The Informed Consent Form

While there may be some variance in what a local IRB will ask re­searchers to submit for review, the issue of an informed consent form is almost always pivotal (Ritchie, 2003, p. 217). New interviewers tend to be hesitant about informed consent. They have no doubt of their own good intentions and worry that somehow a formal informed consent process is not congruent with the relationship they envision with their participants. That may lead some new interviewers not to consider or to minimize the risks their research may indeed present (Smith, 1992, p. 102).

In-depth interviewing does not pose the life and death risk of bio­medical research, but it is not risk free. Interviewers following the model described in this book may meet with participants three times as they ask them to reconstruct their life histories, provide details of their experi­ences in particular areas of inquiry, and then reflect on the meaning of those experiences. In the process of this interview sequence, a measure of intimacy can develop between interviewers and participants. That inti­macy may lead participants to share aspects of their lives that may cause discomfort and even some degree of emotional distress during the inter­view process. If, when they write their reports, researchers misuse the words of their participants, the researchers could leave their participants vulnerable to embarrassment and loss of reputation. Participants have the right to be protected against vulnerability in the process of the inter­views and in how researchers share the results of the interviews (Kelman, 1977). Informed consent is the first step towards minimizing the risks participants face when they agree to be interviewed.

As expressed in the Nuremberg Code, the essential ethical principle of research with humans is that participants freely volunteer to participate in the research. In order to willingly consent in the truest sense, potential participants must know enough about the research to be able to gauge in a meaningful way whether they want to proceed. Meeting this standard is the underlying logic of the informed consent form.

The federal guidelines for informed consent (Protection of Human Subjects, 46.116-117) were designed primarily with the risks and benefits of biomedical research in mind. Consequently the guidelines have stipu­lations that are appropriate for experimental research using human sub­jects, but benefit from adaptation when applied to qualitative research. (For a thoughtful presentation of the fit between the federal guidelines and qualitative research, see Cassell, 1978.) In the discussion below, I have adapted the requirements for informed consent, as they would be applicable to in-depth interviewing research.

Source: Seidman Irving (2006), Interviewing As Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education And the Social Sciences, Teachers College Press; 3rd edition.