Toward a model of purposeful participant inclusion: examining deselection as a participant risk

Author:

Jean DeFeo Dayna

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore purposive approaches to participant selection and to consider how deselecting qualified participants from research studies, particularly in studies of identity, may cause psychological harm. Design/methodology/approach – Within a framework of social identity theory, the paper reviews current approaches to participant selection in the purposive paradigm and uses examples from a case study to illustrate how research participants may be impacted by researcher decisions to include or deselect an individual from participation. Findings – Understanding the importance of belonging and validation on an individual's self-concept, threatening or challenging an individual's identity through the deselection process may present a tangible participant risk. Research limitations/implications – Though many methodologists cite the benefits of participating in narrative studies, if there is a tangible benefit in inclusion, there may conversely be a considerable harm in exclusion. Thusly, in cases of research exploring identity, particularly of marginalized populations, the researcher and ethics committee should examine the selection process itself as a potential participant risk. Originality/value – Though the ethics review seeks to ensure participant safety, it focusses on ongoing threats for the selected individuals, and does not generally consider psychological impacts of the selection process itself on would-be participants who are screened out of the pool. The paper examines the evaluative process of participant selection and posits that it must be scrutinized as a potential participant risk.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

General Social Sciences,Education

Reference42 articles.

1. Abrams, L.S. (2010), “Sampling ‘hard to reach’ populations in qualitative research: the case of incarcerated youth”, Qualitative Social Work, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 536-550.

2. Andrade, R.A.C. (1998), “Life in elementary school: children's ethnographic reflections”, in Egan-Robertson, A. and Bloom, D. (Eds), Students as Researchers of Culture and Language in Their Own Communities, National Council of Teachers of English, Urbana, IL, pp. 93-114.

3. Beaudrie, S. and Ducar, C. (2005), “Beginning level heritage programs: creating a space for all heritage language learners”, Heritage Language Journal, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 1-26.

4. Belmont Report (1979), “Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research”, available at: www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.html (accessed November 7, 2012).

5. Bowen, G.A. (2008), “Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: a researcher note”, Qualitative Research, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 137-152.

Cited by 8 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3