Ethics and Integrity in Research with Children and Young People: Volume 7

Researchers face many ethical challenges when conducting research with children. Ethical issues can be even more significant when researchers work with children from low-income urban settings in the Global South. This chapter presents reflections on research conducted with children aged 6–12 years old who live in Jakarta, Indonesia. Underpinned by the new sociology of childhood, the study was designed to gather these children’s perspectives on child-friendly public spaces in their neighbourhoods. A range of qualitative methods were used including child-led tours, drawings, observations and interviews. As part of the study, the authors developed and reflected on the use of story and storytelling to deliver the research information and obtain the children’s consent to participate. The authors’ experience demonstrates that story and storytelling supported children’s competence and engaged them in a meaningful informed consent process. This approach is especially relevant for children with low literacy skills and whose parents or caregivers may not be available to help children decide on their participation in research. The chapter concludes with recommendations for effectively approaching this ethical challenge in future social research with children from similar backgrounds.

Can children give their informed consent to participate in a research study, or can they only provide assent? This chapter explores this tricky question by drawing on three stages of a longitudinal ethnography within a multi-ethnic school in the north of England. Illustrative examples are used to show how the ability to give consent is not based on age alone, but rather on children’s experiences and confidence, the type of research conducted, and the researcher’s own expertise in communicating with children. The chapter provides examples of children’s active and ongoing negotiation of consent and through their choice to withdraw consent, ‘correct’ the researcher’s interpretations, actively produce their own written field notes and reflect on data collected as part of fieldwork. To facilitate consent, children were given time and space to familiarise themselves with the researcher and the study. Actively involving children in all stages of the study highlighted the importance of familiarisation and participation to the processes of informed consent to ensure children’s ongoing and meaningful involvement in the research.

This chapter examines the research practices, procedures and problems involved in a study investigating the digital lifeworlds of rural and urban youth aged 13–18 years in Nigeria. First, the chapter maps the key aspects of the ethical guidelines that were followed before and during the course of the study. The key aspects of the guidelines covered issues linked to information disclosure, assent/consent, confidentiality, potential harms to participants, and institutions, and financial compensation and other inducements. In addition, the chapter unpacks some of the ethical complexities and dilemmas that emerged during the research. Drawing on perspectives from the new sociology of childhood and youth-centred research approaches, the chapter examines both the opportunities and challenges involved in doing research with young people on digital technology within the African context. In line with a youth-centred approach, the study privileges young people’s views and voices to facilitate their full autonomy and rights to participate in research. The chapter draws attention to the important contextual influences and dynamics that can affect all aspects of the research process and shape the emergent ethical considerations. These include ethical conundrums such as adult–child power relationship, gendered relations and group dynamics, problems of language and cognition, ‘techno-shame’, shy and assertive participants, the drawbacks of conducting fieldwork in school settings and absent participants.

This chapter draws on data from young men¹ interviewed on two occasions; first as ‘children’ aged 17 years within juvenile Young Offenders’ Institutions (YOIs); and then again as ‘adults’ aged 18 years within young adult/adult prisons about their experiences of transitions. Ethical reviews typically reflect age-determined constructions of child/adult status and those aged under 18 years are deemed to be more ‘vulnerable’, thus attracting more scrutiny from research ethics committees (Economic and Social Research Council [ESRC], 2020). This concern heightens the methodological difficulties of prison research, as incarceration renders children ‘doubly vulnerable’ (Jacobson & Talbot, 2017). Such institutions may be obstructive and access must be obtained from a series of gatekeepers. Negotiating the balance between participants’ rights and their best interests (Heptinstall, 2000; Thomas & O’Kane, 1998), along with gatekeepers’ priorities can be challenging. This chapter outlines how tricky ethical tensions were balanced with participants’ best interests in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (United Nations, 1989). Despite the difficulties encountered, the researcher (J.P.) took the view that there would be ‘ethical implication[s] of NOT conducting the research’ (Girling, 2017, p. 38). The chapter offers recommendations for how researchers might conduct ethically sensitive research with similar cohorts of young people.

Issues related to disability and childhood are frequently examined across the social sciences and humanities. Many researchers conduct studies with disabled children as the focus of study, as research participants and/or as research drivers. Disabled children represent two categories of identified vulnerability, thus, requiring stringent ethical boundaries in terms of recruitment, consent, research methods, analysis, disclosure and knowledge mobilisation. Although many safeguards apply to research with all children, the focus on disability and disabled childhoods initiates further ethical scrutiny. In this chapter, the authors examine a number of ethical dilemmas that have emerged when conducting research with, and in relation to, disabled children. In particular, the authors will examine the roles of disabled children and youth in advancing research on policy and practice within education and care sectors. The authors query the possibilities and limitations that emerge when employing institutional ethnographic, participatory action and phenomenological research. The chapter unpacks some of the tricky tensions around asking children to speak about disability and share their experiences of disablement when disability is so frequently stigmatised. The authors examine the impacts of predetermined categories of impairment within quantitative research. Across methodologies, data collection based on assumptions of impairment can skew analyses towards a medicalised framework of disability, leaving little room for socio-cultural perspectives on disablement, including how these approaches trigger ethical issues around notions of representation and agency in research with disabled children.

This chapter draws on a study on Adivasi identities in a context of protracted violence and conflict in India. The chapter examines the ethical issues that emerged during the research with young people, through a critical exploration of researcher positionality and power. The chapter is informed by a naturalistic inquiry into community interactions and youth voice in an area of civil unrest in India, and specifically, with young people from the historically marginalised Adivasi community. I reflect on my theoretical transition to poststructuralism in the doing of this research, enriched by postcolonial and feminist perspectives, which emphasises the centrality of context and the inextricability of the researcher from the researched. By critically reflecting on my power and positionality as an adult researcher, I question how the particular context of the young participants, my presence and participation within it produced particular responses, understandings and identities of young people. These understandings are entangled with ethical challenges in relation to the navigation of the research context, gendering and hierarchisation within local community relations. In encountering these complexities, my ethical positioning raises questions about ‘representation’ in the capturing of youth voices in the Indian context. The chapter suggests an articulation and linking of the ethical tensions to a substantiation of the theoretical and methodological framings of research, informed through the research context and the researcher’s positionality.

Practices of reflexivity have encouraged youth researchers to discuss ethical dilemmas encountered in the field more openly. Whilst this has afforded a departure away from abstracted accounts of practice, published work tends to focus on self-oriented reflexivity and the emotional response of the ethnographer. Participants’ own emotions, and the emotional relationships between researcher and participant, have received less consideration. Not only can this result in adversarial, challenging or ‘controversial’ encounters being sanitised or even avoided in written accounts, but also the possible processual, individual or social benefits of a relational ethnography can be downplayed. This chapter uses cross-cultural ethnographic research involving young people in Laos, Southeast Asia and in Scotland, to expose some of the ethical dilemmas that can emerge from researcher–participant relationships. Reflecting and writing about these events deliberately places the researchers in a position of vulnerability by demonstrating the diverse ways emotional connections can shape and direct ethics in practice. The chapter concludes that a balanced approach to ethics, with attention to honesty and relationality, is key to realising a more considerate, authentic ethnographic account.

This chapter draws on experiences of research with children who work as street traders in Nigeria, with a focus on establishing trust and the related concepts of power and rights. The discussion stems from a study which used a rights-based approach to gather children’s accounts of their experiences of working as street traders within a large market in a Nigerian city. Seventeen children (aged 10–15 years) took part in semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Children talked about difficult situations as they undertook tiring work and received conflicting messages about the importance of making an economic contribution to the family, versus the need to attend school. Researching these accounts entailed a number of ethical challenges, which centred on access and recruitment; consent/assent and participation; sensitivity of research; and researcher positionality. First, recruitment was limited to children with parents/guardians who could give consent, with assent from the children. Second, a relationship of trust had to be negotiated between the researcher and the participating children. This involved acknowledging different elements of adult–child positionality, which had implications for the ways in which children participated in the study. Third, sensitivity was essential given that children could discuss attitudes or activities, which were not universally seen as acceptable. Fourth, researcher positionality influenced all aspects of the study, including access to children, how relationships were forged and the interpretation of data. All of these challenges relied heavily on building trust with children. However, the authors illustrate how trust must be employed cautiously in research with children, given adult–child power disparities.

This chapter explores the ethical challenges related to the study of children in highly complex and sensitive family circumstances where intimate partner violence has taken place. Drawing on eight months of ethnographic fieldwork at a women’s refuge in Denmark, the author unpacks and discusses three key ethical aspects of conducting research with children: gatekeepers and consent, researcher positionality, and participant confidentiality. These aspects highlight the centrality of trust when undertaking sensitive research with children. In qualitative research, trust is often described as an important aspect of the research process, but research rarely takes into account that trust can vary according to the relationship or research context. What spurred these reflections was questions asked by some of the mothers about what their child had told the author. Examples of this kind illustrate the complex role and positionality of the researcher when seeking to enter and explore the everyday lives of children living in complex family circumstances. Furthermore, the notion of trust brings attention to how different relationships of power – in this case between children and mothers – can influence the research encounter. The chapter concludes with a discussion of children’s own positionality in research about their experiences and life worlds, and calls for researchers to be ethically mindful about how powerful dynamics that emerge during research can support (or hinder) children’s rights as research participants.

This chapter aims to present and critically question the work undertaken with a group of children as experts in a transdisciplinary research project, ‘Exploring the way to and from school with children: An interdisciplinary approach of children’s experiences of the third place’. The project is funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation.¹ A partnership was established between the research team and a group of 10 children (11–12 years old). The children were actively involved as co-researchers to provide the research team with expertise regarding their experiences of the school journey. Their roles as co-researchers included refining the research questions and methodological tools, analysing data, and drafting final recommendations. In this chapter, the authors outline the different stages of this transdisciplinary partnership with children as co-researchers, whilst addressing some key issues encountered during the process, including: What is expertise? When, and under what conditions, can children genuinely be co-researchers? What ethical aspects should be considered? The authors commence with an outline of the project’s theoretical framework before detailing how the participatory process enabled children to actively take part and give their views on the research. The authors address a specific focus on the ethical challenges encountered as part of the complexities of conducting research with children. They conclude with some reflections on the benefits of involving children as co-researchers and, in doing so, offer a critique of the notion of ‘expertise’ in research with children.

The overarching aim of our research is the social and environmental sustainability of cities, with a focus on ensuring the rights and needs of the children who live in them are considered in policy and planning arenas. How do we, as researchers, work ethically and effectively with children to foreground their voices and produce robust evidence to inform policies and processes which promote their wellbeing in child-friendly cities, and in line with Sustainable Development Goals? Children have the right to be heard, and their views taken seriously, in policy and planning arenas. Conducting ethical and effective child-centred research requires balancing considerations of children’s rights to genuine participation and their rights to protection at all stages of the research process. This balance requires methodological flexibility and a situated ethical approach, where researchers and participants together determine appropriate research pathways. In this chapter, the authors reflect on ethical and methodological insights gained during a decade of conducting urban-related research with children. The various projects used different methods and provided different lessons; but common to all was an understanding of the importance of relationship-building, of supportive and engaged adults, and of methods which were respectful, age/culturally appropriate and ‘fit for purpose’. These factors are crucial to ethically enable the foregrounding of children’s voices, the collection of robust data and effective dissemination of research with children.

Conducting research with young migrants offers an important opportunity to understand better their own perspectives on their migration experiences. Yet, engaging migrant youth in research can be fraught with ethical and methodological challenges. Institutional ethics processes have a tendency to prioritise standard principles – many of which depart from the ethical sensitivities that emerge during research practice. In this chapter, the authors explore some of the procedural and situated ethical issues involved in conducting research with child and youth migrants in Ghana. In particular, the authors highlight how the diversity of young migrants prompts definitional issues about what constitutes childhood and youth, and in different socio-cultural spatial settings. Differing categorisations of child and youth generate issues of representation and guide adult-led decisions about children’s assumed competencies and vulnerabilities to participate in research. The precarious living circumstances of many migrant children, including the absence of parental figures or legal guardians, coupled with language and cultural barriers, present particular difficulties for securing informed consent. Challenges of this kind can deny young migrants the opportunity to participate in research about their own lives and serve to reproduce dominant power asymmetries and assumptions about these children’s vulnerabilities. The authors conclude by offering some suggestions for how researchers might develop critical ethical reflexivity to support the meaningful and ethical engagement of young migrants in research.

This chapter explores ethical issues related to the use of drama-based methods in child and youth-focussed research projects. It begins by outlining some of the reasons for utilising drama-based research methods in projects that examine children’s perspectives and lived experiences. The chapter proceeds to discuss specific methods of drama-based inquiry including ethnodrama, ethnotheatre, reader’s theatre, play-building, devised theatre and collective creation. The sections draw on examples from recent drama-based research projects to highlight some of the key ethical considerations in drama-based research with children and young people, including specific issues surrounding representation, transparency, physical risks, power dynamics, consent, confidentiality, anonymity and reciprocity. The author shares her experiences of navigating some of the tricky ethical challenges involved in a recent participatory play-building project in Canada, providing some suggestions to help researchers in the field become better prepared to use and assess these methods and approaches in research with children and young people.

In the years 2016–2019, in collaboration with primary school students from Wrocław, Poland, the authors endeavoured to implement participatory methods in children’s literature studies. Their collaborations with these children resulted in the formation of an intergenerational research team and the publication of two peer-reviewed articles co-written with child researchers. As their thinking about child-led research has gravitated towards approaches accentuating the value of co-thinking, they have grown convinced of the potential of participatory research to counterbalance the adultism prevailing in children’s literature studies. Building on the authors’ two participatory projects: ‘Children’s Voices in the Polish Canon Wars: Participatory Research in Action’ (Chawar et al., 2018) and ‘Productive Remembering of Polish Childhoods: Child–Adult Memory-Work with the School Literary Canon’ (Deszcz-Tryhubczak et al., 2019), this chapter offers a meta-critical reflection on the practical and ethical challenges of working on a research paper co-authored by young collaborators. They focus on issues linked to child–adult co-authorship, such as anonymity concerns, the ethics of representations, time pressures, and institutional challenges. They propose that the key to reassessing the status of child-led research in academia lies in accepting the ‘messiness’ of participatory research, treating it as a constant work in progress rather than a final outcome or product, and shifting away from the more rigid format of academic writing towards a collectivistic and free-flowing narrative.