Qualitative Research

The federal laws that IRBs use to protect research participants were written with biomedical research and more quantitative kinds of social science research (such as experiments) in mind, and are not particularly well-equipped to respond to certain kinds of qualitative research, especially fieldwork (also known as ethnographic research). 

However, IRB laws do not exclude qualitative research from their coverage, and this IRB subpage discusses important differences between quantitative and qualitative research, comments briefly on one area of complexity for ethnographers in particular, and provides some suggestions for qualitative researchers (especially ethnographers) interacting with the IRB.

Differences Between Quantitative and Qualitative Research

As an approach to collecting information about people, qualitative research generally differs from quantitative research in the following ways:

• Qualitative research tends to be inductive (theories emerge from the data), whereas quantitative research tends to be deductive (hypotheses/predictions are tested). Surprises are often the most useful part of qualitative research in ways that they are not in quantitative research.
• Qualitative research often involves extensive description and interactions to understand what people think and why, whereas quantitative research often measures behavior, beliefs, or other human phenomena in an attempt to find causal explanations.
• Relationships are central to qualitative research in exactly the way that formal processes, instruments, and equipment are central to quantitative research. It is the relationship, the rapport between the researcher and the people participating in the research, that enables the researcher to collect useful information.
• The notion of sampling can be quite different in the two kinds of research. Because qualitative research does not have the same generalizability goals as quantitative research, samples do not need to be large or representative and may not even be understood as “samples” from a larger “population” or “universe.” Qualitative research can lead to valuable findings about human beings and doings even when focused on a relatively small number of people representing all or part of a single community.
• Qualitative research using a grounded theory approach to theory-building stops when the researcher reaches the point of theoretical saturation (i.e., when new data no longer yields new insights), rather than stopping at a pre-specified number of participants. 

Ethnographic Research

Ethnographic research in particular differs from quantitative research in some additional ways:

• Ethnographic research studies people in their natural contexts rather than trying to isolate them from or control those contexts. 
• Because ethnographic research is naturalistic and holistic it engages with the messy realities of real lives. 
• Ethnographic research makes sense of people and their ideas, values, actions, communities, and institutions from within their own situations and interpretations of those situations. (This is often, but not always, true of other kinds of qualitative research.)
• The researcher is understood to be the “data collection instrument,” whereas in quantitative research the researcher uses data collection instruments (surveys, computers, etc.) 
• Unlike quantitative research's aim for objectivity, ethnographic research is inherently subjective and shaped by the researcher's personhood. Two researchers studying the same community may reach different insights, and both can be valid. 

These characteristics can create tension with IRB processes, which are designed for standardized, structured research. Qualitative (and particularly ethnographic) research is most successful when it is relationship-driven and can be fluid and flexible in its response to changing situations. In contrast, IRBs operate through rules and formal procedures. Understanding both perspectives helps researchers navigate this dynamic.

Ethical Principles

The IRB cares broadly about six ethical aspects of research with people:

• The likelihood and magnitude of harm faced by people participating in research;
• The capacity of research participants to consent to participate in the research, meaning that they must have the necessary information, be able to comprehend the information, and be free to choose either to participate or not to participate in the research;
• Protecting people in vulnerable groups who may not be fully free or able to refuse to participate in research;
• Deception used in research to collect information from people under incomplete or false pretenses;
• The researcher’s ability to keep the participants’ identities confidential; and
• The right of participants to privacy, or their own control over what information about them becomes public and in what contexts.

All forms of research must struggle with potential challenges to these ethical issues; quantitative research has more than enough history of ethical failures. However, ethnography’s relationship-driven focus on the complexities of life lived in situ by people and communities can complicate some of these issues.

For example, because ethnography develops emergently, researchers may not know at the outset exactly what they're studying or what risks the participants may face. Depending on the context, community or society, different people may be authorized to give consent – not just for themselves but for their families or communities. Even the assumption that participants understand what “research” is, means, or requires may not be equally appropriate for all fieldwork settings. The three main components of informed consent (information, comprehension, voluntariness) may look quite different depending on the context.

IRB Suggestions for Qualitative Researchers

The IRB offers qualitative researchers (and particularly ethnographers) the following suggestions for interacting with the IRB:

• Use your commitment to relationship-driven research to build a relationship with the IRB. Ask questions early on, provide updates as projects change, and know that the IRB’s goal is to support your research while making sure that it stays within certain legal and ethical bounds. (For example, IRB laws permit waiving the documentation of informed consent in some circumstances; see if you can obtain such a waiver if appropriate to your situation.)
• Think about how the six IRB concerns apply to your context, while appreciating the ways in which those issues might look different and might require additional ethical commitments. For example, ethnographers can build part of their relational ethics around not making promises to the communities they study that they cannot legally keep, as well as around keeping the promises they do make. This ethical commitment can inform how ethnographers:
  • Address consent,
  • Prevent harm that would be caused or exacerbated by the research,
  • Determine what information will and will not be shared outside the community,
  • Protect those who are not fully able to refuse to participate, and
  • Avoid deceiving community members.
• Frame the ethical commitments that you bring to the research (and share with the IRB) in ways that are nimble enough for the complexities of ethnography. The ethical underpinnings of IRB laws tend toward deontology, or duty-based ethics (though with a consequentialist element). Both deontological and consequentialist ethics focus on good or right actions (things done or avoided). For research in which ethical choices will be situationally driven, such as ethnography, virtue ethics become more important. It is as important for the researcher to be virtuous in certain regards (such as being trustworthy) as it is for them to have parameters about how they will and won’t behave. Consider using your IRB application to think out some of these issues and, if you are a student, consider setting up a meeting with the IRB Chair to discuss this topic.