curranthro-transparency-and-data

Ethics, Consent & Accountability (curranthro-transparency-and-data)

At CA, "transparency" is not primarily a reproducibility package — it is **research ethics and

accountability** toward the people and communities anthropologists work with. The single most important

rule: protecting people can override sharing data. Because Major Articles receive the **CA✩

Treatment**, an unresolved ethics problem will be exposed to international, signed Comment — design

ethics in from the start (run this skill early and before submission). CA also requires **assignment of

copyright to the Wenner-Gren Foundation** for major articles, reports, forums, discussion items, and

commentaries — factor that into any data/material reuse plan.

When to trigger

• Planning consent, anonymization, and accountability into a project (do this early)
• Working with vulnerable, criminalized, Indigenous, or displaced communities
• Handling human remains, sacred objects, genetic/biological samples, or cultural heritage
• Deciding what materials, transcripts, images, or data can — and cannot — be shared
• Preparing the manuscript's ethics statement and handling the Wenner-Gren copyright assignment

Ethics core (anchor every decision here)

1. Do no harm. Anticipate harm to interlocutors and communities — reputational, legal, physical,

cultural — and design to prevent it. When sharing would endanger people, do not share.

1. Informed consent is ongoing, not a one-time signature: people understand what participation and

publication mean, and can withdraw. For media, consent covers that use of that image/recording.

1. Be open and honest about your role, funders, and purposes with those you study and with readers.
2. Weigh competing obligations transparently — to people studied, to scholarship, to communities,

and to the discipline — and explain how you resolved conflicts.

Anonymization & protection of interlocutors

• Anonymize people and often places (pseudonyms, composite or masked details) where exposure could cause

harm; state your anonymization strategy and its limits.

• For vulnerable or criminalized communities, treat confidentiality as protective, not optional;

consider not collecting or not retaining data that could be subpoenaed or leaked.

• Images: blur/withhold identifiers per consent; some images should not be published at all

(see curranthro-tables-figures).

Heritage, repatriation & biological materials

• Cultural heritage & sacred objects: respect community authority; some knowledge/objects should not

be reproduced or published. Follow NAGPRA and relevant national/Indigenous protocols.

• Human remains & repatriation: document provenance and descendant-community consent; align with

repatriation obligations; do not present ancestral remains as ungoverned data.

• Genetic / biological data: community consent (incl. group-level harms), benefit-sharing where

appropriate; deposit only where consent and protocols permit.

Data sharing & copyright (open-but-careful)

• Share what you ethically can (codebooks, non-sensitive materials, analysis details for quantitative

subfields) and document why sensitive data are withheld, with an access/contact path where

appropriate. Follow any UChicago Press / Editorial Manager data-availability prompt at upload.

• For biological/archaeological quantitative work, normal reproducibility hygiene applies: documented

procedures, pinned versions, seeds — subject to the ethics constraints above. Sharing never trumps

consent or community harm.

• Wenner-Gren copyright: CA requires assigning copyright to the Wenner-Gren Foundation for the main

article types; ensure you hold the rights you assign (especially for co-held community materials,

archival images, and others' media) before signing.

Anti-patterns

• Treating ethics as IRB paperwork done once, not an ongoing relationship of care
• Publishing identifiable details/images that endanger interlocutors to look more transparent
• Reproducing sacred/heritage materials or ancestral remains against community wishes
• Extractive research: taking knowledge/samples with no consent, benefit, or accountability
• A "view from nowhere" that hides funders, role, or competing obligations
• Assigning Wenner-Gren copyright over materials you do not actually have the right to license

Output format

【Ethics core】do-no-harm / consent / honesty / competing-obligations addressed? [Y/N]
【Consent】ongoing + covers publication & media use? [Y/N]
【Anonymization】strategy + limits stated; vulnerable interlocutors protected? [Y/N]
【Heritage/remains/biological】provenance + community authority + repatriation respected? [Y/N/NA]
【Data sharing】what is shared / what is ethically withheld + why
【Copyright】Wenner-Gren assignment rights confirmed for all included materials? [Y/N]
【Next】curranthro-review-process

Supplementary resources

• [../../resources/official-source-map.md](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — CA ethics expectations, Wenner-Gren copyright assignment, data-availability prompts
• [../../../shared-resources/empirical-methods/reporting-standards.md](../../../shared-resources/empirical-methods/reporting-standards.md) — background reporting hygiene for quantitative (biological/archaeological) subfields only