Is it the end for anonymity as we know it? A critical examination of the ethical principle of anonymity in the context of 21st century demands on the qualitative researcher
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online April, 2011
Is it the end for anonymity as we know it? A critical examination of the ethical principle of anonymity in the context of 21st century demands on the qualitative researcher
Told from the perspective of two UK-based early career researchers, this article is an examination of contemporary challenges posed when dealing with the ethical principle of anonymity in qualitative research, specifically at the point of dissemination. Drawing on their respective doctoral experience and literature exploring the difficulties that can arise from the application of anonymity with regard to historical and geographical contexts, the authors question the applicability of the principle of anonymity alongside pressures to disseminate widely. In so doing, the article considers anonymity in relation to the following: demonstrating value for money to funders; being accountable to stakeholders; involvement in knowledge transfer; and the demands of putting as much information ‘out there’ as possible, particularly on the internet. In light of these pressures, the article suggests that the standard of anonymity in the context of the 21st century academic world may need to be rethought.
Alterio M. ( 2004) Collaborative journalling as a professional development tool. Journal of Further and Higher Education28(3): 321-332.
2.
American Anthropological Association (2009 ) AAA Code of Ethics. Available at: http://www.aaanet.org/issues/policy-advocacy/Code-of-Ethics.cfm (accessed 20 June 2009).
3.
American Sociological Association (1999) Code of Ethics. Available at: http://www.asanet.org/images/asa/docs/pdf/Ethics%20Code.pdf (accessed 11 December 2009).
4.
Atkinson D, Jackson M and Walmsley J (1997) Forgotten Lives: Exploring the History of Learning Disability. Kidderminster: BILD Publications.
5.
Baez B. ( 2002) Confidentiality in qualitative research: reflections on secrets, power and agency. Qualitative Research2(1): 35-58.
6.
Bonnell V. ( 1980) The uses of theory, concepts and comparison in historical sociology. Comparative Studies in Society and History22(2): 156-173.
7.
Bradshaw M. ( 2003) A politics of doing social research for fishery biologists, managers and industry. Qualitative Research3(3): 359-376.
8.
British Sociological Association (2002) Statement of Ethical Practice for the British Sociological Association. Available at: http://www.britsoc.co.uk/equality/Statement+Ethical+Practice.htm (accessed 16 December 2010).
9.
Bryman A. ( 2004) Social Research Methods (2nd Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10.
Butler I. ( 2002) A code of ethics for social work and social care research . British Journal of Social Work32: 239-248.
11.
Cannella GS and Lincoln YS ( 2007) Predatory vs. dialogic ethics: constructing an illusion or ethical practice as the core of research methods. Qualitative Inquiry13(3): 315-335.
12.
Christensen P. and Prout A. ( 2002) Working with ethical symmetry in social research with children. Childhood9(4) 477-497.
13.
Cornwall A. and Jewkes R. ( 1995) What is participatory research?Social Science and Medicine41(12): 1667-1776.
14.
Darlington Y and Scott D (2002) Qualitative Research in Practice: Stories from the Field. Buckingham: Open University Press.
15.
Department of Health (2005) Research governance framework for health and social care: second edition. Available at: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4108962 (accessed 20 June 2009 ).
16.
Dunkerly D. ( 1988) Historical methods and organization analysis: the case of a naval dockyard. In: Bryman A (ed.) Doing Research in Organizations. London: Routledge, 82-95.
17.
Economic and Social Research Council (2005 ) Research ethics framework. Available at: http://www.esrcsocietytoday.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/Images/ESRC_Re_Ethics_Frame_tcm6-11291.pdf (accessed 20th June 2009).
18.
Flicker S., Haans D. and Skinner H. ( 2004) Ethical dilemmas in research on internet communities. Qualitative Health Research14(1): 124-134.
19.
Fyfe N. and Milligan C. ( 2003) Out of the shadows: exploring contemporary geographies of voluntarism. Progress in Human Geography27(4): 397-413.
20.
Giordano J., O’Reilly M., Taylor M. and Dogra N. ( 2007) Confidentiality and autonomy: the challenge(s) of offering research participants a choice of disclosing their identity. Qualitative Health Research17(2): 264-275.
21.
Grinyer A. ( 2002) The anonymity of research participants. Social Research Update36. Available at: http://sru.soc.surrey.ac.uk/SRU36.html (accessed 20 June 2009).
22.
Hall J. ( 1992) Where history and sociology meet: forms of discourse and sociohistorical inquiry. Sociological Theory10(2): 164-193.
23.
Hammersley M. ( 2003) Social Research today: some dilemmas and distinctions . Qualitative Social Work2(1): 25-44.
24.
Hookway N. ( 2008) ‘Entering the blogosphere’: some strategies for using blogs in social research. Qualitative Research8(1): 91-113.
25.
Huberman M. ( 1995) The many modes of participatory evaluation. In: Cousins JB and Earl LM (eds) Participatory Evaluation in Education: Studies in Evaluation Use and Organizational Learning. London: Routledge, 103-112.
26.
James N. and Busher H. ( 2006) Credibility, authenticity and voice: dilemmas in online interviewing. Qualitative Research6(3): 403-420.
27.
Jessop B. ( 2000) The state and contradictions of the knowledge-driven economy . In: Bryson JR, Daniels PW, Henry N and Pollard J (eds) Knowledge, Space, Economy . London: Routledge, 63-78.
28.
Joint Research Council’s Skills Statement ( 2001) Available at: http://www.grad.ac.uk/downloads/documents/general/Joint%20Skills%20Statement.pdf (accessed 20 June 2009).
29.
Kelly A. ( 2009) In defence of anonymity: rejoining the criticism. British Educational Research Journal35(3): 431-445.
30.
Kennedy JE ( 2005) Grey matter: ambiguities and complexities of ethics in research. Journal of Academic Ethics3(2-4): 143-158.
31.
Marzano M. ( 2007) Informed consent, deception, and research freedom in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry13(3): 417-436.
32.
Mitchell D, Traustadottir R, Chapman R, Townson L, Ingham N and Ledger S (eds) (2006) Exploring Experiences of Advocacy by People with Learning Disabilities: Testimonies of Resistance. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 100-117.
33.
Nespor J. ( 2000) Anonymity and place in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry6(4): 546-569.
34.
Nissenbaum H. ( 1999) The meaning of anonymity in an information age. The Information Society: An International Journal15(2): 141-144.
35.
Papacharissi Z. ( 2002) The virtual sphere: the internet as a public sphere. New Media & Society4(1): 9-27.
36.
Piper H. and Simons H. ( 2005) Ethical responsibility in social research. In: Somekh B and Lewin C (eds) Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London: Sage, 56-63.
37.
Popay J. and Williams G. ( 1998) Qualitative research and evidence based healthcare. Journal for the Royal Society of Medicine91(35): 32-37.
38.
Royal College of Nursing (2005) Informed Consent in Health and Social Care Research: RCN Guidance for Nurses. London: RCN.
39.
Scott S. ( 2004) Researching shyness: a contradiction in terms?Qualitative Research4(1): 91-105.
40.
Silverman D. ( 2005) Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook (2nd Edition). London: Sage.
41.
Snyder L. ( 2002) Confidentiality and Anonymity: Promises and Practices . In: van den Hoonard WC (ed.) Walking the Tightrope: Ethical Issues for Qualitative Researchers. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 70-78.
42.
Social Research Association (2003) Ethical Guidelines. Available at: http://www.the-sra.org.uk/documents/pdfs/ethics03.pdf (accessed 20 June 2009).
43.
Sparkes A. ( 2007) Embodiment, academics, and the audit culture: a story seeking consideration. Qualitative Research7(4): 521-550.
44.
Stewart K. and Williams M. ( 2005) Researching online populations: the use of online focus groups for social research. Qualitative Research5(4): 395-416.
45.
Tilley E. ( 2006) Advocacy for people with learning difficulties: the role of two organisations. Unpublished PhD thesis, Milton Keynes , The Open University.
46.
Tilley S. and Gormley L. ( 2007) Canadian university ethics review: cultural complications translating principles into practice. Qualitative Inquiry13(3): 368-387.
47.
Tuchman G. ( 1994) Historical social science: methodologies, methods, and meanings. In: Denzin N and Lincoln Y (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research . Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 306-323.
48.
Traustadottir R and Johnson K (eds) (2000) Women with Intellectual Disabilities: Finding a Place in the World. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
49.
Urban G. ( 1996) Entextualization, replication, and power. In: Silverstein M and Urban G (eds) Natural Histories of Discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 21-44.
50.
van den Hoonard WC (ed.) (2002) Walking the Tightrope: Ethical Issues for Qualitative Researchers. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
51.
van den Hoonaard WC ( 2003) Is anonymity an artifact in ethnographic research?Journal of Academic Ethics1(2): 141-151.
52.
Walford G. ( 2005) Research ethical guidelines and anonymity. International Journal of Research and Method in Education28(1): 83-93.
53.
Walmsley J. ( 2001) Normalisation, emancipatory research and inclusive research in learning disability. Disability and Society16(2): 187-205.
54.
Ward A. ( 2009) Is your oral history legal and ethical?The Oral History Society. Available at: http://www.ohs.org.uk/ethics/index.php (accessed 11 December 2009).
55.
Wiles R., Charles V., Crow G. and Heath S. ( 2006) Researching researchers: lessons for research ethics. Qualitative Research6(3): 283-299.
56.
Wiles R., Crow G., Heath S. and Charles V. ( 2008) The management of confidentiality and anonymity in social research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology11(5): 417-428.
57.
Woodthorpe K. ( 2007) Negotiating uncertainty and ambiguity in the contemporary cemetery. Unpublished PhD thesis, Sheffield, University of Sheffield.
