RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

SAMPLING AND ACCESS 121
will incur sensitivities, the attraction of discussing
sensitive research per se is that it highlights what
these delicate issues might be and how they might
be felt at their sharpest. We advise readers to
consider most educational research as sensitive, to
anticipate what those sensitivities might be, and
what trade-offs might be necessary.
Sampling and access
Walford (2001: 33) argues that gaining access and
becoming accepted is a slow process. Hammersley
and Atkinson (1983: 54) suggest that gaining
access not only is a practical matter but also
provides insights into the ‘social organisation of
the setting’.
Lee (1993: 60) suggests that there are potentially
serious difficulties in sampling and access in
sensitive research, not least because of the problem
of estimating the size of the population from
which the sample is to be drawn, as members
of particular groups, e.g. deviant or clandestine
groups, will not want to disclose their associations.
Similarly, like-minded groups may not wish to
open themselves to public scrutiny. They may
have much to lose by revealing their membership
and, indeed, their activities may be illicit, critical
of others, unpopular, threatening to their own
professional security, deviant and less frequent
than activities in other groups, making access
to them a major obstacle. What if a researcher
is researching truancy, or teenage pregnancy, or
bullying, or solvent abuse among school students,
or alcohol and medication use among teachers, or
family relationship problems brought about by the
stresses of teaching
Lee (1993: 61) suggests several strategies to
be used, either separately or in combination, for
sampling ‘special’ populations (e.g. rare or deviant
populations):
List sampling: lookingthroughpublicdomain
lists of, for example, the recently divorced
(though such lists may be more helpful to social
researchers than, specifically, educational
researchers).
Multipurposing: using an existing survey to
reach populations of interest (though problems
of confidentiality may prevent this from being
employed).
Screening: targeting a particular location and
canvassing within it (which may require much
effort for little return).
Outcropping:thisinvolvesgoingtoaparticular
location where known members of the
target group congregate or can be found
(e.g. Humphreys’ (1970) celebrated study of
homosexual ‘tearoom trade’); in education this
may be a particular staffroom (for teachers),
or meeting place for students. Outcropping
risks bias, as there is no simple check for
representativeness of the sample.
Servicing: Lee (1993: 72) suggests that it may
be possible to reach research participants by
offering them some sort of service in return
for their participation. Researchers must be
certain that they really are able to provide
the services promised. As Walford (2001: 36)
writes: ‘people don’t buy products; they buy
benefits’, and researchers need to be clear on
the benefits offered.
Professional informants: Lee(1993:73)suggests
these could be, for example, police, doctors,
priests, or other professionals. In education
these may include social workers and
counsellors. This may be unrealistic optimism,
as these very people may be bound by terms
of legal or ethical confidentiality or voluntary
self-censorship (e.g. an AIDS counsellor, after
a harrowing day at work, may not wish
to continue talking to a stranger about
AIDS counselling, or a social worker or
counsellor may be constrained by professional
confidentiality, or an exhausted teacher may
not wish to talk about teaching difficulties).
Further, Lee suggests that, even if such people
agree to participate, they may not know the
full story; Lee (1993: 73) gives the example
of drug users whose contacts with the police
may be very different from their contacts with
doctors or social workers, or, the corollary of
this, the police, doctors and social workers may
not see the same group of drug users.
Advertising:thoughthiscanpotentiallyreacha
wide population, it may be difficult to control
Chapter 5