Knight: Doing it

Chapter 7 of Knight in part discusses, sensitive or distressing issues. He brings to light how social research can be harmful, for example "resurrecting distressing memories or by exploiting them with flattery so as to get disclosure without any commitment to give them something back". He also explains how harm can come to the researcher, physical if they put themselves in dangerous situations to get information, or even emotional, as "finding out more about hurt, misery and terror can corrode the spirit". Both of these observations I found very interesting. I never thought about the fact that by asking people to participate freely we are really not giving them anything in return. Also I have never considered the risk that could come to a researcher (maybe because non of my research interests are "risk" related). Yet I think these are very important points to keep in mind. Knight includes a part where he suggests having a friend or even professional council to talk to (when doing this kind of research). Which I think is a wonderful suggestion, however I am not sure if anonymity is maintained if you then go on an talk about what has upset you!

For building trust to get real answers Knight gives 12 specific points:

1. Getting potential participants’ informed consent by telling them clearly what the research is about.
2. Explaining why they are interested in exploring something that is normally private and why it is valuable.
3. Promising confidentiality and anonymity.
4. Where this is both possible and ethical, inviting potential participants to reassure themselves by talking to other people who have participated.
5. Doing the inquiry in places where participants feel safe. In interview studies it is usually important to find private space.
6. Being a good listener and observer. Good interviewers know that that is nothing like being a good interrogator: humility is needed.
7. Being ready to disclose information about similar experiences they have had. For example, it helps that I can talk with teachers about how we have felt when we have taught classes that have been more intent on larking than on learning.
8. Being able to empathize, which means being able to show informants that they understand and maybe sympathize too.
9. Not persisting if informants signal that they do not wish to go further.
10. Where it is feasible, inviting participants to edit transcripts, to add to them as well as to remove sections that, on reflection, they do not wish to be used.
11. Blending in. There are things that researchers cannot affect (their age) and things that they can (clothing).
12. Becoming an insider. This is not always possible but participant researchers can establish their claim to be trustworthy through becoming close to the people they want to study. On the other hand, Hughes (1996) tells of a participant researcher studying police in Amsterdam who only found at the end of the study that he had missed all the evidence of police corruption.

Do you agree with all of these steps? or find any of them problematic?