This reflective article centres on the controversy surrounding the practice of compensating research participants, drawing on insights gained from data collection experiences in rural, non-affluent schools in Kenya. The practice of going to the field ‘empty-handed’ is explored, shedding light on participants’ reactions. To comprehend the foundational issues embedded in our field experiences, we employ perspectives from decolonial and post-colonial theories, examining three questions: What knowledge systems shape research practice with regard to compensation? What power structures guide the research agenda and influence compensation? And, what ‘being’ determines the ‘acceptable’ research practice with regard to compensation? We argue that the knowledge systems, power structures and conceptualizations of ‘being’ shaping research practices regarding compensation during data collection are often external to the research participants. This leads to the marginalization of the participants’ voices concerning compensation. The practice of compensation during data collection can strengthen connections with participants and enhance research integrity.
BallanceLRipleyE (2023) Paying research participants and community and patient research partners: An engaging ethical issue. In: AndersonEE (eds) Ethical Issues in Community and Patient Stakeholder–Engaged Health Research. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 181–195.
2.
BhambraGK (2014) Postcolonial and decolonial dialogues. Postcolonial Studies17(2): 115–121.
3.
CiarliTRàfolsI (2019) The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice. Research Policy48(4): 949–967.
4.
CrenshawK (1989) Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. In: University of Chicago Legal Forum. Chicago: Routledge, 23–51.
5.
DusdalJPowellJJ (2021) Benefits, motivations, and challenges of international collaborative research: A sociology of science case study. Science and Public Policy48(2): 235–245.
6.
FanonF (2008) Black skin, white masks. New York: Grove/Atlantic, Inc.
7.
GelinasLLargentEACohenIG, et al. (2018) A framework for ethical payment to research participants. New England Journal of Medicine378(8): 766–771.
8.
GelinasLWhiteSABiererBE (2020) Economic vulnerability and payment for research participation. Clinical Trials17(3): 264–272.
9.
GoodingK (2017) The role of NGOs’ service delivery experience in developing relevant research agendas: Experience and challenges among NGOs in Malawi. Health Research Policy and Systems15(1): 1–14.
10.
GradyC (2005) Payment of clinical research subjects. The Journal of Clinical Investigation115(7): 1681–1687.
11.
GrosfoguelR (2008) Transmodernity, border thinking, and global coloniality. Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais80(3): 1–24.
12.
GrosfoguelR (2011) Decolonizing post-colonial studies and paradigms of political-economy: Transmodernity, decolonial thinking, and global coloniality. Transmodernity: journal of Peripheral Cultural Production of the Luso-Hispanic World1(1): 1–38.
13.
GrosfoguelR (2013) The structure of knowledge in westernised universities: Epistemic racism/sexism and the four genocides/epistemicides. Human Architecture: Journal of the Sociology of Self-Knowledge1(1): 73–90.
HorkheimerM (1982) Critical theory: Selected essays. New York: Seabury Press.
16.
International Sociological Association (2001) Code of Ethics.
17.
KarisaA, (2020) Understanding father involvement in the education of learners with intellectual disabilities in a special school in Kenya: a case study. PhD, University of Cape Town.
18.
KivunjaCKuyiniAB (2017) Understanding and applying research paradigms in educational contexts. International Journal of Higher Education6(5): 26–41.
19.
LuukkonenTThomasDA (2016) The ‘negotiated space’ of university researchers’ pursuit of a research agenda. Minerva54(1): 99–127.
20.
MahmoodSSLevyDVasanRS, et al. (2014) The Framingham Heart Study and the epidemiology of cardiovascular disease: A historical perspective. The Lancet383(9921): 999–1008.
21.
Maldonado-TorresN (2007) On the coloniality of being: Contributions to the development of a concept. Cultural Studies21(2–3): 240–270.
22.
Maldonado-TorresN (2021) On the coloniality of human rights. In: The Pluriverse of Human Rights: The Diversity of Struggles for Dignity. New York: Routledge, 62–82.
MignoloW (2000) Local histories/global designs: Coloniality, subaltern knowledges, and border thinking. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
25.
MignoloWD (2007) Delinking: The rhetoric of modernity, the logic of coloniality and the grammar of de-coloniality. Cultural Studies21(2–3): 449–514.
26.
MignoloWD (2017) Interview with Walter D. Mignolo. Critical epistemologies of global politics.11.
27.
MpofuWJ (2013) Coloniality in the scramble for African knowledge: A decolonial political perspective. Africanus43(2): 105–117.
28.
Ndlovu-GatsheniSJ (2013) Empire, global coloniality and African subjectivity. New York: Berghahn Books.
29.
NusbaumLDouglasBDamusK, et al. (2017) Communicating risks and benefits in informed consent for research: A qualitative study. Global Qualitative Nursing Research4: 1–13.
30.
PandyaMDesaiC (2013) Compensation in clinical research: The debate continues. Perspectives in Clinical Research4(1): 70–74.
31.
PathakVDashS (2021) Afro-Asian worldviews: Ideational narratives of ubuntu and confucian communitarianism. International Journal of African Studies1(2): 1–9.
32.
ResnikDB (2019) Are payments to human research subjects ethically suspect?Journal of Clinical Research Best Practices15(6), 2374.
33.
RóżyńskaJ (2022) The ethical anatomy of payment for research participants. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy25(3): 449–464.
34.
RuízE (2021) Postcolonial and decolonial theories. In: HallKQÁ (ed) The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Philosophy. New York: Oxford University, 541–551.
35.
SalemS (2020) Anticolonial afterlives in Egypt: The politics of hegemony. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36.
SingerECouperMP (2008) Do incentives exert undue influence on survey participation? Experimental evidence. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics3(3): 49–56.
37.
SingerEYeC (2013) The use and effects of incentives in surveys. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science645(1): 112–141.
38.
SmithLT (2012) Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
39.
South African San Institute (2017) SAN code of research ethics.
40.
SpivakGC (1988) Can the subaltern speak? NelsonCGrossbergL (eds) Marxism and the interpretation of culture. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 271–313.
41.
ThomsonLJMWatersonHChatterjeeHJ (2024) Successes and challenges of partnership working to tackle health inequalities using collaborative approaches to community-based research: Mixed methods analysis of focus group evidence. International Journal for Equity in Health23(1): 135.
42.
University of Oxford (2020) Payments and incentives in research. Oxford: Central University Research Ethics Committee.
43.
U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (1979) The Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
