Desirability of anonymity

A topic in research methodology

All research has to be informed by a strong sense of ethics.

Research ethics is important in planning and carrying-out research, and also when writing-up. One of the issues that needs to be considered in writing-up research is protection of the identify of participants.

Should research participants be anonymous in reports?

The ‘default’ assumption in writing-up educational research is that participants are not identified in reports, either by being directly named, or though offering sufficient information to allow them to be recognised.

However, it is not automatically the case that anonymity is the ethically preferred situation. The author of a research report should consider:

The conditions of access negotiated

Often participants (individuals, and institutions acting as research sites) will be assured of anonymity when they are recruited into a study. If informed consent has been given on the basis of an assurance of anonymity then the researcher is bound to protect the participant’s identify whatever other factors might suggest. It might be possible to re-negotiate his issue later, but that could be seen as stressful by some participants and should be avoided if at all possible. It is therefore important this issue is considered when planning the research.

The participant’s preferences

Research participants may have preferences about whether their identity should be reported or not. Generally people feel more able to agree to participate in research (and are considered to be more likely to be honest and ‘natural’ when their identities will not be revealed. We should generally respect a participant’s wish for anonymity. Sometimes a participant may prefer to be named. Often we might be uneasy about this, both because of issue of the candidness of data, and because we may feel the person does not fully appreciate the nature and potential consequences of being named. (We would certainly not usually want to identify a child or vulnerable person.)

The participant’s position and status

However, there certainly are occasions when anonymity may not be preferred. Interviews with senior figures in organisations such as government ministries or NGOs may provide credible or substantive evidence because of the position of the interviewee, who will often be a spokesperson for a policy or organisation. Research may be more convincing and influential if sources are named. (And producing work which has impact is itself an ethical issue given the resource costs of research.) The participants in such situations may be happy to be named, may indeed expect to have their words attributed, and is likely to be in a position where publication of their words would not put them at any particular additional risk.

The viability of providing anonymity

Finally, whatever the desirability of (or desire for) anonymity, it may not always be possible to offer it.

If an informant is in a unique position, then it may not be possible to disguise their identity.

This may mean a unique position in relation to the researcher, if the researcher is undertaking context-directed research (Taber, 2013: 126-127). For example, a teacher undertaking practitioner research in their own school might give it and people in it (the head teacher, the head of art, the head girl, the chair of governors, etc) assumed names, BUT as the researcher’s professional relationship is clear form the report, and is in the public domain, the school and people in it are readily identified. (Often it is possible to identify the institution in which a participant researcher works by a simple internet search.)

For example, a Master’s dissertation from a UK university reported that the author of the report had interviewed a young child but changed her name in the report. However, as the researcher reported that the three year old girl “stands in the position both as subject and daughter to me” this did not hide her identity at all!

When such a situation occurs practitioners should make it clear when seeking permission to undertake research in their own school/institution that any report cannot keep the institution’s identity protected.

Source cited:

• Taber, K. S. (2013). Classroom-based Research and Evidence-based Practice: An introduction (2nd ed.). London: Sage.