Swazi co-researcher participants’ dynamic preferences and motivations for,representation with real names and (English-language) pseudonyms – an ethnography
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online December, 2018
Swazi co-researcher participants’ dynamic preferences and motivations for,representation with real names and (English-language) pseudonyms – an ethnography
Using pseudonyms is the accepted and expected ethical practice for maintaining participants’ privacy in qualitative research. However it may not always be ethical, for example in participatory action research (PAR), where academics aim to recognise co-researcher participants’ contributions. I used Bourdieusian theory to analyse data detailing deliberations about, and the dynamic pseudonym-related preferences of, 10 co-researcher participants, generated through an ethnography of PAR in rural Swaziland. The analysis demonstrates the salience of engaging participants in careful deliberations about pseudonyms and the racism and privilege inherent to the practice of White (or otherwise powerful) academics researching and representing non-White (or otherwise marginalized) participants. It further highlights practical strategies academics might employ to facilitate ethical and potentially transformative deliberations with their research participants about pseudonyms, which unmask this racism and privilege.
AllenREWilesJL (2016) A rose by any other name: participants choosing research pseudonyms. Qualitative Research in Psychology13(2): 149–165.
2.
BaezB (2002) Confidentiality in qualitative research: reflections on secrets, power and agency. Qualitative Research2(1): 35–58.
3.
BourdieuP (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4.
BourdieuP (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
5.
BourdieuP (1986) The forms of capital. In: RichardsonR (ed.) Handbook of Theory of Research for Sociology of Education. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 241–258.
6.
BourdieuP (1990) The Logic of Practice. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
7.
BrearMR (2017) ‘I was thinking we would be spoon-fed’: community co-researchers’ perceptions of individual empowerment in participatory health research in Swaziland. Global Public Health13(10):1441–1453.
8.
BrearMRHammarbergKFisherJ (2017a) Community participation in research from resource-constrained countries: a scoping review. Health Promotion International33(4):723–733.
9.
BrearMRShabanguPNFisherJRHammarbergKKeleherHMLivingstoneC (2017b) Health capability deprivations in a rural Swazi community – understanding complexity with theoretically informed, qualitatively-driven, mixed method design, participatory action research. Qualitative Health Research [under review].
10.
BrungerFRussellT (2015) Risk and representation in research ethics: the NunatuKavut experience. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics10(4): 368–379.
11.
ChavezVDuranBBakerQEAvilaMMWallersteinN (2011) The dance of race and privilege in community-based participatory research for health. In: MinklerMWallersteinN (eds) Community-based Participatory Research for Health: From Process to Outcomes. Second edition. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass, 91–105.
12.
FosterKE (2006) Clinics and Citizens: Primary Health Care and the State in Postapartheid South Africa. University of California, Berkeley.
13.
GrinyerA (2002) The anonymity of research participants: assumptions, ethics and practicalities. Social Research Update36: 4.
14.
GuentherKM (2009) The politics of names: rethinking the methodological and ethical significance of naming people, organizations, and places. Qualitative Research9(4): 411–421.
IseliM (2015) De Quincey’s subconscious and the cognitive unconscious. In: Iseli M, Thomas De Quincey and the Cognitive Unconscious. New York: Springer, 43–70.
17.
IsraelBAEngESchulzAParkerE (2013) Introduction to methods for community based participatory research. In: IsraelBEngESchulzAParkerE (eds) Methods for Community-Based Participatory Research for Health. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 4–37.
18.
KrogA (2011) In the name of human rights: I say (how) you (should) speak (before I listen). SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research4: 381–386.
19.
MatsebulaJSM (1972) A History of Swaziland. Cape Town: Longman Southern Africa.
20.
McCormackDCarrTMcCloskeyRKeeping-BurkeLFurlongKEDoucetS (2012) Getting through ethics: the fit between research ethics board assessments and qualitative research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics7(5): 30–36.
21.
MilesMBHubermanMSaldanaJ (2014) Drawing and verifying conclusions. Qualitative data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 275–322.
22.
NHREC, National Health Research Ethics Committee (South Africa) (2012) Payment of trial participants in South Africa – ethical considerations for research ethics committees.
23.
OnwuegbuzieACombsJ (2010) Emergent data analysis techniques in mixed methods research: a synthesis. In: TashakkoriATeddlieC (eds) SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. Second edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 397–430
24.
SihlongonyaneMF (2003) The invisible hand of the royal family in the political dynamics of Swaziland. African and Asian Studies2(2): 155–187.
25.
SimonsLLathleanJSquireC (2008) Shifting the focus: sequential methods of snalysis with qualitative data. Qualitative Health Research18(1): 120–132.
26.
SvalastogA-LErikssonS (2010) You can use my name; you don’t have to steal my story – a critique of anonymity in indigenous studies. Developing World Bioethics10(2): 104–110.
27.
YanarZMFazliMRahmanJFarthingR (2016) Research ethics committees and participatory action research with young people: the politics of voice. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics11(2): 122–128.
