Institutional Review Boards and Methodological Conservatism: The Challenge to and from Phenomenological Paradigms

  • Lincoln Y
  • 18


    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • N/A


    Citations of this article.


Currently, there appear to be four ways in which the work of qualitative researchers and scholars who teach qualitative research philosophies and methods is constrained by the manner in which new paradigms encounter institutional review board (IRB) regulation on campuses: (1) increased scrutiny surrounding research with human subjects (a response to failures in biomedical research), (2) new scrutiny of classroom research and training in qualitative methods involving human subjects, (3) new discourses regarding what constitutes "evidence-based research," and (4) the long-term effects of the recent National Research Council (NRC, 2002) report on what should be considered to be scientific inquiry. After presenting a brief history of IRBs, I offer a set of suggestions to help scholars cope with these constraints in both qualitative research and the teaching of qualitative methods. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document


  • Yvonna S. Lincoln

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free