Peer Research Assistantships and the Ethics of Reciprocity in Community-Based Research

Abstract

A major component of community-based research (CBR) in the field of HIV is the Meaningful Involvement of People Living with HIV/AIDS (MIPA) through hiring, training, and supporting peer research assistants (PRAs). CBR researchers and PRAs have begun to dialogue about the successes and challenges associated with peer research assistantships as they attempt to address the range of ethical issues that impact the PRAs' experience at different stages throughout the research process. I discuss some of the ethical tensions related to the PRA/researcher relationship, the relationship of the PRA to the research itself, and suggestions for how to move forward in addressing these tensions.

Peers Engaging in Empowering Research (PEER): Finding Women's Voices after Prison

“…Peer researchers, due to their direct knowledge of the experiences of the target population, are able reduce the power imbalances between researchers and participants. Additionally, they enhance the quality of data collected based on the trust relationships and credibility they have established with their peers [15][16][17][18]. At the same time, peer researchers benefit through their ability to contribute to positive change for their population or community, through learning about research processes firsthand, and through doing meaningful work [17].…”

“…At the same time, peer researchers benefit through their ability to contribute to positive change for their population or community, through learning about research processes firsthand, and through doing meaningful work [17]. However, because the peer researchers have direct experience with the research focus, their peer researcher role may involve 'emotional work' [16]whereby they are challenged to deal with issues and stories that may trigger memories of their own [19].…”

“…Peer researchers are valued for their ability to connect with their peers through their common experiences, behaviours, and use of language. There should not be expectations of a different type of behaviour to occur when working with others outside of the peer group on the research team [16]. Greene [16] described this as the "precarious intersection of empowerment and efficiency" (p. 445).…”

“…There should not be expectations of a different type of behaviour to occur when working with others outside of the peer group on the research team [16]. Greene [16] described this as the "precarious intersection of empowerment and efficiency" (p. 445). Peer researchers may also experience a change in relationship with their peers due to the need to set up more professional boundaries related to the research [14,20] and they may have difficulty transitioning out of the project at its completion [19].…”

“…Partnered data collection [21]and debriefing discussions after data collection [15]can provide important support to peer researchers. Training sessions are fundamentally important [18]as is reciprocity in the research team relationships such that the peer researchers, the academic researchers, and the community benefit equitably [16]. We believe that adopting a peer researcher model of data collection helped to mitigate a measure of bias that can be inherent when those at the controls are scholars rather than those with lived experience.…”