Drawing on van Meter’s (2000) article examining the methodological literature relating to research on “sensitive” topics, we analyse the corresponding journal literature in the decade following. We present data on authorship patterns, identify thematic continuities and discontinuities, and draw attention to gaps in the existing literature.
BoydDCrawfordK (2011) Six Provocations for Big Data. In A Decade in Internet Time: Symposium on the Dynamics of the Internet and Society. Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute: 17 pages.
2.
BuckleJLCorbin DwyerSJacksonM (2010) Qualitative Bereavement Research: Incongruity between the Perspectives of Participants and Research Ethics Boards. International Journal of Social Research Methodology13: 111–25.
3.
ChatzifotiouS (2000) Conducting Qualitative Research on Wife Abuse: Dealing with the Issue of Anxiety. Sociological Research Online5.
4.
CordenASainsburyRSloperPWardB (2005) Using a Model of Group Psychotherapy to Support Social Research on Sensitive Topics. International Journal of Social Research Methodology8: 151–60.
5.
DevereuxG (1967) From Anxiety to Method in the Behavioral Sciences. The Hague: Mouton.
6.
Dickson-SwiftVJamesELKippenSLiamputtongP (2007) Doing Sensitive Research: What Challenges Do Qualitative Researchers Face?Qualitative Research7: 327–53.
7.
Dickson-SwiftVJamesELLiamputtongP (2008a) Undertaking Sensitive Research in the Health and Social Sciences: Managing Boundaries, Emotions and Risks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Dickson-SwiftVJamesELKippenSLiamputtongP (2008b) Risk to Researchers in Qualitative Research on Sensitive Topics: Issues and Strategies. Qualitative Health Research18: 133–44.
9.
Dickson-SwiftVJamesELKippenSLiamputtongP (2009) Researching Sensitive Topics: Qualitative Research as Emotion Work. Qualitative Research9: 61–79.
10.
FoxJP (2005) Randomized Item Response Theory Models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics30: 189–212.
11.
FoxJPMeijerRR (2008) Using Item Response Theory to Obtain Individual Information from Randomized Response Data: An Application Using Cheating Data. Applied Psychological Measurement32: 595–610.
12.
FranklinKKLowryC (2001) Computer-mediated Focus Group Sessions: Naturalistic Inquiry in a Networked Environment. Qualitative Research1:169–84.
13.
FurmanJLSternS (2006) Climbing Atop the Shoulders of Giants: The Impact of Institutions on Cumulative Research. Cambridge, Mass: National Bureau of Economic Research.
14.
GerrishKGuillaumeL (2006) Whither Survey Research?: The Challenges of Undertaking Postal Surveys within the UK Research Governance Framework. Journal of Research in Nursing11: 485–97.
15.
HerdmanE (2000) Reflections on “Making Somebody Angry”. Qualitative Health Research10: 691–702.
16.
HineC (2005) Internet Research and the Sociology of Cyber-Social-Scientific Knowledge. The Information Society21: 239–48.
17.
HochschildAR (1979) Emotion Work, Feeling Rules, and Social Structure. American Journal of Sociology: 551–75.
18.
HuntJC (1989) Psychoanalytic Aspects of Fieldwork. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
19.
KnoxC (2001) Establishing Research Legitimacy in the Contested Political Ground of Contemporary Northern Ireland. Qualitative Research1: 205–22.
20.
LaraDStricklerJDiaz OlavarrietaCEllertsonC (2004) Measuring Induced Abortion in Mexico: A Comparison of Four Methodologies. Sociological Methods & Research32: 529–58.
21.
LeeRM (1993) Doing Research on Sensitive Topics. London: Sage Publications.
LeeRM (2004) Recording Technologies and the Interview in Sociology, 1920-2000. Sociology: Journal of the British Sociological Association38: 869–89.
24.
LeeRM (2011) “The most important technique…”: Carl Rogers, Hawthorne, and the Rise and Fall of Nondirective Interviewing in Sociology. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences47: 123–46.
25.
LeeRMFieldingNGBlankG (2008) The Internet as a Research Medium: An Editorial Introduction to the Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods. In LeeRMFieldingNGBlankG (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Online Research Methods. London: Sage Publications: 3–20.
26.
Lensvelt-MuldersGHoxJJHeijdenPGM (2005) How to Improve the Efficiency of Randomised Response Designs. Quality and Quantity39: 253–65.
27.
LiamputtongP (2007) Researching the Vulnerable: A Guide to Sensitive Research Methods. London: Sage Publications.
28.
ManganMAReipsUD (2007) Sleep, Sex, and the Web: Surveying the Difficult-to-Reach Clinical Population Suffering from Sexsomnia. Behavior Research Methods39: 233–36.
29.
MelroseM (2002) Labour Pains: Some Considerations on the Difficulties of Researching Juvenile Prostitution. International Journal of Social Research Methodology5: 333–51.
30.
NaderL (1972) Up the Anthropologist: Perspectives Gained from Studying Up. In HymesD (ed.) Reinventing Anthropology. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press: 284–311.
31.
NathanG (2001) Telesurvey Methodologies for Household Surveys: A Review and Some Thoughts for the Future?Survey Methodology27: 7–32.
32.
NicholasDBLachLKingGScottMBoydellKSawatzkyBJResimanJSchippelEYoungNL (2010) Contrasting Internet and Face-to-Face Focus Groups for Children with Chronic Health Conditions: Outcomes and Participant Experiences. International Journal of Qualitative Methods9: 105–121.
33.
OringderffJ (2004) “My Way”: Piloting an Online Focus Group. International Journal of Qualitative Methods3: 1–10.
34.
OstapczukMMoshagenMZhaoZMuschJ (2009) Assessing Sensitive Attributes Using the Randomized Response Technique: Evidence for the Importance of Response Symmetry. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics34: 267–87.
35.
ShahidianH (2001) “To be recorded in history”: Researching Iranian Underground Political Activists in Exile. Qualitative Sociology24: 55–81.
36.
ShieldsCM (2003) “Giving voice” to Students: Using the Internet for Data Collection. Qualitative Research3: 397–414.
37.
Van MeterKM (2000) Sensitive Topics-Sensitive Questions: Overview of the Sociological Research Literature. Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique68: 59–78.
38.
WarnerSL (1965) Randomized Response: A Survey Technique for Eliminating Evasive Answer Bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association: 63–69.
39.
YoungEHLeeRM (1996) Fieldworker Feelings as Data: “Emotion Work” and “Feeling Rules” in First Person Accounts of Sociological Fieldwork. In JamesVGabeJ (eds), Health and the Sociology of Emotions. Oxford: Blackwell, 99–113.
