Data, integrity & fieldwork: Navigating ethical debates and processes in interpretive research

These are the slides from a seminar entitled, 'Data, integrity & fieldwork: Navigating ethical debates and processes in interpretive research,' which took place on 4 November 2025 at the International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam. The seminar was co-led by Andrew S. Hoffman and Peter Pels from Leiden University; the slides cover the material Andrew presented during the seminar, while Peter's contributions detailing the history of Pels et al. 2018 (referenced below) did not have an accompanying slide deck. The following description of the event appeared on the original event announcement of the ISS website: Sponsored by the International Institute of Social Studies' Research Ethics Committee and the Political Ecology Research Group, this event will examine how researchers and data managers can navigate the sensitivities related to privacy and trust in research. The International Institute of Social Studies and Erasmus University Rotterdam, as with many other universities in the Netherlands and globally, have endorsed 'open science' principles and related efforts that encourage (or sometimes require) researchers to make their data 'Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable'Opens external. This raises sensitivities related to privacy, trust and epistemology - especially for socially-engaged ethnographic and interpretive researchers. The speakers will share their experiences navigating and advising on data management for ethnographic and fieldwork-based interpretive research projects. Following these presentations the seminar will then offer space to examine how researchers, data managers and REC reviewers can best chart these debates and expectations so as to productively support socially-engaged and ethical ethnographic and interpretive research. The suggested readings for the seminar were: Pels, P., Boog, I., Henrike Florusbosch, J., Kripe, Z., Minter, T., Postma, M., Sleeboom-Faulkner, M., Simpson, B., Dilger, H., Schönhuth, M., von Poser, A., Castillo, R. C. A., Lederman, R., & Richards-Rissetto, H. (2018). Data management in anthropology: The next phase in ethics governance? Social Anthropology, 26(3), 391–413. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12526Opens external Poirier, L., Fortun, K., Costelloe-Kuehn, B., & Fortun, M. (2020). Metadata, Digital Infrastructure, and the Data Ideologies of Cultural Anthropology. In J. W. Crowder, M. Fortun, R. Besara, & L. Poirier (Eds.), Anthropological Data in the Digital Age: New Possibilities – New Challenges (pp. 209–237). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24925-0_10Opens external [Link to PDF available via Google ScholarOpens external] Elfenbein, T. W., & Hoffman, A. S. (2024). Towards meaningful institutional change: Responsive bureaucracy and the governance of anthropological ethics. Anthropology Today, 40(2), 4–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8322.12871Opens external de Koning, M., Meyer, B., Moors, A., & Pels, P. (2019). Guidelines for anthropological research: Data management, ethics, and integrity. Ethnography, 20(2), 170–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1466138119843312

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2024-11-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14330249
Primary Topic
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Data, integrity & fieldwork: Navigating ethical debates and processes in interpretive research

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
article

Data, integrity & fieldwork: Navigating ethical debates and processes in interpretive research

article en

Abstract

These are the slides from a seminar entitled, 'Data, integrity & fieldwork: Navigating ethical debates and processes in interpretive research,' which took place on 4 November 2025 at the International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam. The seminar was co-led by Andrew S. Hoffman and Peter Pels from Leiden University; the slides cover the material Andrew presented during the seminar, while Peter's contributions detailing the history of Pels et al. 2018 (referenced below) did not have an accompanying slide deck. The following description of the event appeared on the original event announcement of the ISS website: Sponsored by the International Institute of Social Studies' Research Ethics Committee and the Political Ecology Research Group, this event will examine how researchers and data managers can navigate the sensitivities related to privacy and trust in research. The International Institute of Social Studies and Erasmus University Rotterdam, as with many other universities in the Netherlands and globally, have endorsed 'open science' principles and related efforts that encourage (or sometimes require) researchers to make their data 'Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable'Opens external. This raises sensitivities related to privacy, trust and epistemology - especially for socially-engaged ethnographic and interpretive researchers. The speakers will share their experiences navigating and advising on data management for ethnographic and fieldwork-based interpretive research projects. Following these presentations the seminar will then offer space to examine how researchers, data managers and REC reviewers can best chart these debates and expectations so as to productively support socially-engaged and ethical ethnographic and interpretive research. The suggested readings for the seminar were: Pels, P., Boog, I., Henrike Florusbosch, J., Kripe, Z., Minter, T., Postma, M., Sleeboom-Faulkner, M., Simpson, B., Dilger, H., Schönhuth, M., von Poser, A., Castillo, R. C. A., Lederman, R., & Richards-Rissetto, H. (2018). Data management in anthropology: The next phase in ethics governance? Social Anthropology, 26(3), 391–413. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12526Opens external Poirier, L., Fortun, K., Costelloe-Kuehn, B., & Fortun, M. (2020). Metadata, Digital Infrastructure, and the Data Ideologies of Cultural Anthropology. In J. W. Crowder, M. Fortun, R. Besara, & L. Poirier (Eds.), Anthropological Data in the Digital Age: New Possibilities – New Challenges (pp. 209–237). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24925-0_10Opens external [Link to PDF available via Google ScholarOpens external] Elfenbein, T. W., & Hoffman, A. S. (2024). Towards meaningful institutional change: Responsive bureaucracy and the governance of anthropological ethics. Anthropology Today, 40(2), 4–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8322.12871Opens external de Koning, M., Meyer, B., Moors, A., & Pels, P. (2019). Guidelines for anthropological research: Data management, ethics, and integrity. Ethnography, 20(2), 170–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1466138119843312

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Leiden University (NL)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 38%
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
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.