For scientific ethics: Interview with people whose opinions are not usually taken into consideration: crossed viewpoints.

What ethics to adopt and what responsibilities to assume for the researcher who investigates by engaging the speech of those whose opinions are not usually taken into consideration? How is the researcher's report played out to his respondents? In very different fields of research - the sociology of mental health and the history of contemporary art - these questions arise in the same terms. This article is based on the research experiences of the research authors. They all have experienced a relatively complex survey approach because of the respondents' positioning, perceived as "stigmatizing" or "out of step" from society’s point of view. Laurence Fond-Harmant has gathered a panel of testimonies for the de-stigmatization of psychiatric diseases by inviting patients to testify of their relation to their mental pathology and to the social world. Lydie Rekow has interviewed live models of the contemporary artist Paul-Armand Gette with the aim of listening to the voices of those who act as part of his art, in order to constitute a corpus of knowledge enlightening the modalities of the artist’s artwork. Mihaela Gavrila-Ardelean has studied occupational interview techniques and educational methods to reduce stigma of people with mental health problems. Liviu Gavrila-Ardelean has been working for over a decade with children with mental deficiencies, improving their compliance to medical treatment. In all cases, the researchers have adapted to a new audience and adopted a new position; what are the stakes and issues, the added values and the scientific postures in the field of the interview? These are the tormenting questions of scientific ethics that the article attempts to answer. It inscribes the tracks of reflection in the deontological and ethical framework of the fields of research reviewed in human and social sciences.