RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

5
Sensitive educational research
Much educational research can be sensitive, in
several senses, and researchers have to be acutely
aware of a variety of delicate issues. This chapter
sets out different ways in which educational
research might be sensitive. It then takes two
significant issues in the planning and conduct
of sensitive research – sampling and access – and
indicates why these twin concerns might be
troublesome for researchers, and how they might
be addressed. Our outline includes a discussion
of gatekeepers and their roles. Sensitive research
raises a range of difficult, sometimes intractable,
ethical issues, and we set out some of these in the
chapter. Investigations involving powerful people
are taken as an instance of sensitive educational
research, and this is used as a vehicle for examining
several key problematic matters in this area. The
chapter moves to a practical note, proffering advice
on how to ask questions in sensitive research.
Finally, the chapter sets out a range of key issues
to be addressed in the planning, conduct and
reporting of sensitive research.
What is sensitive research
Sensitive research is that ‘which potentially poses
asubstantialthreattothosewhoareinvolved
or have been involved in it’ (Lee 1993: 4), or
when those studied view the research as somehow
undesirable (Van Meter 2000). Sensitivity can
derive from many sources, including:
Consequences for the participants (Sieber and
Stanley 1988: 49).
Consequences for other people, e.g. family
members, associates, social groups and the
wider community, research groups and
institutions (Lee 1993: 5).
Contents, e.g. taboo or emotionally charged
areas of study (Farberow 1963), e.g. criminality,
deviance, sex, race, bereavement, violence,
politics, policing, human rights, drugs,
poverty, illness, religion and the sacred,
lifestyle, family, finance, physical appearance,
power and vested interests (Lee 1993; Arditti
2002; Chambers 2003).
Situational and contextual circumstances (Lee
1993).
Intrusion into private spheres and deep
personal experience (Lee and Renzetti 1993:
5), e.g. sexual behaviour, religious practices,
death and bereavement, even income and age.
Potential sanction, risk or threat of stigmatization,
incrimination, costs or career loss
to the researcher, participants or others, e.g.
groups and communities (Lee and Renzetti
1993; Renzetti and Lee 1993; De Laine 2000),
aparticularissuefortheresearcherwhostudies
human sexuality and who, consequently, suffers
from ‘stigma contagion’, i.e. sharing the same
stigma as those being studied (Lee 1993: 9).
Impingement on political alignments (Lee
1993).
Cultural and cross-cultural factors and inhibitions
(Sieber 1992: 129).
Fear of scrutiny and exposure (Payne et al.
1980);
Threat to the researchers and to the
family members and associates of those
studied (Lee 1993); Lee (1993: 34) suggests
that ‘chilling’ may take place, i.e. where
researchers are ‘deterred from producing or
disseminating research’ because they anticipate
hostile reactions from colleagues, e.g. on
race. ‘Guilty knowledge’ may bring personal
and professional risk from colleagues; it