Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T22:23:21.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From the Field to the Courthouse: Should Social Science Research Be Privileged?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Robert H. McLaughlin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Social scientists need clarification about the extent to which the confidential aspects of their research are protected from compulsory disclosure in legal proceedings, and the extent to which they ought to be. Investigating the nature of social science research with an emphasis on researcher-participant relationships in ethnographic practice, I conclude that a qualified privilege would confer three major benefits on social science researchers: confidence that the government will not unnecessarily interfere with research, facilitation of improved researcher-participant relationships, and increased accuracy, thoroughness, and reliability of research data. I also discuss the development of privilege and confidentiality issues in practical research contexts through an examination of two criminal cases in which social science researchers refused to divulge the confidential information obtained in the course of research. Finally, I discuss the possible formulations of a scholarly research privilege. This is especially important because courts have cast social scientists as members of the larger community of academic or scholarly researchers with respect to these issues. Potential sources of protection include state journalist protection laws, federal common law, and federal statutory law. Evaluation of these sources and the case law to which they correspond suggests that developing common law privileges in state and federal jurisprudence is the most promising means of affording the confidential aspects of social science research legal protection. As researchers continue to press privilege issues in state and federal courts, these courts should recognize a qualified research privilege accordingly.

Type
“From the Trenches and Towers”
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , Fall 1999 , pp. 927 - 965
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 1999 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ablon, Joan. 1994. Reflections on Fieldwork with Little People of America: Myths and Methods. In Fowler and Hardesty 1994.Google Scholar
Akeroyd, Anne V. 1984. Ethics in Relation to Informants, the Profession, and Governments. In Ellen 1984.Google Scholar
American Anthropological Association. 1973. Professional Ethics: Statements and Procedures of the American Anthropological Association. Washington, D.C.: American Anthropological Association.Google Scholar
American Bar Association (ABA). 1993. ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Reprinted in Gillers, Stephen, and Roy D. Simon Jr. Regulation of Lawyers: Statutes and Standards. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
American Psychological Association. 1993. Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Appell, G. N. 1978. Ethical Dilemmas in Anthropological Inquiry. Los Angeles: Crossroads Press.Google Scholar
Boas, Franz. 1919. Scientists as Spies. The Nation, 19 December, 797.Google Scholar
Brajuha, Mario, and Hallowell, Lyle. 1986. Legal Intrusion and the Politics of Fieldwork: The Impact of the Brajuha Case. Urban Life 14:454–78.Google Scholar
Brown, Bruce P. 1983. Free Press, Privacy, and Privilege: Protection of Researcher-Subject Communications. Georgia Law Review 17:1009–48.Google Scholar
Campbell, Mary B. 1988. The Illustrated Travel Book and the Birth of Ethnography: Part I of de Bry's America . In The Work of Dissimilitude: Essays from the Sixth Citadel Conference on Medieval and Renaissance Literature, ed. Allen, David G. and White, Robert A. Newark: University of Delaware Press.Google Scholar
Carrington, Paul D., and Traci, L. Jones. 1996. Reluctant Experts. In Cecil and Wetherington 1996.Google Scholar
Cecil, Joe S., and Wetherington, Gerald T., eds. 1996. Court-Ordered Disclosure of Academic Research: A Clash of Values of Science and Law. Law and Contemporary Problems 59 (summer):1–191.Google Scholar
Clifford, James. 1995. Anthropology's Edges. A Celebration of the Scholarship of George W. Stocking, Jr. University of Chicago, Humanities Institute. Typescript.Google Scholar
Committee on Federal Agency Evaluation Research. 1975. Protecting Individual Privacy in Evaluation Research. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Cotchett, Joseph W., and Arnold, B. Elkind. 1993. Federal Courtroom Evidence. 3d ed. New York: Butterworth.Google Scholar
Coutin, Susan Bibler. 1994- Enacting Law Through Social Practice: Sanctuary as a Form of Resistance. In Contested States: Law, Hegemony, and Resistance, ed. Lazarus-Black, Mindie and Hirsch, Susan F. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Crabb, Barbara B. 1996. Judicially Compelled Disclosure of Researcher's Data: A Judge's View. In Cecil and Wetherington 1996.Google Scholar
Bois, Du, Cora, . 1970. Studies in an Indian Town. In Women in the Field: Anthropological Experiences, ed. Golde, Peggy. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Ellen, R. F., ed. 1984. Ethnographic Research: A Guide to General Conduct. San Diego, Calif.: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ellen, R. F., and Hicks, David. 1984. Preparation for Fieldwork. In Ellen 1984.Google Scholar
Fowler, Don D., and Donald, L. Hardesty. 1994. Others Knowing Others: Perspectives on Ethnographic Careers. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Press.Google Scholar
Gay, Lance. 1998. Criminal Lawyers Want Parent-child Confidentiality. Orange County Register, 14 February, 26.Google Scholar
Goodale, James C. Moodhe, Joseph P., and Ott, Rodney W., eds. 1995. Communications Law: Reporter's Privilege Cases. PLI Pat., Copyrights, Trademarks, and Literary Property Course Handbook Series No. 412, 63. New York: Practicing Law Institute.Google Scholar
Gooding, Susan. 1996. Reeling from Justice: Ritual Mappings of Identity in a Native American Court Case. Workshop on Religion, Law, and the Construction of Identities. University of Chicago. Typescript.Google Scholar
Hallowell, Lyle. 1985. The Outcome of the Brajuha Case: Legal Implications for Sociologists. Footnotes 13 (December): 1, 13.Google Scholar
Hazard, , Geoffrey, C. Jr., Koniak, Susan P., and Crampton, Roger C., eds. 1994. The Law and Ethics of Lawyering. Westbury, N.Y.: Foundation Press.Google Scholar
Hendel, Samuel, and Bard, Robert. 1973. Should There Be a Researcher's Privilege AAUP Bulletin 59 (winter):398–401.Google Scholar
Humphreys, Laud. 1970. Tearoom Trade: Impersonal Sex in Public Places. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Labaton, Stephen. 1998. The Law Ranks Its Privileges. New York Times, 22 February, 5.Google Scholar
Leo, Richard A. 1995. Trial and Tribulations: Courts, Ethnography, and the Need for an Evidentiary Privilege for Academic Researchers. American Sociologist 26:113–34.Google Scholar
Lorant, Stefan, ed. 1965. The New World: The First Pictures of America. New York: Duell, Sloan, and Pearce.Google Scholar
Marcus, Richard L. 1991. Discovery Along the Litigation/Science Interface. Brooklyn Law Review 57:381–428.Google Scholar
Melton, Gary B. 1988a. When Scientists Are Adversaries, Do Participants Lose Law and Human Behavior 12:191–206.Google Scholar
1988b. Must Researchers Share their Data Law and Human Behavior 12:159–62.Google Scholar
Mueller, Christopher B., and Laird, C. Kirkpatrick. 1995. Federal Rules of Evidence with Advisory Committee Notes, Legislative History, and Case Supplement. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Nash, Dennison, and Wintrob, Ronald. 1972. The Emergence of Self-consciousness in Ethnography. Current Anthropology 5:527–41.Google Scholar
Nejelski, Paul, and Peyser, Howard. 1975a. A Researcher's Shield Statute: Guarding Against Compulsory Disclosure of Research Data. In Committee on Federal Agency Evaluation Research 1975.Google Scholar
1975b. An Act to Protect Researchers and Their Subjects. In Committee on Federal Agency Evaluation Research 1975.Google Scholar
Paul, Benjamin D. 1953. Interview Techniques and Field Relationships. In Anthropology Today: An Encyclopedic Inventory, ed. Kroeber, Alfred L. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Pinsky, Valerie. 1992. Archaeology, Politics, and Boundary Formation: The Boas Censure (1919) and the Development of Archaeology during the Inter-War Years. In Rediscovering Our Past: Essays on the History of American Archaeology, ed. Reyman, Jonathan E. Aldershot, England: Avebury Press.Google Scholar
Punch, Maurice. 1986. The Politics and Ethics of Fieldwork. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar
Rosman, Abraham, and Paula, G. Rubel. 1995. The Tapestry of Culture: An Introduction to Cultural Anthropology. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Safire, William. 1998. Privilege Proliferation. New York Times, 5 March, A25.Google Scholar
Sanjek, Roger. 1990. Fire, Loss, and the Sorcerer's Apprentice. In Fieidnotes: The Makings of Anthropology, ed. Sanjek, Roger. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Scarce, Rik. 1994. (No) Trial (But) Tribulations: When Courts and Ethnography Conflict. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 23:123–49.Google Scholar
1995. Scholarly Ethics and Courtroom Antics: Where Researchers Stand in the Eyes of the Law. American Sociologist 26:87–112.Google Scholar
Shein, Brian. 1987. Playing, Pretending, Being Real. Akert Bay's U'Mista Potlatch Collection: Strength at the Core of Illusion. Canadian Art, spring.Google Scholar
Smith, Gavin. 1989. Livelihood and Resistance: Peasants and the Politics of Land in Peru. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Stocking, , George, W. Jr. 1982. The Scientific Reaction against Cultural Anthropology. In Race, Culture, and Evolution: Essays in the History of Anthropology, ed. Stocking, George W. Jr. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Traynor, Michael. 1996. Countering the Excessive Subpoena for Scholarly Research. In Cecil and Wetherington 1996.Google Scholar
Ward, Martha C. 1989. Nest in the Wind: Adventures in Anthropology on a Tropical Island. Prospect Heights, N.J.: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
Warwick, Donald P. 1982. Tearoom Trade: Means and Ends in Social Research. In Social Research Ethics: An Examination of the Merits of Covert Participant Observatton, ed. Bulmer, Martin. New York: Holmes and Meier.Google Scholar
Wiggins, Elizabeth C, and Judith, A. McKenna. 1996. Researchers' Reaction to Compelled Disclosure of Scientific Information. In Cecil and Wetherington 1996.Google Scholar
Williams, Terry. 1989. Cocaine Kids: The lnside Story of a Teenage Drug Ring. Reading, mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar