Using peer‐interviewing methods to explore place‐based disadvantage: dissolving the distance between suits and civilians

Abstract

Collaborative and participatory research methods reflect ideals to undertake research in consultation and partnership with communities and to advance community empowerment and capacity. They offer ethical and practical approaches for conducting research addressing socioeconomic and health disparities particularly in marginalised or vulnerable communities. Peer-interviewing is one such participatory strategy employed in studies involving hard-to-reach populations. However, while the value of peer-interviewing for researchers is noted in the methodological literature, there are few discussions that critically examine the benefits and challenges of using peer-researcher approaches, either for the interviewers themselves or the communities they represent. This study reports the findings from a qualitative study that explored the experiences of peer-interviewers who were involved in undertaking community surveys of residents in the socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods in which they lived. We discuss the benefits and challenges that participants reported from their involvement.

Peer interviewing in medical education research: experiences and perceptions of student interviewers and interviewees

“…Specifically this paper documents and gives ‘voice’ to the opinions and experiences of interviewees and interviewers (the peers and the communities) on the value of peer interviewing in the study and outlines (1) the preparation made to address some of the foreseen challenges, (2) the challenges still faced, and (3) the benefits of using peer interviews with respect to the research study, the individual and the institution. It addresses gaps in the published literature on the views of peer and insider interviewers and the community members they interview [ 9 ] and the ways introduced to overcome some of the challenges faced.…”

“…In all cases peer doesn’t necessarily mean youth or being of the same age, though this is commonly the case, but more specifically refer to membership of significant social network—“… people who have ready access to a population group that is not accorded to more traditional researchers.” [ 20 , p. 173]. Insider research refers more specifically to being a member of the community that is the subject or focus of the research, not just having access or connected to that community [ 9 ]. However, most of the advantages and disadvantages of insider or peer interviewing are similar.…”

“…In action research, indigenous persons are frequently recruited as fieldworkers, informants and community guides on the social context [ 9 , 24 ]. The recruitment of indigenous fieldworkers enables access to particular local knowledge, social networks and local interpretations.…”

Ethical complexities in child co-research

“…• • The child co-researchers' exposure to distressing information is described in the literature but only in passing and in a superficial way. The main identification of this issue in the literature is in relation to adult co-researchers (Warr et al, 2011), but it can also be a problem for child co-researchers. • • One of the possible burdens for child co-researchers, the burden of unspoken adult expectations, features in the literature but it is acknowledged as something that is not widely recognized or articulated (Michail and Kellett, 2015: 393).…”

The impact of using peer interviewers in a study of patient empowerment amongst people in cancer follow‐up

“…8,12,14 Both benefits and challenges of peer interviews are most often described from the perspectives of researchers and peer interviewers, for example. [15][16][17][18] Not much is known about how interviewees experience peer interviews and whether they feel that it makes a difference to the interview. Furthermore, the literature predominantly focuses on the impact of peer interviewers on the process of the interview, and less on the impact on research outcomes.…”