Ethics or access? Balancing informed consent against the application of institutional, economic or emotional pressures in recruiting respondents for research

Abstract

In this article, I will show how groups with low human and social capital are less likely to volunteer to participate in research, if participation entails no direct personal benefits for respondents. Consequently, if our research was to be based solely on volunteers, our knowledge of social practices would be biased. This bias would often be in favour of groups with high human and social capital, who are also more likely to have their voices heard in other arenas; while more marginalised groups remain unheard. In order to get access to all respondent groups, various forms and degrees of institutional, economic and emotional pressure are widely used to recruit respondents for interviews. Although such practices are common, it is still taboo in many research communities to acknowledge that pressure is applied. I argue that it can be defended to apply pressure in some instances, even if this reduces the respondents’ opportunity to freely consent. However, if pressure is applied, it becomes increasingly important to ensure that respondents are not put at any risk of harm. To facilitate research that is ethically sound, research communities could benefit from widening their focus, from one strongly focussed on informed consent to a wider awareness of factors that can entail risk of harm for participants.