From principles to practice: methods to increase the transparency of research ethics in violent contexts

Abstract

There has been a proliferation of research with human participants in violent contexts over the past ten years. Adhering to commonly held ethical principles such as beneficence, justice, and respect for persons is particularly important and challenging in research on violence. This letter argues that practices around research ethics in violent contexts should be reported more transparently in research outputs, and should be seen as a subset of research methods. We offer practical suggestions and empirical evidence from both within and outside of political science around risk assessments, mitigating the risk of distress and negative psychological outcomes, informed consent, and monitoring the incidence of potential harms. An analysis of published research on violence involving human participants from 2008 to 2019 shows that only a small proportion of current publications include any mention of these important dimensions of research ethics.

Enumerator Experiences in Violent Research Environments

“…This may pose thorny trade-offs for researchers: questions that are designed from afar to achieve social scientific goals may need to be reevaluated if enumerators find they pose challenges. Inversely, by incorporating local feedback, survey questions may obtain greater construct validity because they are attuned to local contextual factors.• As has been suggested by others (e.g., Baron & Young, 2021), researchers working on particularly sensitive topics may consider providing psychosocial support if they expect enumerators may experience secondary trauma. Providing tools that can support enumerator mental health of working may also help to ensure their well-being and safety (Herman et al, 2022).…”

“…While conflict researchers have reflected on the risks they themselves face in the field (e.g., Loyle & Simoni, 2017; Steinart et al, 2021), the obvious yet frequently under-appreciated reality is that survey enumerators are asked to work in the same violent settings. Attention to local research staff safety has only recently received recognition in political science (e.g., Sangaré & Bleck, 2020), with the most concerted attention focused on research ethics, as scholars recognize that locally recruited research teams have often experienced the same violence as subject populations and may face duress during interviews (Baron & Young, 2021).…”

“…Survey enumerators are not immune from insecurity in the environments they work. Although this reality is increasingly being noted (Baron & Young, 2021; Cronin-Furman & Lake, 2018), this work does not focus explicitly on enumerators’ experiences, leaving us uninformed about the scope of risks that enumerators face during data collection. By documenting the reported experiences of the enumerators we sampled in Côte d’Ivoire, we offer an initial step towards systematically inventorying challenges enumerators face in the field in what we hope will be a larger conversation.…”

Repression and Dissent in Moments of Uncertainty: Panel Data Evidence from Zimbabwe

“…See further discussion in section C of the Supplementary Material.7 Baron and Young (2022), following research in trauma psychology, recommend empirically assessing the adequacy of the consent process for studies that involve sensitive questions with survivors of violence.Adrienne LeBas and Lauren E. Young…”

“…Baron and Young (2022), following research in trauma psychology, recommend empirically assessing the adequacy of the consent process for studies that involve sensitive questions with survivors of violence.…”