Essay on The Moral and Ethical Dilemmas of Anthropology

Before attempting to submerge oneself into the unknown and trying to understand the customs and behaviors of a foreign culture, an anthropologist first needs to inspect his or her own background and influences. In spite of all the efforts to be objective, a researcher’s personality will inevitably always be a part of the research. Even when he or she “sees” through the eyes

Calcagno (2003) emphasizes the importance of encouraging biocultural approaches to research. In order to be holistic it is necessary that the research used is widespread across the anthropological sub disciplines (Riley. E, 2006). Calcagno identifies how this approach is easily discussed in practice, but this can be significantly harder to produce successfully in practical settings. The tension surrounding this is due to preceding conflicts in procedures and philosophies disrupting their ability to coexist in the research subfields. Calcagno uses the data collected by Borofsky that indicated the holistic

Informed consent is and was at the time of Scheper-Hughes’ fieldwork an important aspect of ethical research. Scheper-Hughes was criticized by Irish anthropologists for not obtaining the full and informed consent of her participants before conducting her research, and this criticism is warranted (Callahan 311:1979). It is clear from the villagers’ reactions when she returned to Ballybran some years later that this is in fact true. Scheper-Hughes herself remarked that many felt betrayed by her book, and that they initially had no idea what she would publish (Scheper-Hughes 2000:148). Schrag argues that part of informed consent should be to communicate honestly the research objectives of the ethnographer, which

The interviews in Anne Fadiman’s The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down and Joshua Reno’s Waste Away both have their fair share of barriers to overcome, even though their research could not be more different. Anne Fadiman conducts interviews in two drastically different topics, Hmong culture and medicine. Joshua Reno favors a landfill in Michigan; interviewing residents living next to Four Corners Landfill. However different these two areas of research may be, both books show that interviewing individuals is a research method incredibly valuable when working to determine a person or group’s feelings and ideas. Both anthropologists use interviewing as a method to gain information, but are careful to align with the culture of each of the

Nathan faced ethical questions in approaching this research project using an undercover method of observation: Did she lie to people? Was permission given by the university? How to handle the Research Board? Could she record her findings or conversations since she did not disclose her identity? Can an anthropologist really go “undercover”? These are a few of the concerns and criticisms the author faced during this project.

Nathan faced ethical questions in approaching this research project using an undercover method of observation: Did she lie to people? Was permission given by the university? How to handle the Research Board? Could she record her findings or conversations since she did not disclose her identity? Can an anthropologist really go “undercover”? These are a few of the concerns and criticisms the author faced during

An anthropologist usually, at the beginning of their career, conduct ethnographic research in a foreign country or remote location to validate themselves as a “bonafide anthropologist” (Brondo 43). Eventually however, the anthropologist will return home often to conduct research around their own familiar ethnic group. Tsuda refers to the anthropologists return to familiar territory as an “Ethnographic homecoming” (Brondo 44). The use of ethnographic methods in the anthropologist’s home or familiar environment is what Tsuda means by “native anthropology”.

Research today has limits and standards to protect study participants and researchers alike, all in an attempt to facilitate ethical data collection for reliable results. A universal research body, such as the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at UVM, governs these set values. However, early anthropological research often deviated from ethical standards and broke basic research rights. Such is the case with Zora Hurston’s compilation of collected stories in Mules and Men. After returning to her hometown in Florida, she begins listening to stories from locals, building a cultural interpretation of the locals. Continuing her studies, she travels to New Orleans to pursue research in Hoodoo, a sacred and protected practice. Her unethical approach breaches IRB standards regarding her methods of safety, consent, and confidentiality, violating the UVM Institutional Review Board’s human subjects protection guidelines.

Researchers should be honest about who they are and be able to answer questions about the research they are conducting. It is understandable that one might want to put themselves in another person’s shoes and try to connect and understand that population, but when conducting a research, it is not ethical to deceive participants by portraying to be someone that you are not. “It is important to demonstrate an ethic

Within anthropology there are two main schools of thought. These different views shape the philosophies of anthropologist who are classified as materialist, idealist, or falling in between. The materialist approach focuses on positivistic knowledge and empirical truths. Materialists’ use science and material elements within society to explain the basis for human culture and life; they consider anthropology one of the sciences. On the other hand, idealists consider anthropology one of the humanities. Idealists view culture and behavior as a pattern of interpretation of beliefs and ideas by the participants. This paper will discuss anthropologist Marvin Harris, a materialist, Clifford Geertz’s idealist point of view, and Eleanor Leacock’s approach

Before an anthropologist is to set foot in another man’s land; research is first to be done. An anthropologist will read up on previous studies and articles done by past anthropologists.

The researcher most honor commitments to respondents and respect reciprocity, exercise objectivity and professional integrity in performing and reporting research, and protect confidentiality and privacy of

Ethics are a big part of research, in order for research to be conducted and the findings be used then they must follow ethics set by the Ethics committee. Ethics are a set of rules and rights. The rules must be followed by the researchers and the rights are for the participants. All participants must fully consent to the research and if they are too young then a guardian must consent for them. The participants’ information must be kept confidential and they can opt out of any parts of the research that they are uncomfortable completing.

Institutional review boards are responsible for reviewing and approving research that deals with human subjects. Both articles discussed the inadequacies of IRB reviews when it concerns ethnographic research. According to both authors, IRB’s are not sufficiently knowledgeable in anthropology and as result they are not aware of the methods and dilemmas that arise in participant observation. Kelty states that IRB’s are concerned with privacy, which is a western concern that has been established as a global norm. While both authors are critical of IRB’s, I believe that IRB’s have the best intentions, but may be misguided because of the lack of anthropological knowledge. In order to improve IRB reviews, the board must be knowledgeable in research

Maiter et al., (2008:307) finds that reciprocity is an important component of practicing CBPAR ethically and defined it as, “exchange between social equals”. The authors aim to discuss the interactions between researchers and communities and the practice of reciprocity in anthropological research (Maiter et al., 2008). Maiter et al., (2008) mentions that reciprocity can be as simple as being honest about research relationships and goals. I found this to be true in my experience, it was easier to talk to people and have them provide valuable information by being honest with our research goals. In addition, our group talked to the receptionist at the Bennetto Community center in order to find out if there were any art programs offered. Instead of just asking her if the community center offered any art programs, we started our conversation with who we are, what we are doing there and what we are expecting to gain. From this the receptionist understood our goals and directed us to the Bennetto Elementary School as they have a community garden. This conversation reflects ‘reciprocal dialogue’, as discussed by Maiter et al., (2008). Reciprocal dialogue is when a “researcher and study participant communicate as equals” (Maiter et al., 2008:307). In this sense, our conversation with the receptionist did not create the notion that we as researchers were more important than her. Rather, we engaged in creating a relationship with her where she left she could exchange information regarding the community garden with us and redirect us to the school so we could gain more