Managing anonymity and confidentiality in social research: the case of visual data in Community research

Abstract

Anonymity and confidentiality of participants are central to ethical research practice
\nin social research. Where possible, researchers aim to assure participants that every
\neffort will be made to ensure that the data they provide can not be traced back to them
\nin reports, presentations and other forms of dissemination. The primary method
\nresearchers use to preserve anonymity and confidentiality is the use of pseudonyms
\nfor participants and also for the location of the research. In addition, other practices,
\nsuch as changing the reported characteristics of participants (such as gender or
\noccupation) are also used by some researchers to conceal identities and thereby
\nmaintain the confidentiality of the data provided by participants. There are several
\nissues that such practices raise. One is that it is difficult for researchers to know how
\nfar to take anonymisation of individuals in order for them not to be identifiable, given
\nthat research findings may be presented to a variety of audiences, including members
\nof participants’ communities. A second issue is that research participants hold
\ndiffering views about the desirability of anonymisation, presenting researchers with
\ndifficult choices between respecting the preferences of those participants who wish to
\nbe identifiable and those who prefer to remain anonymous. A third issue is that of
\nwhether or not to attempt the anonymisation of the location of the research, which
\nmay be adjudged more or less practical or impractical (depending on its
\ndistinctiveness) and more or less desirable (depending on its importance in providing
\nthe social context of the analysis that is being developed). This paper explores these
\nissues by looking at how they have been handled by researchers in the field of
\ncommunity sociology (broadly defined) who have used visual data in their reports. This analysis allows the argument to be developed that although the issues themselves
\nare not new, the ways in which they are handled by researchers are necessarily
\nevolving in the context of technological change, the growth of research regulation,
\nand shifts in the expectations of research that participants hold.