The Promises and Pitfalls of Engaging Male Juvenile Offenders in Gender Violence Prevention and Bystander Education.

Drawing on interviews with and observations of boys enrolled in a bystander violence prevention program at a juvenile detention center, this article provides a sociological case study on how the boys' biographies and violent lived experiences shaped their engagement with the program. Previous research on bystander prevention programs has typically focused on men enrolled in college who do not have the same kinds of violent histories as the boys in this study do. This article builds upon prior research on prevention programs by demonstrating how at-risk youth participants understand and access the program. We offer suggestions for tailoring bystander prevention programs to more adequately address the specific needs of these populations.

"There Are No Known Benefits . . .": Considering the Risk/Benefit Ratio of Qualitative Research.

Institutional review boards (IRBs) are responsible for weighing the risks and benefits of research participation. Qualitative researchers note numerous instances where IRB ethical frameworks fail to align with the ethics of their research projects and point out that IRB understandings of the benefits and risks of research often differ from those of the participants they seek to protect. This qualitative cross-case research investigates participants' interview experiences in six qualitative studies that differed in their methods, subject of focus, and populations. Our findings indicate that contemporary IRBs' use of population "vulnerability" and topic "sensitivity" to assess project risk does not adequately determine the benefits, risks, or ethicality of research. We recommend that IRBs treat as real the evidence for benefits in qualitative research, recognize that sensitivity and vulnerability do not predict risk, and encourage researchers to attend to relationships in their projects.