The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Researching researchers: lessons for research ethics
Open accessAbstract
There is widespread debate about ethical practice in social research with most social researchers arguing that situational relativist approaches are appropriate for resolving the ethical issues that emerge. In this article, we draw on research conducted on an ESRC-funded study of informed consent in social research to explore the ethical issues that are raised when conducting research with one’s peers. The study involved conducting focus groups and telephone interviews with academic and non-academic researchers. The ethical issues emerging from the study related to consent, data ownership and the management of confidentiality and anonymity. Participants’ responses to these issues and the ways that we managed them are discussed. We conclude by exploring the implications of this study for research more generally and argue that the increased regulation of research needs to enable researchers to attend reflexively to the social context in which consent takes place.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Behavioral Study of obedience.
Milgram, S. (1963) · The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0040525 · Cited by 4,918
Empty ethics: the problem with informed consent
Corrigan, O. (2003) · Sociology of Health & Illness · doi:10.1046/j.1467-9566.2003.00369.x · Cited by 436 · cited 3×
“This is especially the case in medical research (Corrigan, 2003; Stone, 2004).”
BackgroundParry, O., & Mauthner, N. S. (2004) · Sociology · doi:10.1177/0038038504039366 · Cited by 258
Cited by
The Management of Confidentiality and Anonymity in Social Research
Wiles, R., Crow, G., Heath, S., & Charles, V. (2008) · International Journal of Social Research Methodology · doi:10.1080/13645570701622231 · Cited by 473
Self-citationThe Eye Regards Itself: Benefits and Challenges of Reflexivity in Qualitative Social Work Research
Probst, B. (2015) · Social Work Research · doi:10.1093/swr/svu028 · Cited by 234
Men, masculine identities, and health care utilisation
Noone, J. H., & Stephens, C. (2008) · Sociology of Health & Illness · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2008.01095.x · Cited by 215
Identity, positionality and reflexivity: relevance and application to research paramedics
Wilson, C., Janes, G., & Williams, J. (2022) · British Paramedic Journal · doi:10.29045/14784726.2022.09.7.2.43 · Cited by 132
Metadata
- Authors
- Wiles, R., Charles, V., Crow, G., & Heath, S.
- Venue
- Qualitative Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-08
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 283-299
- ISSN
- 1468-7941 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-3109
- OpenAlex
- W2093517151
- Cited by
- 159
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 25.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Researching researchers: lessons for research ethics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1468794106065004
- The paper
- Wiles, R., Charles, V., Crow, G., & Heath, S. (2006). Researching researchers: lessons for research ethics. Qualitative Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106065004
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.