Harrowing testimonies from U.K. combat veterans—accounts of killing, sexual violence, and public grief—demand methods that are rigorous and trauma-informed. This research note addresses the problem of how insider researchers can ethically and analytically manage the emotional labor of trauma-focused interviewing. It asks: (1) how emotional and cognitive strain emerges for an insider interviewer and (2) what safeguards make such work sustainable. Based on a grounded theory study with 37 veterans and 14 mental health practitioners, the note outlines trauma-informed procedures—distress protocol, next-day check-ins, transcriber warnings, spacing, and transcripts-first analysis. Findings show that reflexivity, treated as an analytic discipline rather than disclosure, enables containment of projection while preserving empathy. The note concludes that explicit safeguards and structured self-monitoring enhance both participant safety and researcher well-being, offering a transferable model for ethics boards and qualitative teams working with traumatic material.
AlessiE. J.KahnS. (2023). Toward a trauma-informed qualitative research approach: Guidelines for ensuring the safety and promoting the resilience of research participants. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 20(1), 121–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2022.2107967
2.
AlexanderS.PillayR.SmithB. (2018). A systematic review of the experiences of vulnerable people participating in research on sensitive topics. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 88, 85–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.08.013
3.
American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed., text rev.).
4.
BirksM.MillsJ. (2023). Grounded theory: A practical guide (3rd ed.). Sage.
5.
BourkeJ. (2000). An intimate history of killing. Granta Books.
6.
Bracken-RocheD.BellE.MacdonaldM. E.RacineE. (2017). The concept of vulnerability in research ethics: An in-depth analysis of policies and guidelines. Health Research Policy and Systems, 15(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0164-6
7.
BransonD. C. (2019). Vicarious trauma, themes in research, and terminology: A review of literature. Traumatology, 25(1), 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1037/trm0000161
BrownV. M.StraussJ. L.LaBarK. S.GoldA. L.McCarthyG.MoreyR. A. (2014). Acute effects of trauma-focused research procedures on participant safety and distress. Psychiatry Research, 215(1), 154–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2013.10.038
10.
Carter-VisscherR. M.MaA. E.NaugleK. M.BellM. A.SuvakM. K. (2008). Ethics of asking trauma-related questions and exposing participants to arousal-inducing stimuli. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 8(3), 27–55. https://doi.org/10.1300/J229v08n03_03
11.
CharmazK. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage.
ClarkA, M.SousaB. J. (2018). The mental health of people doing qualitative research: Getting serious about risks and remedies. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918781259
14.
ColesJ.AstburyJ.DartnallE.LimjerwalaS. (2014). A qualitative exploration of researcher trauma and researchers’ responses to investigating sexual violence. Violence against Women, 20(1), 95–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801213520578
15.
CromerL. D.FreydJ. J.BinderA. K.DePrinceA. P.Becker-BleaseK. (2006). What’s the risk in asking? Participant reaction to trauma history questions compared with reaction to other personal questions. Ethics & Behavior, 16(4), 347–362. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327019eb1604_5
16.
DeckerS. E.Carter-VisscherR.BellK.SeifertA. (2011). Ethical issues in research on sensitive topics: Participants’ experiences of distress and benefit. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 6(3), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1525/JER.2011.6.3.55
17.
Dickson-SwiftV.JamesE. L.KippenS.LiamputtongP. (2007). Doing sensitive research: What challenges do qualitative researchers face?Qualitative Research, 7(3), 327–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794107078515
18.
DrauckerC. B.MartsolfD. S.PooleC. (2009). Developing distress protocols for research on sensitive topics. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 23(5), 343–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2008.10.008
19.
DwyerS. C.BuckleJ. L. (2009). The space between: On being an insider-outsider in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(1), 54–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800105
20.
EllisC. (2007). Telling secrets, revealing lives: Relational ethics in research with intimate others. Qualitative Inquiry, 13(1), 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800406294947
21.
FloresD. (2018). Standing in the middle: Insider/outsider positionality while conducting qualitative research with opposing military veteran political groups. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 31(7), 564–581. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2018.1479038
22.
FoodaniM. N.ZakerimoghadamM.GhiyasvandianS.DolatabadiZ. A. (2024). Wounded healer nurses: A qualitative content analysis of the positive traits of nurses affected by chronic cardiovascular disease. BMC Nursing, 23, Article 83. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02124-3
23.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.
24.
GrossmanD. (1996). On killing: The psychological cost of learning to kill in war and society. Little, Brown and Company.
HolmesR. (2004). Acts of war: The behavior of men in battle. Free Press.
27.
JiménezT. R.OrozcoM. (2021). Prompts, not questions: Four techniques for crafting better interview protocols. Qualitative Sociology, 44(4), 507–528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-021-09483-2
28.
KarcherK.McCuaigJ.King-HillS. (2024). (Self-) reflection / reflexivity in sensitive, qualitative research: A scoping review. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 23, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241261860
29.
KinitzD. J. (2022). The emotional and psychological labor of insider qualitative research among systemically marginalized groups: Revisiting the uses of reflexivity. Qualitative Health Research, 32(11), 1635–1647. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323221112620
30.
KleiningG.WittH. (2000). The qualitative heuristic approach: A methodology for discovery in psychology and the social sciences—Rediscovering the method of introspection as an example. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1(1), Article 13. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-1.1.1123
31.
KohnT.ShoreC. (2017). The ethics of university ethics committees: Risk management and the research imagination. In WrightS.ShoreC. (Eds.), Death of the public university? Uncertain futures for higher education in the knowledge economy (pp. 229–249). Berghahn Books. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvw04bj2.17
32.
Le GallaisT. (2008). Wherever I go there I am: Reflections on reflexivity and the research stance. Reflective Practice, 9(2), 145–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623940802005475
33.
MetrikJ.JacksonK.BassettS. S.ZvolenskyM. J.SealK.BorsariB. (2016). The mediating roles of coping, sleep, and anxiety motives in cannabis use and problems among returning veterans with PTSD and MDD. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 30(7), 743–754. https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0000210
34.
MoranR. J.AsquithN. L. (2020). Understanding the vicarious trauma and emotional labour of criminological research. Methodological Innovations, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2059799120926085
35.
MorrisonJ.BoehnleinJ. (2007). Our favorite tips for interviewing veterans. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 30(2), 269–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psc.2007.02.002
36.
NormanR. (1995). Ethics, killing and war. Cambridge University Press.
37.
PeterE.FriedlandJ. (2017). Recognizing risk and vulnerability in research ethics: Imagining the “what ifs?”Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 12(2), 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264617696920
38.
PillowW. S. (2003). Confession, catharsis, or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity as methodological power in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(2), 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951839032000060635
RisanP.MilneR.BinderP.-E. (2020). Trauma narratives: Recommendations for investigative interviewing. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 27(4), 678–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2020.1742237
41.
SikweyiyaY.JewkesR. (2013). Potential motivations for and perceived risks in research participation: Ethics in health research. Qualitative Health Research, 23(7), 999–1009. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732313490076
42.
SmithC. A. (2006). Strong role differentiation: Military ethics and the ethics of military research. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 577(1), 131–135. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1373.010
43.
ThorpM. (2025). Command, combat and psychological trauma: Commanders and the psychological protection of soldiers exposed to combat and trauma [Doctoral dissertation]. Loughborough University.
44.
WelzC. (2018). Trauma, memory, testimony: Phenomenological, psychological, and ethical perspectives. Scripta Instituti Donneriani Aboensis, 27, 145–166. https://doi.org/10.30674/scripta.66571
45.
WrightN.HadziosmanovicE.DangM.BalesK.BrookesC.JordanM.SladeM. (2020). Mental health recovery for survivors of modern slavery: Grounded theory study protocol. BMJ Open, 10(11), Article e038583. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038583
