“What Should I Do Now?”: Navigating Relational Ethics in Practice as an Early Career Researcher as Illustrated by a Qualitative Interview Study About Women’s Drinking Practices

Abstract

Qualitative interview studies on sensitive topics often draw on principles of feminist methodologies which focus on developing and maintaining non-exploitative, caring relationships with participants. For early career researchers, who may have less research experience, managing relational ethical issues that arise in research relationships can be difficult. Additionally, they could experience further pressures because of their junior roles and precarious employment. In the context of health research, early career researchers working on qualitative studies may experience specific challenges because of the predominance of the biomedical paradigm in this discipline. In this article, I explore some of the relational ethical issues I deliberated as an early career researcher when working in a medical faculty on a semi-structured qualitative interview study about women’s alcohol drinking practices. I focus on two overlapping themes from my experience of ethics in practice “Trying to building and maintain relationships” and “Trying to stabilize inequalities in research relationships.” With a primary focus on how I negotiated differing responsibilities, I draw on examples from the community-based face-to-face and virtual recruitment, the fast-paced face-to-face interviews, and the process of returning interview transcripts to women to review. With this analysis, I contribute to existing literature about ethics in practice for early career researchers by indicating the types of relational ethics that will need to be navigated and the resources needed to support them. These resources include having adequate time, opportunities for reflection, and good supervisory support. I also contribute to scholarship which critiques the wider health research context by considering the challenges it can pose for early career researchers when managing relational ethical spaces in qualitative interview studies. This article will be of relevance to novice researchers and those who supervise and manage them.

‘I Enjoy Having Someone to Rant to, I Feel Like Someone is Listening to Me’: Exploring Emotion in the Use of Qualitative, Longitudinal Diary-Based Methods

“…Though attention to emotions, emotion work and emotional labour has gained traction in qualitative academic disciplines recently, it remains firmly at the margins, particularly within health research. Detailed accounts of ethics in practice from researchers are vital in order to highlight the ethical deliberations managed in the spaces outside of the procedural ethical review (Jackson, 2021). Moreover, as Waters et al (2020) suggest, understanding these emotional reactions is paramount to then interpreting that data.…”

Sensitive, Challenging, and Difficult Topics: Experiences and Practical Considerations for Qualitative Researchers

“…The 'Buddy System' relies on there being an effective, and pre-planned 'telephone chain'. That is, one member of the research team (usually a senior collaborator, line manager, or supervisor) is nominated to be the point of contact (or 'buddy') for each field researcher who is collecting data (see also Jackson, 2021). A second buddy should also be nominated for when the primary buddy themself is undertaking data collection, or for when the primary buddy is ill or on annual leave.…”

Microinclusive teaching in family science courses

“…Ethical issues can be seen in multiple pairings, such as friendships (Connolly, 2012), researchers-study participants (Jackson, 2021), caregivers-patients (Marquis, 2002), employersemployees (Kim & Kim, 2020), and therapists-clients (Gergen, 2015). Some colleagues have addressed instructor-student interactions and noted some ambiguities about the interactional dynamics (Allen, 1995;Campbell, 2017).…”