Research ethics and the study of armed actors: process vs. practice

This Special Issue assesses the state of the field and advances corresponding debates by reflecting unflinchingly on the unanticipated costs and consequences that have resulted from our collective studies of armed actors, especially in unstable and insecure settings. We introduce the idea of research silences – the controversial topics, regions, populations and perspectives that tend to be neglected or avoided, representing an ethical blind spot for the field. And we show how existing research ethics frameworks do not align with the realities of how field research is actually conducted on the ground. We propose a shift towards a more adaptive and context-sensitive approach to research ethics that prioritises reflexivity and acknowledges the fluid power relations between researchers and armed groups. We also advocate for ethical practices that foreground the protection of both participants and researchers, ensuring that ethical considerations are embedded directly into the research design. The ultimate goal of this special issue is to align how we discuss and practice research ethics so that it genuinely reflects the realities of studying armed actors.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Conflict Security and Development
Published
2024-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/14678802.2024.2436546
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Gender, Security, and Conflict
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.93
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Research ethics and the study of armed actors: process vs. practice

Christine Cheng, Christopher Day
1 citations
Conflict Security and Development
Gender, Security, and Conflict
0.93
article

Research ethics and the study of armed actors: process vs. practice

Christine Cheng, Christopher Day
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This Special Issue assesses the state of the field and advances corresponding debates by reflecting unflinchingly on the unanticipated costs and consequences that have resulted from our collective studies of armed actors, especially in unstable and insecure settings. We introduce the idea of research silences – the controversial topics, regions, populations and perspectives that tend to be neglected or avoided, representing an ethical blind spot for the field. And we show how existing research ethics frameworks do not align with the realities of how field research is actually conducted on the ground. We propose a shift towards a more adaptive and context-sensitive approach to research ethics that prioritises reflexivity and acknowledges the fluid power relations between researchers and armed groups. We also advocate for ethical practices that foreground the protection of both participants and researchers, ensuring that ethical considerations are embedded directly into the research design. The ultimate goal of this special issue is to align how we discuss and practice research ethics so that it genuinely reflects the realities of studying armed actors.

Conflict Security and DevelopmentVol. 24(6)
King's College London (GB), College of Charleston (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Gender, Security, and Conflict
0.93
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.