Melanesian research ethics.
Vallance, Roger
Abstract
Research ethics underpins a successful research method and ethics
is the corner stone of useful and meaningful research. Within the
Melanesian context, research ethics has a foundational role in meeting
the challenges faced when researching in Melanesia. Collaboration action
and community involvement, personal compassion and courage are advocated
as the means that researchers can apply to achieve improved research
outcomes. The role of these attributes is explained in terms of research
in Melanesian communities.
Keywords: research ethics, PNG, Melanesia, research methodology,
validity
Introduction
An earlier article explored the criteria to be satisfied in order
to describe a Melanesian research methodology (Vallance, 2007). This
present article takes a wider perspective than a Melanesian methodology
to address the concern of the ethical conduct of research within
methodologies in Melanesian cultures, with particular reference to
research conducted in PNG.
This article explores the domain of research ethics within the
qualitative paradigm and within social research. While this paper does
not directly address medical ethical concerns, the broad frame of
reference is pertinent to medical research as well as positivist research models. This paper presumes that ethical research does not
'just happen' but is the result of careful and creative
planning, human and technical insight, and respect for the research and
the social contexts.
A starting point for this article is that research ethics is more
than just informed consent. Research ethics pertains to more than data
collection, although at times discussions of research ethics seem
restricted to data collection issues. Research ethics pertains to the
whole research process and is a guarantee of validity, the usefulness of
the research outcomes.
The term 'Melanesia' is used through out this article.
While the author's principal exposure has been within Papua New
Guinea, there are clear cultural and sociological similarities between
the peoples of PNG and the greater Melanesia (Franklin, 2007, p.26). PNG
itself has an enormous cultural diversity evidenced in languages,
customs and societal organisation (CIA FactFiles, 2006; Kelep-Malpo,
2007). The prominent PNG thinker Bernard Narakobi has developed a well
respected philosophy of 'the Melanesian Way' (Narokobi, 1980).
Lastly, many of the social issues that concern today's researchers,
including land rights, the conflict between traditional and so-called
'western' ways, the divide between customary practices and
modern practices, transcend the national boundaries of the many island
states of Melanesia. The term 'Melanesia' best accounts for
the similarities and shared cultural identities of the peoples of PNG
and their near neighbours in the south Pacific region.
Melanesian research ethics
This paper does not argue that research in Melanesia is more or
less ethically challenged than in other locales or cultures. It does
argue that there are challenges in accomplishing research in Melanesian
societies, and that these challenges are fully worthy of the efforts
required. This paper does argue that respecting the Melanesian context
of the society is the only way to do ethical research in Melanesia.
Furthermore, this paper argues that respectful, ethical research is the
only form of social research that should be done and is worth doing in
Melanesia.
The scope of research ethics
This paper is premised on the assertion that the ethical status of
the research is fundamental to any discussion of the value of the
research. While in methodological terms validity is often championed as
the 'gold standard' of research, ethics is overwhelmingly the
sine qua non of research (Vallance, 2005). Ethics, in the context of
research, includes all aspects of the research and publication cycle
rather than the more narrow perspective of ethical data collection.
Ethical research demands that ethical research questions, research
processes, analytic processes and data management and result
dissemination all be accorded rightful priorities (Vallance, 2005).
Melanesian context of research ethics
Within the Melanesian cultures, a number of factors impinge upon
the validity and trustworthiness of the research process. Two aspects of
the research process: data collection and data analysis are examined in
some detail with regard to safeguards to be employed to ensure high
quality research outcomes. It is not claimed that these factors are
unique to PNG or to Melanesia, however these factors are frequently
encountered in research in Melanesian cultures.
Factors pertaining to data collection
There are a number of factors that pertain to the processes of data
collection of particular relevance to Melanesian research contexts. The
division of factors into those pertaining to data collection and those
concerning data analysis is a dichotomy created for the convenience of
explanation rather than a theoretical or practical difference. It is
understood that overlap between these factors occurs. However, for the
sake of organisation, the different groups are useful as an aid for
discussion.
Language
The linguistic diversity of PNG is often stated. Not only are there
some 800 or more languages today current in PNG itself (CIA FactFiles,
2007) but these languages derive from two different language groups,
Austronesian and NonAustronesian so that there can be little similarity
between neighbouring language groups (Foley, 2000; Whiteman, 1984). Some
of these languages have only several hundred mother tongue speakers
(Kulick & Stroud, 1990). While tok pisin is usually described as the
lingua franca, the peoples in the south of PNG often speak Police Motu
(1) rather than tok pisin as a common language, although English is
common in most towns across PNG.
Literacy is often little esteemed in PNG villages. While literacy
rates and skills affect PNG development (Booth, 1995), the lack of
literacy is a social issue of significance. Akinnaso (1981) asserts that
literacy has cultural, social development and cognitive consequences.
Literacy affects not only how one conceptualises but also what one can
conceptualise (Meacham, 2001). One of the realities of research in
village situations is the difficulty explaining what one is researching
and why it is worthy of research. Many local PNG languages, and tok
pisin itself (I have no experience of Motu), lack a vocabulary that is
rich in abstract concepts, time delimitations and individualised effects. In some languages the vocabulary is so limited that even in
verbal dialogue the context is crucial to resolve the intended meaning
for words which have multiple, distinct meanings (2). It is difficult,
even for a fluent speaker, to translate the ideas of research into a
local language. Furthermore, many PNG people speak tok pisin but cannot
read or write in tok pisin, so translated Consent Forms are inscrutable in either language. When these difficulties impede clear communication,
it is of concern that the researcher cannot readily gain informed
consent because the information cannot be readily communicated.
Cultural perspective of compensation
The visitor to PNG soon encounters the word
'compensation'. Yet compensation is not limited to the Western
understanding of 'making right' (3). It is argued that there
are three different senses of the term compensation in PNG today. The
first sense of compensation that operates in PNG today is the
Western-legal understanding or redressing a particular wrong.
Compensation is due to the person wronged and is to be paid by the
person who has done wrong (Kepore, 1975; N. O'Neill, 1975).
Compensation is also applied to a range of other social interactions
like bride price and marriage payments (Jessep & Luluaki, 1994,
p.8). Compensation also applied to activities to restore the social
order (Kepore, 1975, p.178; MacDonald, 1984) and is most effective in
re-aligning existing relationships (Stralhern, 1975, pp.185-186).
Trompf argues that 'Melanesian social life is a constant give
and take' (Trompf, 1991, p.64) and that compensation has different
faces and processes when employed between hostile groups and within
tribes or clans not normally mutually hostile. So compensation can be
understood as either retribution for wrongs admitted (Trompf, 1994,
p.107), or 'indemnification of one's allies for their
services, risks, and serious losses' (Trompf, 1994, p.107).
'Compensation' also includes the exchanges or gifts, some
token in nature but others substantial, that are used to create,
formalise and acknowledge relationships (Mantovani, 1984, p.204). The
reciprocity of exchanges can be seen as building relationships. It is
this sense of ritualising relationship which is now discussed in terms
of research ethics and data collection.
The researcher and the research participants enter into a
relationship. This relationship usually has some clearly defined
boundaries in Western thinking, but in the Melanesian mindset relationships can be more pervasive and certainly more valued. It is
possible that a research participant can understand that contributing to
the research enterprise is, in fact, one part of a ritualised
relationship exchange and that person can expect reciprocity or
compensation for the information given. This cultural perspective has
several consequences. Firstly, if unanticipated or unrecognised, this
expectation of reciprocity may result in offence and even anger if the
expected reciprocal exchange does not occur. Secondly, if information
given is offered in order to create or cement a relationship, that which
is offered might be constructed in ways to maximise the perceived
relationship benefit: in other words the discussion, may become more a
telling of what is thought to be valued, rather than the person's
own understanding.
It is not uncommon for some participants to have unrealistic
expectations of personal benefits of research. While the Belmont Report specifically enjoins researchers to have regard for the beneficence of
participants (National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects
of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, 1979; National Health and Medical
Research Council, 1997, 1999; Sieber, 1992), the Belmont Report does not
advocate reciprocal relationships within the research context. It is not
claimed that the cultural understanding of compensation will invalidate data collection. It is argued that careful planning of the approach and
establishment of the research relationship in the Melanesian cultural
context is important to ensure that appropriate and trustworthy data are
collected for the research.
Communal consent
Melanesians frequently report a communal model of ownership. This
communal ownership usually extends to land and other resources
(Trebilcock, 1984). Customary land tenure is never separate in Melanesia
from social, political and economic factors (Giddings, 1984, p.150).
Allied with this communal sense of ownership is a decrease, relative to
Western perceptions, of individual efficacy. It is the practice in many
communities that decisions are made by community leaders, or big-men,
for the community. The big-man is not usually a hereditary leader in
Melanesian cultures but one who maintains his leadership through
political and economic prowess (Chao, 1984, p.133, pp.137-138). While
decision-making is often in consultation with community members,
community leaders can make such decisions.
The power of the local community leaders is pervasive and
persuasive. If a researcher gains research access through the approval
of the local leader/s, it may be difficult to determine whether
individuals offer real assent to being involved in the research, or more
importantly can realistically choose to not consent if the community has
consented. If the community assents to the research, even if solely
through the decision of the local leader, it will be rare that community
members can freely not participate in the research. This nexus has
implications for the collection of research data. If a participant is
not fully consenting, or does not know how to express lack of consent,
then the quality of the data offered to the researcher is compromised.
Clearly, community consent cannot be presumed to mean that all community
members are willing participants. If all participants are not fully
willing, the researcher needs to be mindful that the data she/he is
collecting is of mixed quality and may need to employ further on-to-one
discussions to determine the extend of consent.
In some traditional communities the concept of consent is subsumed
under broader issues of trust or relationship. The exchange of token
gifts can signify the building of such a relationship, be that betel nut
in Melanesia or tobacco as might be used in indigenous Australian
communities (Davison, Brown, & Moffitt, 2006; Ellis & Earley,
2006). This aspect of exchange can mitigate the quality of informed
consent that may be desired in well planned research.
Epistemology
It has been argued elsewhere that differences in epistemology can
produce different research methodologies (Vallance, 2007). However, if
the potential research participants have an epistemology that is very
different from that of the researcher, the threat of miscommunication in
data collection is high.
Indigenous peoples have a distinctive way of looking at the world,
thinking about it, relating to it, and experiencing it, with the
result that indigenous peoples' epistemologies can no longer stand
behind or outside mainstream methodologies, but in front or beside
as the situation demands (Fleras, 2004, p.118).
It is not unknown that some cultures resist research (Gibbs, 2001,
p.675; Hudson & Bruckman, 2004). Whether due to bad experiences with
researchers or a world view that does not validate or honour research
into people's lives, some cultures are resistant to research
(Beresford, Partington, & Gower, 2003; Gibbs, 2001; Ryen, 2004).
A number of factors impinge upon data collection that is ethically
and methodologically sound. These factors include, in the Melanesian
context, the languages of the people and researcher, the local
community's understanding of compensation and communal versus
personal consent. Wherever differences in world view exist, and the
differences track between researcher and research participants, there
are grounds for caution that the messages being given and received in
the same sense that they are transmitted.
Factors pertaining to data analysis
The previous section of this paper has explored some issues that
pertain to the collection of valid or trustworthy data. This section
addresses a number of issues that pertain more to the transparent and
meaningful analysis of research data. While the distinction between data
collection and data analysis is not always an unequivocal one,
especially within the qualitative methodologies, it is employed here as
a means of order and priority for conceptual clarity.
Giving the answers that might be valued
As earlier noted, compensation can be an exchange to develop or
cement relationships. This culturally approved practice develops a
social habit of agreement, and in Melanesian cultures agreement with
superiors or those of higher status is often the currency of reinforcing
these relationships. Within normal discourse this cultural norm makes
for politeness, social harmony and effective bonds within the community.
When a researcher enters the Melanesian context, social compliance
with the views of another can be problematic. It is tempting to suggest
in the previous sentence; 'when a Western researcher enters the
Melanesian context', but this construction would be misleading and
unnecessarily biased. Melanesian peoples encompass an extremely
heterogeneous group of languages, cultures and even races such that PNG
people, for instance, can often feel culturally out of tune in their own
country by simply moving some few kilometres from where they grew up or
live. So just being a citizen of PNG, or being an indigenous born person
in PNG, does not mean that one is culturally in tune with the research
field. In fact, it is likely with over 800 languages, that only tok
pisin or English are shared languages and mother and father tongues [tok
ples] are diverse. Just being Melanesian does not guarantee cultural
sensitivity, and indeed as the history of anthropology suggests, being
aware of one's cultural differences might heighten one's
sensitivities to those very differences and make them visible to
observation.
The researcher usually arrives with expectations. The community
also has expectations, and in many communities there is some deference
to the outsider even if it is just as a visitor. This deference and a
concern to be hospitable and welcoming can sometimes incline
participants to 'give the answers that make the researcher
happy'. Social discourse that seeks to establish or confirm
relationships, if not appreciated and understood, can impede the search
of personally held opinions and socially constructed attitudes than
could be thought to persist beyond the space of the research, and
social, encounter.
Working in such a cultural matrix, the researcher needs to take
care accepting those first offered thoughts. The researcher needs to
self monitor what clues are being sought by participants and what clues
are being offered by the researcher. Sometimes researchers offer non
verbal clues that reinforce certain messages, at least as perceived by
participants: noting some words in a book, or writing notes at one point
of the talk can be seen to be approving or validating such a
communication and may encourage a participant to offers further such
ideas, 'since the researcher likes these, because they are being
written down'. Conversely, to stop note taking at a certain point
might be perceived as research disinterest in the participant's
views. Similarly, non verbal expressions of approval, smiles and sub
verbal messages, can subtly influence and guide the participant along
lines that are perceived to be approved by the researcher.
Temporary nature of answers
The temporary nature of expressed attitudes is something often
remarked upon by initial researchers in PNG. While no social scientist
expects attitudes to be unchanging and completely permanent, there is an
assumption of consistency over time within the Western thinking of
attitudes and opinions. The Melanesian mind, immersed in concerns for
social harmony has less trouble adjusting expressed opinions to match
community mores (Gesch, 2007). This flexibility can be noted when the
context changes, possibly from working-day or modern occupation mindset
to a traditional perspective.
The social researcher in Melanesia needs to take special care to
shift and sort evidence of attitudes reported. In this situation, the
researcher needs to reflexively consider contextual and complementary
evidence that might substantiate the consistency or firmness over time
of expressed opinions.
Embedded cultural perspectives such as sorcery
Traditional Melanesian societies are alive to the spiritual world.
The notions of tambu, sorcery and witchcraft are still current. Indeed
in traditional societies today sorcery and witchcraft are the objects of
conflict and the resource of the ill (Gesch, 2007, pp.19-20).
Different tribes have different totem objects or animals, tambu,
and special sensitivities surround these cultural imperatives.
Similarly, cultures have sensitivities about particular issues, bodily
functions, means of interpersonal address or association. Some societies
are very sensitive to the relationships between opposite genders, and
even social gestures can change meaning when gender becomes a factor:
the ubiquitous hand shake on meeting new people is strongly discouraged
between men and unmarried women in some places.
Any research, especially amongst people living traditionally, has
cultural perspectives. Social research that does not include the
deliberate and thoughtful awareness and sensitivity to cultural mores in
the local place will always be threatened by the possibilities of
conflict, and even more importantly, of not clearly hearing the messages
spoken by participants. Hearing the spoken messages requires awareness
of the cultural context in which the messages are spoken.
Literacy and culture
The adult population in PNG has a declining rate of literacy.
Recent estimates of the nett school enrolment at primary levels of
schooling has shown that less than 35% of school age primary level
students attend on a regular basis (Kombra & Webster, 2006). Hence,
the literacy of adults, especially in the English language can be
expected to be in decline. Even literacy in tok pisin, which may be the
language of rural primary level schools (Department of Education, 2003)
cannot be expected to be high. Hence written communications and written
instructions to participants are increasingly problematic in PNG today.
Researchers will need to be aware that even simple written directions
may be beyond the reading skills of many people in either tok pisin or
English.
Much of Melanesia remains a culture of oral stories. The rules and
interpretative protocols of oral stories are different to those of the
written form: both in flexibility of expression and adaptability of
meaning. As researchers approach projects from a perspective of written
literacy rather than oral stories, the interpretative potentials change
from the oral form to the written forms. It is possible that researchers
might think that they are being told 'literal truths' whereas
the participants might be communicating 'moral or social
truths' in the oral tradition that sound lie the reporting of
actual accounts.
Guidelines for ethical research in Melanesian cultures
Ellis and Earley propose a fourfold approach to respectful research
with indigenous communities. Modifying their American focussed schema a
little, it is suggested that these four approaches of community,
collaboration, compassion, and courage create the hallmarks of ethical
research in Melanesian cultures (Ellis & Earley, 2006, p.8). These
qualities are human qualities. The human interactions of qualitative
research do not limit its effectiveness nor its usefulness.
Neutrality in qualitative research, or in any situation where there
is direct human contact, is a fallacy.
(Ellis & Earley, 2006, p.7)
These four guidelines presume a human interaction that does not
assume neutrality (Tom & Herbert, 2002). Melanesian research cannot
be neutral since it is informed by and involved in Melanesian values and
world-views.
Community
First and foremost, ethical Melanesian research requires a
community approach. Ethical research projects will inform the community,
seek permission from the community and include community perspectives in
data collection and analysis.
So much of traditional Melanesian life revolves around the village.
Village leadership is frequently a matter of extensive consultation with
member, and researchers must build such extended consultation into their
research plans and timetables. Even those Melanesians who live in urban
environments frequently have a strong sense of identification with
village which in turn creates bonds with family, kin and tribe. So,
researchers need to inform the whole village community about the aims
and processes of the research, as well as inform all community members
of potential outcomes and possible consequences of the proposed
research.
Permission for the research must be gained from and of the
community. This task is twofold: the community needs to have a voice to
assent to the research, and the researcher for his/her own ethical
responsibilities must ensure that each individual participant also fully
assents to the research process. The acquiring of informed individual
assent will usually require signed Consent Forms, of such forms attested by a personal mark where the participant is not literate enough to make
a signature. Both community consent and individual consent are required
because the individual researcher has her/his own ethical standards to
maintain which are not to be lowered or ameliorated in communal research
situations.
The research must include a community perspective. To be true to
the Melanesian world-view of community, to respect the Melanesian
epistemology, research must be respectful of community and must foster
community. This statement is stronger than 'should not harm
community' since community is a positive force in Melanesian
epistemologies.
Collaboration
Ethical Melanesian research will be collaborative. Collaborative
research has a number of levels. The first level of collaboration is to
involve the participants as more than sources of data. Researchers will
find collaborative question-making useful to enable participants to
reveal their realties. Collaborative question-making involves people in
what questions need to be asked and how to ask those questions so that
people can respond informatively. Collaborative research can include
collaborative meaning-making. While the researcher has her/his own
perspective on the meaning told by participants, the community members
themselves can add an extra dimension if they can contribute to the
reflection on their realities. Surely, appropriate safeguards for
confidentiality or anonymity will be to be employed, and there are
numerous means of suitable safeguards. Collaboration can also include
shared dissemination of research outcomes, clear acknowledgment of the
contributions of the community and acknowledgement that the community
has some ownership of the research outcomes.
Compassion
Some authors have positioned compassion as a quality intrinsic to
feminist methodologies (Thompson, 1992). This paper argues that active
compassion is an essential orientation for the social researcher who is
seeking to understand the 'other'. Other-ness is never easy to
encounter, and researchers might avoid the challenges of other-ness
(Witz, 2007). Without compassion, ethnography becomes less than the
emotional and human account to which it aspires to be (O'Neill et
al., 2002). Without compassion, the ethnographer risks becoming some
type of voyeur who is distanced from the research scene and by that very
distance is dislocated from much of its meaning. In a real way the
immersion and prolonged fieldwork of the classical anthropologist was an
extended protocol to allow compassion to develop and interpret the
research field through eyes that felt with the research participants.
Ashworth and Lucas (2000, p.299) claim that empathy is a fundamental
attribute in order to perceive the meaning that the other communicates.
When the research context includes cross cultural parameters, the
need for empathy and compassion becomes even stronger. There are two
different calls for empathy and compassion. The first and possibly more
obvious call is for compassion with the people in the research context;
their experiences and feelings should evoke compassion. The second call
is an internal one; that the researcher deals compassionately and
patiently with his own difficulties of enculturated understanding.
Courage
Ellis and Earley propose that the researcher needs courage to
'have strength to be who one is and to seek one's vision'
(2006, p.8). The researcher does need courage (Dickson-Swift, James,
Kippen, & Liamputtong, 2007) to be an individual, although in
concert with the requirement of compassion, individualistic courage is
not enough. Courage is also required to acknowledge and abide with
differences, discontinuities and even contradictions between the
research and the research context (Hubbard, Backett-Milburn, &
Kemmer, 2001). Values, assumptions and even fundamental perceptions of
the value of life may call for courage to be encountered rather than
these discomforts be overlooked or diminished in their power (Wolgemuth
& Donohue, 2006). This courage enables the researcher to stand on
the edge of uncertainty and to acknowledge that one does not have all
the answers and sometimes cannot understand the answers of the other.
Courage is required in reporting cultural research. It is an easy
matter to report only that which is well understood and under analytic
control. It is risky to report gaps or places where understanding is
incomplete.
Conclusion
This article has attempted to explore some of the challenges of
social research embedded in cultural settings. While research in cross
cultural contexts is neither easier nor more difficult than other
research, cross cultural research has distinct challenges. These
challenges involve the full research process, and this article has used
the lens of research ethics to better focus the requirements of valid
and useful research.
The article has explored some challenges of collecting valid and
useful data, and other challenges under the heading of analytic
challenges. While these are not intrinsic differences, there are
differences of degree and also differences in terms of when in the
research cycle the challenges may be confronted.
Lastly, the paper has attempted to offer some guidance to those
undertaking cross cultural research. The guidance is not in the form of
a series of steps or procedures, but rather a group of attitudes and
personal orientations that may permit the researcher to encounter the
culture in a way to better appreciate its integrity and values. While
cultural sensitivity is often recommended, it is less frequent to find
suggested means to work towards cultural sensitivity. It is argued that
cultural sensitivity can be attained by the application of the attitudes
of collaborative action, community involvement, compassion and courage.
It may be that researchers in diverse domains will find the advice
towards collaborative action and community development useful to better
understand the meanings that participants are requested to communicate.
The researcher's qualities of compassion and courage are
recommended for all social researchers, especially those who are
encountering the challenges of the differences in others and their
understandings of the world. It is suggested that courage and compassion
can usefully characterise much social research.
Author's Note:
My thanks to Mrs Bernadette Aihi, a doctoral student, for
suggestions and helpful comments, particularly in relation to Motu as
the language is used today.
References
Akinnaso, F. N. 1981, 'The consequences of literacy in
pragmatic and theoretical perspectives', Anthropology &
Education Quarterly, 12(3), 163-200.
Ashworth, P. & Lucas, U. 2000, 'Achieving empathy and
engagement: a practical approach to the design, conduct and reporting of
phenomenographic research', Studies in Higher Education, 25(3),
295.
Beresford, Q., Partington, G. & Gower, G. 2003,
'Introduction', in Q. Beresford & G. Partington (Eds.),
Reform and Resistance in Aboriginal Education (pp. 1-9), UWA Press,
Perth.
Booth, A. 199, 'Development challenges in a poor pacific
economy: the case of Papua New Guinea', Pacific Affairs, 68(2),
207-223.
Chao, M. J. P. 1984, Leadership, in D. Whiteman (Ed.), An
Introduction to Melanesian Cultures (pp. 127-148), Melanesian Institute
Press, Goroka.
CIA FactFiles 2006, Papua New Guinea, retrieved 15 October 2006,
from http://stronghold.n00bless.com/cia/publications/factbook/geos/pp.html# People
CIA FactFiles 2007, Languages of PNG, retrieved 13 December 2007,
from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world
factbook/geos/pp. html # People
Davison, C. M., Brown, M. & Moffitt, P. 2006, 'Student
researchers negotiating consent in northern Aboriginal
communities', International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(2),
1.
Department of Education 2003, National Curriculum Statement for
Papua New Guinea.
Dickson-Swift, V., James, E. L., Kippen, S. & Liamputtong, P.
2007, 'Doing sensitive research: what challenges do qualitative
researchers face?' Qualitative Research, 7(3), 327-353.
Ellis, J. B., & Earley, M. A. 2006, 'Reciprocity and
Constructions of Informed Consent: Researching with Indigenous
Populations', International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(4),
1.
Fleras, A. 2004, 'Researching together differently: bridging
the research paradigm gap', Native Studies Review, 15(2), 117.
Foley, W. A. 2000, 'The languages of New Guinea', Annual
Review of Anthropology, 29, 357-404.
Franklin, K. J. 2007, 'Framework for a Melanesian world
view', Catalyst, 37(1), 25-52.
Gesch, P. F. 2007, 'Working out of two mindsets: critical
methodology and PNG village traditional way', Contemporary PNG
Studies: DWU Research Journal, 7, 17-34.
Gibbs, M. 2001, 'Toward a strategy for undertaking
cross-cultural collaborative research', Society & Natural
Resources, 14(8), 673.
Giddings, R. 1984, 'Land tenure', in D. Whiteman (Ed.),
An Introduction to Melanesian Cultures (pp. 149-172), Melanesian
Institute Press, Goroka.
Hubbard, G., Backett-Milburn, K. & Kemmer, D. 2001,
'Working with emotion: issues for the researcher in fieldwork and
teamwork', International Journal of Social Research Methodology,
4(2), 119.
Hudson, J. M. & Bruckman, A. 2004, 'Go Away':
participant objections to being studied and the ethics of chatroom
research', Information Society, 20(2), 127.
Jessep, O. & Luluaki, J. 1994, Principle of Family Law in Papua
New Guinea (2nd edn.), University of Papua New Guinea Press, Waigani.
Kelep-Malpo, K. 200, 'Matrilineality and its implications for
traditional and contemporary Papua New Guinea cultures', Catalyst,
37(1), 3-24.
Kepore, K. 1975, 'Crime, compensation and kin', in J.
Zorn & P. Bayne (Eds.), Lo Biolong Ol Manmeri (pp. 176-180),
University of PNG Press, Waigani.
Kombra, U. & Webster, T. 2006, 'Nett enrolment rate study
in nine provinces of PNG', paper presented at the National Research
Institute and Department of Education, Port Moresby.
Kulick, D., & Stroud, C. 1990, 'Christianity, cargo and
ideas of self: patterns of literacy in a Papua New Guinean
village', Man, New Series, 25(2), 286304.
MacDonald, M. 1984, 'Melanesian communities past and
present', in D. Whiteman (Ed.), An Introduction to Melanesian
Cultures (pp. 213-230). Melanesian Institute Press, Goroka.
Macquarie Dictionary, 2005, (3rd edn), Eurofield Information
Services, Chatswood.
Mantovani, E. 1984, 'Traditional values and ethics', in
D. Whiteman (Ed.), An Introduction to Melanesian Cultures (pp. 195-212),
Melanesian Institute Press, Goroka.
Meacham, S. J. 2001, 'Vygotsky and the blues: re-reading
cultural connections and conceptual development', Theory into
Practice, 40(3), 190-197.
Narokobi, B. 1980, The Melanesian Way, Institute of Papua New
Guinea Studies, Port Moresby.
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of
Biomedical and Behavioral Research 1979, The Belmont Report, Department
of Health, Education and Welfare, USA.
National Health and Medical Research Council 1997, (9 December
2002), 'Joint NHMRC/AVCC Statement and Guidelines on Research
Practice', Retrieved 9 December, 2003, from
http://www.health.gov.au/nhmrc/research/general/nhmrcavc.htm
National Health and Medical Research Council 1999, National
Statement on Ethical Conduct in Research Involving Humans, AusInfo,
Canberra.
O'Neill, M., Giddens, S., Breatnach, P., Bagley, C., Bourne,
D., & Judge, T. 2002, 'Renewed methodologies for social
research: ethno-mimesis as performative praxis', Sociological
Review, 50(1), 69-88.
O'Neill, N. 1975, 'Compensation: liability without fault
in Papua New Guinea', in J. Zorn & P. Bayne (Eds.), Lo Bilong
Ol Manmeri (pp. 168-175), University of Papua New Guinea Press, Waigani.
Ryen, A. 2004, Ethical issues, in C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. Gubrium
& D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative Research Practice (pp. 230-247),
Sage Publications, London.
Sieber, J. E. 1992, Planning Ethically Responsible Research: A
Guide to Students and Internal Review Boards, Sage, London.
Stralhern, A. 1975, 'Compensation payments in the
highlands', in J. Zorn & P. Bayne (Eds.), Lo Bilong Ol Manmeri
(2 edn.), University of Papua New Guinea Press, Waigani.
Thompson, L. 1992, 'Feminist methodology for family
studies', Journal of Marriage & Family, 54(1), 3-18.
Tom, A. & Herbert, C. P. 2002, 'The 'near miss':
a story of relationship', Qualitative Inquiry, 8, 591-607.
Trebilcock, M. J. 1984, 'Communal property rights: the Papua
New Guinean experience', The University of Toronto Law Journal,
34(4), 377-420.
Trompf, G. W. 1991, Melanesian Religion, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Trompf, G. W. 1994, Payback: The Logic of Retribution in Melanesian
Religion, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Vallance, R. J. 2005, 'Research ethics: re-visioning
postgraduate formation', Issues in Educational Research, 15(2),
50-63.
Vallance, R. J. 2007, 'Is there a Melanesian research
methodology?', Contemporary PNG Studies: DWU Research Journal,
7(Nov), 1-15.
Whiteman, D. 1984, 'Melanesia: its people and cultures',
An Introduction to Melanesian Cultures, 1, 85-104.
Witz, K. G. 2007, 'Awakening to' an aspect in the other:
on developing insights and concepts in qualitative research',
Qualitative Inquiry 2007; 13; 235, 13, 235-258.
Wolgemuth, J. R. & Donohue, R. 2006, 'Toward an inquiry of
discomfort: guiding transformation in 'emancipatory' narrative
research', Qualitative Inquiry, 12, 1012-1039.
(1) Motu is the specific language spoken by an ethnic group in the
south of PNG. Police Motu is the name of the lingua franca, which has
some considerable differences from ethnic Motu. However, in common
conversation, Police Motu, as the lingua franca, is frequently referred
to as Motu.
(2) In the Roro language the word ' wapuka'a' can
mean 'bartering system' or 'midnight', depending on
the context and the sentence structure in which it is used. Roro is
spoken in Central Province by the coastal peoples between Hisu north of
Port Moresby to the northern coastal extent of Central Province to
Kikori on the province border with Gulf Province.
(3) Macquarie Dictionary defines compensation as 'something
given or received as an equivalent for services, debt, loss, suffering,
etc.; indemnity' ('Macquarie Dictionary', 2005).
Roger Vallance holds a PhD from Cambridge University. He has an
earlier background of secondary science teaching and school
administration and now explores research interests in educational and
values-based leadership, the education of boys and research methods
particularly qualitative methods and research ethics. He was a Visiting
Professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in the
second half of 2005, and is now Director of Research, Quality Assurance
and Postgraduate Studies at DWU. He is developing the postgraduate and
research activities of DWU, and has interests in workplace and
professional training. Email rvallance@dwu.ac.pg