This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Redwood, S. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Colliding discourses

Deconstructing the process of seeking ethical approval for a participatory evaluation project

Institute of Health and Community Studies, Bournemouth University; University of East Anglia

The aim of this paper is to bring to the surface issues of power and authority in the process of seeking ethical approval for health service research in the UK in relation to the dominant discourse about methods to generate data and results that constitute legitimate ‘evidence’. In order to demonstrate how alternative and competing discourses may be silenced, I offer a deconstructive readings of the term ‘evidence’ as applied to healthcare, and excerpts of policy documents, which provide the framework for the ethical review of research proposals. I debate how the discourse shaped my own experience of seeking ethical approval for a participatory evaluation project involving Consultant Nurses. Furthermore, I engage in a dialogue with other texts in the literature in order to open up possible patterns and to generate alternative explanations and discourses which seek to promote constructive dialogue rather than regulation.

Key Words: research ethics • participatory research • research governance • discourse • deconstruction • poststructuralist therapy

Journal of Research in Nursing, Vol. 10, No. 2, 217-230 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/174498710501000201


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?