FOR SCIENTIFIC ETHICS: INTERVIEW WITH PEOPLE WHOSE OPINIONS ARE NOT USUALLY TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION: CROSSED VIEWPOINTS

Abstract

What ethics to adopt and what responsibilities to
assume for the researcher who investigates by engaging the
speech of those whose opinions are not usually taken into
consideration? How is the researcher's report played out to his
respondents? In very different fields of research - the sociology
of mental health and the history of contemporary art - these
questions arise in the same terms. This article is based on the
research experiences of the research authors. They all have
experienced a relatively complex survey approach because of the
respondents' positioning, perceived as "stigmatizing" or "out of
step" from society’s point of view. Laurence Fond-Harmant has
gathered a panel of testimonies for the de-stigmatization of
psychiatric diseases by inviting patients to testify of their relation
to their mental pathology and to the social world. Lydie Rekow
has interviewed live models of the contemporary artist Paul-
Armand Gette with the aim of listening to the voices of those
who act as part of his art, in order to constitute a corpus of
knowledge enlightening the modalities of the artist’s artwork. 

Mihaela Gavrila-Ardelean has studied occupational interview
techniques and educational methods to reduce stigma of people
with mental health problems. Liviu Gavrila-Ardelean has been
working for over a decade with children with mental
deficiencies, improving their compliance to medical treatment. In
all cases, the researchers have adapted to a new audience and
adopted a new position; what are the stakes and issues, the added
values and the scientific postures in the field of the interview?
These are the tormenting questions of scientific ethics that the
article attempts to answer. It inscribes the tracks of reflection in
the deontological and ethical framework of the fields of research
reviewed in human and social sciences.