. Our paper argues that the traditional biomedical ethics model may not always be appropriate in evaluating qualitative proposals. Due to the nature of its methods, qualitative work may have emergent and ongoing ethical issues that require consultation and resolution. We argue that, contrary to the judgements of many ethics committees, methods such as deception and covert observation can be justified if certain conditions are met. In reaffirming a commitment to the overarching ethical principle of respect for persons, we conclude that researchers need to recognize and plan for ethical issues in their work. Likewise, ethics committees need to recognize that qualitative work poses unique problems, but that these need not necessarily be insurmountable obstacles to project approval.",
keywords = "ethics, quantitative research, qualitative research, ethics committees",
author = "Steve Olivier and Lesley Fishwick",
year = "2003",
doi = "10.17169/fqs-4.1.754",
language = "English",
volume = "4",
journal = "Forum, Qualitative Social Research",
issn = "1438-5627",
publisher = "German Research Foundation",
number = "1",

}

Qualitative research in sport sciences : is the biomedical ethics model applicable? / Olivier, Steve; Fishwick, Lesley.

In: Forum, Qualitative Social Research, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2003.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Qualitative research in sport sciences

T2 - is the biomedical ethics model applicable?

AU - Olivier, Steve

AU - Fishwick, Lesley

PY - 2003

Y1 - 2003

N2 - Research in sports science has historically been grounded in positivist traditions. This means that ethics committees may not be adequately sensitized to the ethical problems posed by qualitative research. Qualitative researchers may thus be disadvantaged in the research approval process. Our paper argues that the traditional biomedical ethics model may not always be appropriate in evaluating qualitative proposals. Due to the nature of its methods, qualitative work may have emergent and ongoing ethical issues that require consultation and resolution. We argue that, contrary to the judgements of many ethics committees, methods such as deception and covert observation can be justified if certain conditions are met. In reaffirming a commitment to the overarching ethical principle of respect for persons, we conclude that researchers need to recognize and plan for ethical issues in their work. Likewise, ethics committees need to recognize that qualitative work poses unique problems, but that these need not necessarily be insurmountable obstacles to project approval.

AB - Research in sports science has historically been grounded in positivist traditions. This means that ethics committees may not be adequately sensitized to the ethical problems posed by qualitative research. Qualitative researchers may thus be disadvantaged in the research approval process. Our paper argues that the traditional biomedical ethics model may not always be appropriate in evaluating qualitative proposals. Due to the nature of its methods, qualitative work may have emergent and ongoing ethical issues that require consultation and resolution. We argue that, contrary to the judgements of many ethics committees, methods such as deception and covert observation can be justified if certain conditions are met. In reaffirming a commitment to the overarching ethical principle of respect for persons, we conclude that researchers need to recognize and plan for ethical issues in their work. Likewise, ethics committees need to recognize that qualitative work poses unique problems, but that these need not necessarily be insurmountable obstacles to project approval.

KW - ethics

KW - quantitative research

KW - qualitative research

KW - ethics committees

U2 - 10.17169/fqs-4.1.754

DO - 10.17169/fqs-4.1.754

M3 - Article

VL - 4

JO - Forum, Qualitative Social Research

JF - Forum, Qualitative Social Research

SN - 1438-5627

IS - 1

ER -