The Complex Roles of the Qualitative Social Work Researcher: Ethics of Vulnerability and Researcher Identity

Social workers encounter complex ethical issues in practice and research settings. This roundtable focuses on research ethics and examines two dilemmas that emerge during qualitative research processes: conceptualizing vulnerability and navigating complex researcher identities.  The purpose of this roundtable is to provide a reflexive discussion about ethically important moments in qualitative research and to analyze key issues in qualitative social work research ethics. This is a timely topic as the federal regulations for the protection of human subjects is undergoing regulatory changes.

Data from three original qualitative social work studies will be analyzed: 1. the first study examines the health care access and usage among a recently arrived refugee group in the United States; 2. the second study involves interviews with emerging adults who have siblings with severe mental health conditions; 3. the third study examines social workers’ beliefs about reporting suspected elder abuse to Adult Protective Services. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in all of the studies.  All three researchers employed purposive sampling techniques and analyzed interview data using NVivo software.  Two researchers used grounded theory methods and the third used theoretically directed content analysis to guide thematic analysis of coded transcripts.

The United States federal regulations identify certain groups of people that require specific protections when recruited to be research participants.  This roundtable analyzes the definition of “vulnerability” in social work research.  Vulnerability can be induced by power hierarchies or can be created by a need for services, assistance, or protection.  Researcher identity involves issues of power and representation in research and is tied to the principle of respect for persons.  In some situations, investigators may occupy multiple, tension-generating identities that they have ascribed to themselves or that have been ascribed to them (Simon & Mosavel, 2011).  Role confusion may occur if study participants do not clearly understand the role of the investigator.

Reflexivity is a process in which researchers place themselves and their practices under scrutiny, while acknowledging ethical dilemmas that emerge in the research process (McGraw, Zvonkovic & Walker. 2004).  These three researchers used reflexive memo writing during data collection and analysis to reflect on the research process, their respondents, and their role as researcher.  Reflexivity allows researchers to validate, discuss, and better understand the “ethically important moments” that arise during qualitative research (Guillemin & Gillam, 2004).

Each researcher identified ethically important moments related to the themes of vulnerability and researcher identity.  In the first two studies, complex vulnerability of research participants raised ethical issues related to informed consent and voluntariness.  In the third study, vulnerability surfaced with regard to employment and identity as a social worker.  Complex identities occurred for all three authors.  Two researchers managed researcher/practitioner roles and the third navigated researcher/colleague roles.

The authors will provide a reflexive discussion in order to increase greater “ethical mindfulness” (Simon & Mosavel, 2011) and to begin developing ethical guidelines for qualitative methods.  These guidelines will promote ethical standards and competency for social work researchers and practitioners.