Welcome. This page is an attempt to open discussions of the risks researchers face when conducting qualitative research.
Types of Reseacher Risks:
When conducting qualitative methods, it can be hard to anticipate what types of risks you might encounter. This is especially true because risk to researchers, versus their participants, is rarely discussed. After a meta-analysis of articles about researcher risks, Kirstie McAllum and I have identified 5 common contexts that cause risks:
-Crisis: Research where an urgent issue is ongoing and creating threats to stability in the research site. Examples include disaster recovery, war, and political turmoil.
-Disrupted: Research that occurs in a seemingly "safe" or mundane context that is disrupted by threats to safety. Examples include sudden violence, injuries, and conflict.
-Vulnerable: Research where the researchers' identity(ies) create potential for risks. For example, sites where gender, belonging to a marginalized racial/ethnic group, or being LGBTQ create potential threats, either by participants or by the context surrounding them.
-Emotional: Research that can cause emotional distress or even secondhand trauma due to what the researcher witnesses. Examples include health research around death and dying, research with survivors of violence, war, or other crisis situations.
-Ethical: Research where the researcher faces ethical dilemmas. Examples include whether and how to maintain confidentiality when participants divulge criminal activity, or sites where the research may leave participants vulnerable to harm, causing researchers to question continuing the research.
What should we do about researcher risks?
Some discussion is already occuring about how to deal with risks to qualitative researchers. Unfortunately, most of this discussion exists at the individual level. We aim to elevate this conversation to the institutional level as well.
How to protect yourself as a researcher
Create a research safety plan that includes:
Where you will be, shared with trusted others who can check on you, along with designated check-in times.
A site exit plan and anticipated reasons you may want to leave the site.
Identified partners, if the research will be safer to conduct in pairs.
Checkpoints to take care of yourself and plans to do so (e.g., packing snacks, removing self from the field, discussing the research with members of your team and/or qualified counselors).
How to protect your research team
Begin research with a group discussion to identify risks the research may cause. Consider how different members of the team may face different risks (e.g., due to identities, seniority/status, and insider/outsider status).
Create a safety plan (see above) and consider interviewing or collecting research in pairs or groups.
Create debrief points where team members check in on each other about how the research is affecting them.
Create exit points, multiple ways to contact team members, and an emergency plan if you cannot make contact with someone.
What can universities do?
Create trainings for early career researchers that identify and discuss risks they may face.
Add researcher risk lessons to qualitative methods (see our sample lesson plan).
Add identification of researcher risks to the institutional review board process.
Develop protocols that the IRB and university will use if researcher safety is jeopardized (see above).
Suggested readings:
Bahn, S. (2012). Keeping academic field researchers safe: Ethical safeguards. Journal of Academic Ethics, 10(2), 83-91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-012-9159-2
Bashir, N. (2020). The qualitative researcher: the flip side of the research encounter with vulnerable people. Qualitative Research, 20(5), 667-683. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794119884805
Bloor, M., Fincham, B., & Sampson, H. (2010). Unprepared for the worst: Risks of harm for qualitative researchers. Methodological Innovations Online, 5(1), 45-55. https://doi.org/10.4256/mio.2010.0009
Boromisza-Habashi, D. (2023). A front-row seat to fascists: Complicities in the field. Chroniques Du Terrain. https://www.chroniquesduterrain.org/explorer/complicities-in-the-field
Brookfield, S. (2024). Choosing not to help: The ethical challenge of beneficence for clinicians conducting ethnographic research. Ethnography, 14661381241237407. https://doi.org/10.1177/14661381241237407
Brougham, P. L., Uttley, C. M., & Haley, T. M. (2023). Researcher Safety: Studying Social Deviance or Criminal Behavior. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 34(1), 53–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511253.2022.2137540
Browne, B. C. (2013). Recording the personal: The benefits in maintaining research diaries for documenting the emotional and practical challenges of fieldwork in unfamiliar settings. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 12(1), 420–435. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691301200121
Calgaro, E. (2015). If you are vulnerable and you know it raise your hand: Experiences from working in post-tsunami Thailand. Emotion, Space and Society, 17, 45-54.
Chambers, J. (2020). When fieldwork falls apart: Navigating disruption from political turmoil in research. Area, 52(2), 437–444. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12587
Collins, V. E., & Farrell, A. L. (2024). “What’s She Doing Here?!”: Negotiating Gender Identity and Harassment in Gendered, Sexualized, and “Taboo” Research Spaces. Feminist Criminology, 19(2), 83–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/15570851231214796
Connolly, K., & Reilly, R. C. (2007). Emergent issues when researching trauma: A confessional tale. Qualitative inquiry, 13(4), 522–540. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800406297678
Connor, J., Copland, S., & Owen, J. (2018). The infantilized researcher and research subject: Ethics, consent and risk. Qualitative Research, 18(4), 400–415.
Coy, P. G. (2001). Shared risks and research dilemmas on a Peace Brigades International team in Sri Lanka. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 30(5), 575–606. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124101129024277.
Davis, S. M., Ashun, F., Dannett, A., Edwards, K., & Nwaohuocha, V. (2021). Writing Ourselves into Existence Black Women Researchers’ Collaborative Autoethnographic Reflections on Addressing Exclusion in Academia. Departures in Critical Qualitative Research, 10(1), 4–27. https://doi.org/10.1525/dcqr.2021.10.1.4
Dawar, A. I. (2020). Are you a spy? On the inconveniences of conventional methodology in terror wrap ethnography. Qualitative Research Journal, 21(1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-11-2019-0091
Dickson-Swift, V., James, E. L., Kippen, S., & Liamputtong, P. (2007). Doing sensitive research: What challenges do qualitative researchers face? Qualitative Research, 7(3), 327–353. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1468794107078515
Dominey-Howes, D. (2015). Seeing ‘the dark passenger’–reflections on the emotional trauma of conducting post-disaster research. Emotion, Space and Society, pp. 17, 55-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emospa.2015.06.008
Eriksen, C., & Ditrich, T. (2015). The relevance of mindfulness practice for trauma-exposed disaster researchers. Emotion, Space and Society, 17, 63–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emospa.2015.07.004
Eaves, Y. D., & Kahn, D. L. (2000). Coming to terms with perceived danger: A researcher’s narrative. Journal of Holistic Nursing, 18(1), 27–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/089801010001800105
emerald, e., & Carpenter, L. (2015). Vulnerability and emotions in research: Risks, dilemmas, and doubts. Qualitative Inquiry, 21(8), 741-750. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800414566688
Franks, T. M. (2017). Breaching ethics for the sake of a “good” interview. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 45(3), 352–357.
Gill, R., Barbour, J., & Dean, M. (2014). Shadowing in/as work: Ten recommendations for shadowing fieldwork practice. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 9(1), 69–89. https://doi.org/10.1108/QROM-09-2012-1100
Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, reflexivity, and “ethically important moments” in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(2), 261-280. http://doi.org/10.1177/1077800403262360
Hällgren, M., Rouleau, L., & de Rond, M. (2017). A matter of life or death: How extreme context research matters for management and organization studies. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 111–153. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0017
Heller, E., Christensen, J., Long, L., Mackenzie, C. A., Osano, P. M., Ricker, B., ... & Turner, S. (2011). Dear diary: Early career geographers collectively reflect on their qualitative field research experiences. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 35(1), 67-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2010.486853
Howe, K. (2022). Trauma to self and other: Reflections on field research and conflict. Security Dialogue, 53(4), 363–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/09670106221105710
Huang, M. (2016). Vulnerable observers: Notes on fieldwork and rape. What does it mean to produce knowledge through an experience that includes trauma? Chronicle of Higher Education. http://www.chronicle.com/article/Vulnerable-Observers-Notes-on/ 238042
Hubbard, G., Backett-Milburn, K., & Kemmer, D. (2001). Working with emotion: Issues for the researcher in fieldwork and teamwork. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 4(2), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570116992
Jensen, P. R., Cruz, J., Eger, E. K., Hanchey, J. N., Gist-Mackey, A. N., Ruiz-Mesa, K., & Villamil, A. (2019). Pushing beyond positionalities and through “failures” in qualitative organizational communication: Experiences and lessons on identities in ethnographic praxis. Management Communication Quarterly, 0893318919885654. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318919885654
Lee, R. M. (1995). Dangerous Fieldwork. SAGE Publications.
Lund, R. (2012). Researching crisis—recognizing the unsettling experience of emotions. Emotion, Space and Society, 5(2), 94–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emospa.2010.09.003
Markowitz, A. (2021). The better to break and bleed with: Research, violence, and trauma. Geopolitics, 26(1), 94–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2019.1612880
Massanari, A. L. (2018). Rethinking research ethics, power, and the risk of visibility in the era of the “alt-right” gaze. Social Media + Society, 4(2), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118768302
Moncur, W. (2013). The emotional wellbeing of researchers: Considerations for practice. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, France, 1883-1890. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466248
Nilan, P. (2002). ‘Dangerous fieldwork’ re-examined: The question of researcher subject position. Qualitative Research, 2(3), 363–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/146879410200200305
Peritore, N. P. (1990). Reflections on dangerous fieldwork. The American Sociologist, 21(4), 359–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02691846
Peterson, B. L., Albu, O. B., Foot, K., Hutchins, D., Qiu, J., Scott, C. R., Stohl, M., & Tracy, S. J. (2022). Conducting research in difficult, dangerous, and/or vulnerable contexts: Messy narratives from the field. Management Communication Quarterly, 36(1), 174–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/08933189211058706
Pithouse-Morgan, K., Khau, M., Masinga, L., & van de Ruit, C. (2012). Letters to those who dare feel: Using reflective letter-writing to explore the emotionality of research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 11(1), 40–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691201100104
Rager, K. B. (2005). Compassion stress and the qualitative researcher. Qualitative Health Research, 15(3), 423–430. doi: 10.1177/1049732304272038
Sampson, H. (2017). “Fluid fields” and the dynamics of risk in social research. Qualitative Research, 19(2), 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794117746085
Sampson, H., & Thomas, M. (2003). Risk and responsibility. Qualitative Research, 3(2), 165–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941030032002
Schneider, L. T. (2020). Sexual violence during research: How the unpredictability of fieldwork and the right to risk collide with academic bureaucracy and expectations. Critique of Anthropology, 40(2), 173–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308275X20917272
Sergi, V., & Hallin, A. (2011). Thick performances, not just thick descriptions: The processual nature of doing qualitative research. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 6(2), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1108/17465641111159152
Sharp, G., & Kremer, E. (2006). The safety dance: Confronting harassment, intimidation, and violence in the field. Sociological Methodology, 36(1), 317–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9531.2006.00183.x
Sherry, E. (2013). The vulnerable researcher: Facing the challenges of sensitive research. Qualitative Research Journal, 13(3), 278–288. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-10-2012-0007
Sluka, J. A. (1990). Participant observation in violent social contexts. Human Organization, 49(2), 114–126.
Stein, A. (2010). Sex, truths, and audiotape: Anonymity and the ethics of exposure in public ethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39(5), 554–68. doi: 10.1177/0891241610375955.
Stringer, C., & Simmons, G. (2015). Stepping through the looking glass: Researching slavery in New Zealand’s fishing industry. Journal of Management Inquiry, 24(3), 253–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492614561228
Tedeschi, R. G., & Moore, B. A. (2016). The posttraumatic growth workbook: Coming through trauma wiser, stronger, and more resilient. New Harbinger Publications.
Vanderstaay, S. L. (2005). One hundred dollars and a dead man: Ethical decision making in ethnographic fieldwork. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 34(4), 371–409. doi: 10.1177/0891241605275478.
van Zijll de Jong, S. L., Dominey-Howes, D., Roman, C. E., Calgaro, E., Gero, A., Veland, S., Bird, D. K., Muliaina, T., Tuiloma-Sua, D., & Afioga, T. L. (2011). Process, practice and priorities—Key lessons learnt undertaking sensitive social reconnaissance research as part of an (UNESCO-IOC) International Tsunami Survey Team. Earth-Science Reviews, 107(1), 174–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2011.03.001
Willer, E. K. (2019). The Hea/r/tist Part: Turning the Point of Mothering Toward 100%. Health Communication, 34(9), 1069–1073. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2018.1455137
Winfield, T. P. (2022). Vulnerable research: Competencies for trauma and justice-informed ethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 51(2), 135–70. doi: 10.1177/08912416211017254.
Wray, N., Markovic, M., & Manderson, L. (2007). “Researcher saturation:” The impact of data triangulation and intensive-research practices on the researcher and qualitative research process. Qualitative Health Research, 17(10), 1392-1402. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323073083