Between Worlds: Reflecting on Ethics, Knowledge, and Methods in Indigenous Community Research

Introduction
Indigenous community-based research holds tremendous promise for producing knowledge that is responsive, relational, and transformative. Guided by the principle of two-eyed seeing—which blends Western science with Indigenous ways of knowing, doing, and relating—these partnerships often face challenges at the intersection of distinct cultural realities. Partners may experience “culture shock,” including disorientation and frustration, as they encounter unfamiliar practices and values. Yet such challenges are rarely reported in academic outputs, obscuring lived realities and limiting opportunities for shared learning.

Goals and Methods
Using collaborative autoethnography, two members of the research team reflected on the challenges and lessons learned during the first four years of a community-based project that brought together academics, Indigenous service providers, and communities to support Indigenous families living with childhood disabilities. These reflections aim to inform other research partnerships and to encourage postsecondary institutions to adapt to the needs of Indigenous-focused undertakings.

Results
Three key tensions emerged. First, while academic institutions emphasize individualized ethics processes, Indigenous contexts prioritize collective, relational responsibilities. Second, qualitative scholarship often privileges abstraction and thematization, which can obscure the specificity and relational grounding central to Indigenous knowledge systems. Third, academic processes (such as ethics and grants) typically assume fixed plans and methodological expertise, whereas Indigenous community-based research is dynamic and invites methods to emerge from community priorities. We describe how these tensions were navigated and their impact on researchers, the project, and institutional processes.

Conclusions
Researchers new to Indigenous community-based work should anticipate how cultural intersections may require them to confront and reframe conventional understandings of research. Strong mentorship is crucial in helping teams navigate these tensions and build partnerships that are both fruitful and mutually beneficial.