Ethics Statement

D/deaf and Hard of Hearing (HH) communities have historically been disenfranchised and marginalized. It is, thus, important to reiterate the importance of conducting research that is ethical and conscientious. This is especially the case for rural and indigenous (sign) languages, and communities of the global South, which have experienced academic/scientific exploitation from international researchers from Europe, North America and other so-called ‘first world, developed’ nations.

 

Sign language research can be empowering, with the potential for preserving local language/culture, providing evidence for issues in advocacy and policy reform, and validating the existence of these communities. However, there is always potential for unintended, harmful consequences. We have seen the rise of ‘academic tourism’ with Kata Kolok and Adamorobe Sign Language, for instance.

 

Like all regions, the Caribbean presents its own unique circumstances. We must be considerate of the differing realities of these communities from those in the north, but also between countries within the region itself. Beyond consent, we must be mindful of the methodologies we use in our research and adapt them to the socio-economic, cultural, and educational situations of each individual community. For example, while 18% of deaf adults in the United States have obtained a bachelor’s degree or higher, approximately five deaf Trinbagonians in total have achieved tertiary education. These disparities are equally reflected in who typically performs research on rural/indigenous sign languages and who is being researched; the former often benefiting from publication, grants, and other academic accolades and the latter remaining a subject of fieldwork. As a post-colonial region, the Caribbean has long been extracted for its resources to the benefit of imperial nations. In order to conduct ethical research, we must actively participate in dismantling this dichotomy. 

 

This website was created with the intention of providing a resource of information on Caribbean sign languages. With this in mind, we are aware of the risk of exposing local communities to further ‘academic tourism’ by international researchers who happen upon this page. We ask hearing and international researchers to reflect on their positionality and role in this field of study, and to remember that the ultimate goal is to have research performed by D/deaf and HH individuals, to work with D/deaf and HH communities, and not simply do research on them.
 

To read more on performing ethical research with signing communities, please refer to these resources:

https://sites.google.com/view/linasigns/bibliography?authuser=0

 

Boland, A., Wilson, A., Winiarczyk, R., 2015. Deaf international development practitioners and researchers working effectively in deaf communities. In: Friedner, M., Kusters, A. (Eds.), It's a Small World: Inquiries into International Deaf Spaces. Gallaudet University Press, Washington DC, pp. pp239–pp248.

 

De Clerck, G.A.M., Lutalo-Kiingi, S., 2018. Ethical and methodological responses to risks in fieldwork with deaf Ugandans. Contemp. Soc. Sci. 13, 372–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2017.1347273.

 

Dikyuva, H., Escobedo Delgado, C.E., Panda, S., Zeshan, U., 2012. Working with village sign language communities: Deaf fieldwork researchers in professional dialogue. In: Zeshan, U., De Vos, C. (Eds.), Sign Languages in Village Communities. De Gruyter Mouton / Ishara Press, pp. 313–344.

 

Fischer, S.D., 2009. Sign language field methods: approaches, techniques, and concerns. In: Tai, J.H.-Y., Tsay, J. (Eds.), Taiwan Sign Language and beyond. Taiwan Institute for the Humanities, National Chung Cheng University, Chia-Yi, pp. 1–19.

 

Hou, L.Y.-S., 2017. Negotiating language practices and language ideologies in fieldwork: a reflexive meta-documentation. In: Kusters, A., De Meulder, M., O'Brien, D. (Eds.), Innovations in Deaf Studies: the Role of Deaf Scholars. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 339–359.

 

Kusters, A., 2012. Being a deaf white anthropologist in adamorobe: some ethical and methodological issues. In: Zeshan, U., de Vos, C. (Eds.), Sign Languages in Village Communities: Anthropological and Linguistic Insights, pp. 27–52.

 

Moriarty Harrelson, E., 2017. Authenticating Ownership: Claims to Deaf Ontologies in the Global South. In: Kusters, Annelies, De Meulder, Maartje, O’Brien, Dai (Eds.), Innovations in Deaf Studies: The Role of Deaf Scholars. Oxford University Press.

 

Singleton, J.L., Martin, A.J., Morgan, G., 2015. Ethics, deaf-friendly research, and good practice when studying sign languages. In: Research Methods in Sign Language Studies: A Practical Guide, pp. 7–20.

 

Zeshan, U., 2007. The ethics of documenting sign languages in village communities. In: Austin, P.K., Bond, O., Nathan, D. (Eds.), Language Documentation & Linguistic Theory. SOAS, London, pp. 269–279.