In qualitative research, confidentiality is something we try to ensure for our participants. Although we can never guarantee it, it is important we try to protect and honor our participants' privacy as much as possible. Additionally, in some cases, our informants share experiences with us (e.g., marginalization, trauma) that they may not share if people could easily identify them. However, this is something I have really struggled with as a disability researcher on a college campus with very few students with disabilities. In this case, using pseudonyms does not result in confidentiality.
For example, one of my participants, Mia*, is a blind woman. There are currently only 1-2 other students on campus who are blind, one of whom is a man. Additionally, Mia described important events in her life during our interviews (for example, taking horseback riding lessons, going to the National Federation of the Blind Convention) and revealing this information makes it even more likely someone can identify her.
I spoke with Mia about this risk. I gave her several options to try and increase the likelihood her identity would remain confidential. First, I could talk about her "disability," rather than her blindness. In other words, I would not specify the type of disability. Second, I could substitute specifics by either talking about them more generally (e.g., a meaningful activity vs. horseback riding or a conference vs. the National Federation of the Blind Convention) or by substituing a different activity (e.g., judo vs. horseback riding). Third, I could leave those type of significant details out completely. As a researcher, all of these options are not desirable because they take away from fully telling Mia's story. However, it is more important to tell the story Mia wants to tell while protecting her confidentiality than to tell the story that I as a researcher want to tell.
In this case, Mia requested that I alter nothing about her story. She was fine with people on campus being able to identify her, and said I could leave every detail in because they were important parts of her experience. Having a conversation with Mia about confidentiality and the various options available to try and ensure confidentiality was likely empowering to her as a participant because she was able to determine what would be shared and not be shared. After this experience, I have come to the decision that involving the participants in this aspect of the research process may be best. I know from speaking with Marcia Baxter Magolda that she worked closely with her participants in her longitudinal study of adult development to determine what would be included in articles and books and what would not. As researchers, we face complex decisions around confidentiality and I think it is something that I, as a beginning researcher, will continue to reflect on as I design and implement additional studies.
*-Pseudonym
For example, one of my participants, Mia*, is a blind woman. There are currently only 1-2 other students on campus who are blind, one of whom is a man. Additionally, Mia described important events in her life during our interviews (for example, taking horseback riding lessons, going to the National Federation of the Blind Convention) and revealing this information makes it even more likely someone can identify her.
I spoke with Mia about this risk. I gave her several options to try and increase the likelihood her identity would remain confidential. First, I could talk about her "disability," rather than her blindness. In other words, I would not specify the type of disability. Second, I could substitute specifics by either talking about them more generally (e.g., a meaningful activity vs. horseback riding or a conference vs. the National Federation of the Blind Convention) or by substituing a different activity (e.g., judo vs. horseback riding). Third, I could leave those type of significant details out completely. As a researcher, all of these options are not desirable because they take away from fully telling Mia's story. However, it is more important to tell the story Mia wants to tell while protecting her confidentiality than to tell the story that I as a researcher want to tell.
In this case, Mia requested that I alter nothing about her story. She was fine with people on campus being able to identify her, and said I could leave every detail in because they were important parts of her experience. Having a conversation with Mia about confidentiality and the various options available to try and ensure confidentiality was likely empowering to her as a participant because she was able to determine what would be shared and not be shared. After this experience, I have come to the decision that involving the participants in this aspect of the research process may be best. I know from speaking with Marcia Baxter Magolda that she worked closely with her participants in her longitudinal study of adult development to determine what would be included in articles and books and what would not. As researchers, we face complex decisions around confidentiality and I think it is something that I, as a beginning researcher, will continue to reflect on as I design and implement additional studies.
*-Pseudonym
RSS Feed
