Not so long ago I was asked to participate in qualitative research. This was an in depth intervju and I was assured anonymity. I said that I would only participate under my full name. The researcher found this very confusing. I explained that my views were well thought through and that I would prefer to get credit for them.
An interesting boundary issue. You defined your parameters, and can say "no" to the request. I could see that a researcher might want to keep interviewee names out of it and thus not include you or give you credit.
This can be a issue related more to the institution than to the researcher. Specially with the new rules about privacy in UE the universities are preferring to keep companies and persons anonymity and avoid future disputes or problems involving their researchers and themselves.
As long as the relevant ethics committee agreed with you being identified then there should be no problem in identifying you as a participant. What might be more difficult is individualising your responses if the researchers were looking more for shared themes than individual differences. The researchers may see your request as too problematic and are at liberty to exclude you from the study.
Hendrika Vande Kemp Ana Reinbold Mark Gillespie - The issue here is partly philosophical. In my own research I often find that the informants or participants contribute in ways that are fundamental for the research prosess and discoveries. In som cases they end up having a role more like a co-researcher than an informant.
You´re asking about an interesting and controversial issue on the ethics of research. As many others human actions, research is an activity where power and risks of domination, and abuse are in play. From my viewpoint as researcher, there can be some different perspectives. One is that, generally, I prefer to respect and follow the international and general ethics principles of research which includes justice, anonymity, privacy, and confidentiality, among others. In this context, if the participant claims recognition, I would explain the participant about the ethics and the purposes of the research. If the participant insists, I would thank and advise to follow other ways to publish his/her viewpoints in an open way, in order to get the recognition that she/he wants. There are many other ways to obtain public recognition of ideas.
Yet, there are other scenarios where recognizing the name of the participants is relevant for the research and isn´t risky. In this case, I think it´s a possibility that should be open to all the participants – under the principle of justice. In this case, I would submit this possibility to the Ethics Committee. Another scenario is related to the participant as possible co-researcher… This case requires particular analysis that I would follow not by myself, but, recognizing some risks uses of power, always supported with colleagues – Ethics Committee.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Cognitive Science
- Thinking