Researchers in sociology wish to research how prevalent discriminatory attitudes are on the job market and what forms these attitudes take (practices, reactions…). They intend to approach their research target through workplace recruiters and their reactions towards supposedly immigrant job seekers.

The researcher is going to call companies that have advertised jobs in a major newspaper. They present themselves as immigrant job seekers. When calling, they make sure they get to speak with someone who is responsible for recruitments. The researchers plan three scenarios in which the “job seekers” speak in three different ways: no accent, a Middle-Eastern accent, an African accent. The researchers present themselves with an imaginary name referring to an ethnic background.

The researchers then record the phone call and analyse how the recruiters react to information about the job seeker.

Questions:

  • Does the study put participants (i.e. the recruiters) at risk?

  • Could the researchers obtain reliable data if the workplace recruiters knew that their attitudes towards different race were considered? That is, would there be other ways to study the phenomenon without the deceptive element?

  • Does the importance of the study justify the use of deception in this particular case? In general, can the societal importance of a study justify that researchers deviate from seeking full informed consent?

  • If a deviation is used, should it be required that there is a debriefing organised for the participants revealing the true nature of the study? Must there always be a debriefing?

  • As a result of debriefing, participants may wish to withdraw their data. How should researchers react to such requests?


Last modified: Tuesday, 12 March 2019, 2:02 PM