{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017663043478260868, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.991869918699187, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
An Ethic of Analysis: An Argument for Critical Analysis of Research Interviews as an Ethical Practice

Nursing literature is replete with discussions about the ethics of research interviews. These largely involve questions of method, and how careful study design and data collection technique can render studies more ethical. Analysis, the perennial black box of the research process, is rarely discussed as an ethical practice. In this paper, I introduce the idea that analysis itself is an ethical practice. Specifically, I argue that political discourse analysis of research interviews is an ethical practice. I use examples from my own research in a prison control unit to illustrate what this might look like, and what is at stake.