Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethical Dilemmas in Cross-national Qualitative Research: A Reflection on Personal Experiences of Ethics from a Doctoral Research Project

  • Published:
Journal of Academic Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Gaining ethical approval for qualitative health research and implementing all the planned research processes in a proposed study are not straightforward endeavours. The situation becomes more complex when qualitative research is conducted in a cross-national healthcare and academic context. Also, it is even exhausting when the study is student-based, as student researchers may be considered novices and inexperienced researchers, especially for field-based research. Our aim in this reflective paper is to present, reflect, and discuss the experiences of a doctoral researcher in dealing with two independent institutional review boards in Canada and Ghana during an interdisciplinary Ph.D. project and the ethical dilemmas encountered while collecting data in Ghana. Based on the researcher’s experiences, it became apparent that consent and its documentation can have cultural implications in different settings; hence, institutional review boards must exercise reflexivity in their protocol review practice. Also, sharing research data with participants and institutional leaders while maintaining participant confidentiality and privacy in institutional ethnographic research requires sensitivity to bi-lateral ethical values. With the experiences shared in this paper, we advocate for a dialogic ethical review process in qualitative research where researchers and research ethics boards engage in ongoing dialogue rather than the usual prescriptive format research ethics reviews often assume.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Data used in this article are part of an ongoing doctoral research project and can be made available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  • Adu-Gyamfi, J. (2015). Ethical challenges in cross-cultural field research: A comparative study of UK and Ghana. African Social Science Review: Article 3, 7(1), 44–53. http://digitalscholarship.tsu.edu/assr/vol7/iss1/3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, R. E. S., & Wiles, J. L. (2016). A rose by any other name: Participants choosing research pseudonyms. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 13(2), 149–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2015.1133746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appiah, R. (2020). Community-based participatory research in rural african contexts: Ethico-cultural considerations and lessons from Ghana. Public Health Review, 41(27), https://doi.org/10.1186/s40985-020-00145-2.

  • Boateng, E. G. (2019). Assessment of the standard operating procedures of selected research ethics committees in Ghana [Master’s Thesis, University of Ghana].

  • Chimentao, L. K., & Reis, S. (2019). Beyond bureaucratic ethics in qualitative research involving human beings. Alfa São Paulo, 63(3), 697–715. https://doi.org/10.1590/1981-5794-1911-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, Reflexivity, and “Ethically important Moments” in Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(2), 261–280. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800403262360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helgesson, G. (2015). Informants a potential threat to confidentiality in small studies. Medical Health Care and Philosophy, 18, 149–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-014-9579-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howe, N., Giles, E., Newbury-Birch, D., & McColl, E. (2018). Systematic review of participants’ attitudes towards data sharing: A thematic synthesis. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 32(2), 123–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1355819617751555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, L., Kuhnt, J., Picot, L. E., & Grasham, C. F. (2022). Safeguarding research staff “in the field”: A blind spot in ethics guidelines. Research Ethics, 19(1), 18–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161221131494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kearney, G. P., Corman, M. K., Hart, N. D., Johnston, J. L., & Gormley, G. J. (2019). Why institutional ethnography? Why now? Institutional ethnography in health professions education. Perspectives on Medical Education, 8, 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-019-0499-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, J. (2019). The need for improved ethics guidelines in a changing research landscape. South African Journal of Science, 115(11/12), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2019/6349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laar, A. K., Redman, B. K., Ferguson, K., & Caplan, A. (2020). Institutional approaches to research integrity in Ghana. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26, 3037–3052. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00257-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lahman, M. K. (2018). Ethics in social science research: Becoming culturally responsive. Sage.

  • Leinius, J. (2020). Postcolonial feminist ethics and the politics of research collaborations across north-south divides. In D. Bendix, F. Muller, & A. Ziari (Eds.), Beyond the master’s tools. Decolonizing knowledge orders, research methodology, and teaching, pp. 71–92.

  • Meyer, M. N. (2018). Practical tips for ethical data sharing. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(1), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245917747656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mfoafo-M’Carthy, M., & Grischow, J. (2022). Hierarchy and inequality in research: Navigating the challenges of research in Ghana. Qualitative Research, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941221098927.

  • Miles, S. H., & Laar, A. K. (2018). Bioethics north and south: Creating a common ground. Ethics Medicine and Public Health, 4, 59–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millora, C., Maimunah, S., & Still, E. (2020). Reflecting on the ethics of PhD research in the Global South: Reciprocity, reflexivity and situatedness. Acta Academica, 52(1), 10–30. https://doi.org/10.18820/24150479/aa52i1/SP2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montero-Sieburth, M. (2020). Ethical dilemmas and challenges in ethnographic migration research. Qualitative Research Journal, 20(3), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-12-2019-0100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morina, A. (2021). When people matter: The ethics of qualitative research in the health and social sciences. Health and Social Care in the Community, 29, 1559–1565. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.13221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mwakikagile, G. (2017). The people of Ghana: Ethnic diversity and national unity. New Africa Press.

  • Nortje, N., Hoffmann, W. A., & de Jongh, J. C. (2018). Development of bioethics and professionalism in the healthcare context. African perspectives on ethics for healthcare professional (pp. 11–24). Springer.

  • Owusu, S. A., Addison, G., Redman, B., Kearns, L., Amuna, P., & Laar, A. (2022). Assessment of the operational characteristics of research ethics committees in Ghana. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 17(1–2), 114–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264621103B589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paradis, E., & Varpio, L. (2018). Difficult but important questions about the ethics of qualitative. Perspectives in Medical Education: Commentary, 7, 65–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-018-0414-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parboteeah, K. P., Seriki, H. T., & Hoegl, M. (2014). Ethic diversity, corruption and ethical climates in sub-Saharan Africa: Recognizing the significance of human resource management. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(7), 979–1001https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.815251

  • Peled-Raz, M., Tzafrir, S. S., Enosh, G., Efron, Y., & Doron, I. (2021). Ethics review boards for research with human participants: Past, present, and future. Qualitative Health Research, 31(3), 590–599. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732320972333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rankin, J. (2017). Conducting analysis in institutional ethnography: Analytical work prior to commencing data collection. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917734484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid, A. M., Brown, J. M., Smith, J. M., Cope, A. C., & Jamieson, S. (2018). Ethical dilemmas and reflexivity in qualitative research. Perspectives on Medical Education, 7, 69–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-018-0412-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W-M. (2018). A transactional approach to research ethics. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 19(3 (Art 1)), https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-19.3.3061.

  • Roth, W. M., & von Unger, H. (2018). Current perspectives on research ethics in qualitative research. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 19(3 (Art 33)).

  • Rowland, E., Manogaran, M., & Bourgeault, I. L. (2019). Institutional ethnography as a unique tool for improving health systems. Healthcare Management Forum, 32(3), 143–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/0840470418823220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seddoh, A., Nazzar, A., Batse, Z. K., Tetteh, E., & Adjei, S. (2015). Mapping of health research institutions in Ghana: Landscaping and comparative analysis. Ghana: Centre for Health and Social Services (CHeSS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shah, N., CoathuP, V., Teare, H., Forgie, I., Giordano, G. N., Hansen, T. H., Groeneveld, L., Hudson, M., Pearson, E., Ruetten, H., & Kaye, J. (2019). Motivations for data sharing—views of research participants from four european countries: A DIRECT study. European Journal of Human Genetics, 721–729. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-019-0344-2.

  • Smith, J. A. (2017). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Getting at lived experience. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), 303–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. A., Jarman, M., & Osborn, M. (1999). Doing interpretive phenomenological analysis. Qualitative health psychology (pp. 218–240). Sage.

  • Tri-Council Policy Statement (TCPS2). (2014). Ethical conduct for research involving humans. Government of Canada.

  • Wa-Mbaleka, S. (2019). Ethics in qualitative research: A practical guide. International Forum, 22(2), 116–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkins, C. H., Mapes, B. M., Jerome, R. N., Villalta-Gil, V., Pulley, J. M., & Harris, P. A. (2019). Understanding what information is valued by research participants, and why. Health Affairs, 38(3), 399–407. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wodak, R., & Meyer, R. W. (2009). Critical discourse analysis: History, agenda, theory, and methodology. In Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 1–33).

  • Wodak, R., & Savski, K. (2018). Critical discourse–Ethnographic approaches to language policy. In &. M.-M. W. Tollefson, The Oxford handbook of language policy and planning doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190458898.013.4

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to all our research participants and the leadership of the Yendi Municipal Hospital for their support during the fieldwork of this research project.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Interdisciplinary Studies, College of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies, University of Saskatchewan,, Saskatoon, Canada

    Abukari Kwame BA, MPhil, MPhil, PhD

  2. Research and Graduate Studies, College of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada

    Pammla M. Petrucka RN, MN, PhD

Authors
  1. Abukari Kwame BA, MPhil, MPhil, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pammla M. Petrucka RN, MN, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AK conceived the topic and drafted the manuscript. PMP edited and reviewed the article for intellectual content. AK and PMP read and approved the final version of the article.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abukari Kwame BA, MPhil, MPhil, PhD.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Competing Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kwame, A., Petrucka, P.M. Ethical Dilemmas in Cross-national Qualitative Research: A Reflection on Personal Experiences of Ethics from a Doctoral Research Project. J Acad Ethics (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-023-09484-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-023-09484-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation