Ethics for social research: guidance

2. Ethical Principles

2.1. This section sets out six ethical principles which those commissioning or conducting research for government need to uphold.

Principle 1: Research should have a clear user need and public benefit

2.2. Social research conducted for the Scottish Government should meet a clearly defined, legitimate and unmet need to inform the conduct of government business and serve the public good. Social research can help to meet a range of needs, from providing evidence to inform policy and decision-making, to running and improving services and ensuring people have a voice in policy-making that affects them.

2.3. Identifying a clear need as early as possible in the research design process, by conducting both internal and external engagement with relevant stakeholders, is a fundamental part of making sure that research will provide outputs that are of value. As discussed later under Principle 5, engaging with stakeholders and groups the research seeks to represent, not only helps to ensure the effective dissemination and impact of research findings, but it is also an important step in determining the most appropriate and effective research methods.

2.4. As well as considering the user need, it is important to consider the timing of the research, and whether this could affect the public acceptability or public benefit of conducting the research. Events in the wider political, policy, social and economic landscape in Scotland, the rest of the UK and internationally may affect the intended public benefit of doing the research. When conducting research that may potentially be contentious due to the topic, timing or proposed methods, you should consider the need to assess the public acceptability of the research by conducting public engagement work before proceeding with the research. It may also be beneficial to consult with the Office of the Chief Researcher, or wider analytical community both within and outwith the Scottish Government to ensure adherence to the latest advice or guidance.

Public Benefit

2.5. Defining the public good or benefit of both primary research and secondary uses of data and analysis requires consideration of benefits beyond just producing the statistics or research outputs. Researchers should be able to describe how those statistics or outputs will lead to public benefit, as well as who the benefits may apply to. The UK Statistics Authority Research Code of Practice and Accreditation Criteria provides a useful list of examples regarding what it means to conduct research that is in the public interest or serves the public good. This includes research whose primary purpose is to:

• provide an evidence base for public policy decision-making;
• provide an evidence base for public service delivery;
• provide an evidence base for decisions which are likely to significantly benefit the economy, society or quality of life of people in Scotland, people connected to Scotland or people born in Scotland now living abroad;
• replicate, validate, challenge or review existing research and proposed research publications, including official statistics;
• significantly extend understanding of social or economic trends or events by improving knowledge or challenging widely accepted analyses;
• improve the quality, coverage or presentation of existing research.

2.6. When assessing the public good of social research, it is important to consider the following questions:

• How beneficial would the research be to society as a whole? Could the research disproportionately benefit or disadvantage a particular group?
• Is it necessary to conduct this research to realise the public benefits? Is this the best and most cost-effective way of answering the research questions?
• Have the potential benefits been weighed up carefully against potential harms to individuals and communities (for both those involved and not involved in the research)?
• Is the budget for the research proportionate to the public good?
• Would there be any negative consequences if this research was not conducted? Could it be unethical not to conduct the research?

Transparency and Dissemination

2.7. Evidence resulting from research should be widely and appropriately disseminated so that the maximum impact resulting from this contact with the public is generated. Researchers should work to ensure that their findings are presented reasonably, and they should consider how to best protect any results from distortion or misinterpretation in communication.

2.8. The evidence from Scottish Government-funded social research should be brought to the attention of policy makers and other users in a clear and accessible way. It should also conform to professional and ethical standards to protect against distortion and bias in the interpretation of findings.

2.9. Ensuring the transparent dissemination of research methods and findings maximises the potential public benefit of social research, by enabling the research findings to reach wider audiences. It is also an essential part in maintaining public trust in collection and use of public data. Transparency of research methods as well as research findings also enables research to be subject to scientific scrutiny and evaluation, as well as promoting the sharing of best practice throughout the research community.

2.10. It is therefore important for all Scottish Government research to have a clear dissemination strategy agreed with Ministers. This should take account of all five provisions in the Scottish Government Social Research Publication Protocol, summarised below:

• Findings from government social research and, where possible, research data will be made available to all;
• Research reports will be released as soon as practicable to an agreed timetable. Agreed final outputs will be published within 12 weeks;
• Publication of findings and report content should not be influenced by political concerns;
• Details of research commissioned by the SG will be published;
• Dissemination strategies should be drawn up for all in-house and externally commissioned research;
• Final responsibility for the content, format and timing of publications rests with the Scottish Government’s Chief Researcher or their nominee.

2.11. There may be instances where it is not possible to openly publish research findings in a timely manner (for example, during pre-election periods). In such instances, it is important to ensure the Chief Researcher is consulted, that research findings are published when it is possible to do so, and that any decisions and reasons for not publishing are clear and proportionate. For further guidance on the use and dissemination of evaluation findings, refer to Chapter 6 of the Magenta Book.

Principle 2: Research should be based on sounds research methods and protect against bias in the interpretation of findings

2.12. Quality matters. Research done by or for Scottish Government must be based on robust and relevant methods. It is unethical to intrude into people’s lives with methods that are unsound, unproven or unreasonable, and government research has a duty to serve legitimate needs of government business. Research should not unduly burden respondents, and the risks of over-researching particularly vulnerable groups should always be weighed up against any anticipated benefits of the research.

2.13. When considering the most appropriate methods to use it is important to consider which methods will enable the research question to be fully and thoroughly answered, and whether different methods entail any additional risks (e.g. increased participant burden). Methods should only be chosen where any additional risks are significantly outweighed by the potential benefits of using a particular method.

2.14. It is also important when considering the most appropriate method to be aware of the wider environment. This includes designing and conducting research in a way that is sensitive to cultural, socio-economic, environmental and political contexts, as well as being aware of how external events can impact on social research, particularly the conduct of fieldwork.

2.15. Researchers should be able to justify the need for working directly with groups of interest in favour of using alternative existing sources of data. In instances where direct participation is deemed necessary, the research team need to ensure research participants’ rights and dignity are respected and every effort is made to ensure participation is equitable.

2.16. All social research and use of findings should adhere to the core values of Honesty, Integrity, Impartiality and Objectivity required from all Civil Servants by the Civil Service Code. As stated in Principle 1, researchers should conform to professional and ethical standards to protect against distortion and bias in the interpretation of findings. The findings and evidence presented should also adhere to departmental and government quality assurance guidance. More information on producing quality analysis for government can be found in The Aqua Book.

2.17. Researchers should ensure they are aware of and adhere to all relevant legislation and policies when planning what research methods they will use before beginning a research project. They should seek legal advice or guidance if there is any uncertainty.

2.18. They should also consider what methods are used when conducting research with participants from certain groups. For example, when working with particular groups researchers may have to consider the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000, or when using freely available social media data (see Appendix B) there may be specific departmental policies in place. The research methods chosen should be inclusive and enable all appropriate persons to take part in accordance with the Public Sector Equality Duty, the Fairer Scotland Duty and other legislation such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Analysis and presentation of findings should take potential differences between groups into consideration.

Principle 3: Research should adhere to data protection regulations and the secure handling of personal data

2.19. Research participants have a right to privacy. The duty of researchers to protect the privacy of their research subjects is enshrined in data protection laws, including GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, which govern the way in which we can use, process, and store personal data. The Information Commissioner’s Office covers Data Protection rights (personal information) for the whole of the UK, including Scotland. The Scottish Information Commissioner is solely responsible for Freedom of Information compliance of all public authorities in Scotland.

2.20. Personal data is information relating to an individual who can be identified directly from the information itself, or indirectly, from the combination of the information with other available information. Special category personal data is information that needs more protection because it is sensitive.

2.21. While there are clear similarities between GDPR and ethical principles in social research it is important to note that something that is GDPR compliant will not be ethical by default. Therefore, social researchers must consider ethics in addition to the GDPR.

2.22. Personal data must be collected and processed appropriately. GDPR sets out seven key principles for handling personal data. The table below summarises these principles and illustrates how these should be implemented in social research practice.

Summary of GDPR seven principles for processing personal data for research

Principle: Lawfulness, fairness and transparency

Personal data must be processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner

In practice

• Must be a lawful basis for collecting and using personal data. ICO’s lawful basis interactive tool helps decide which is most appropriate.
• For social research, the most appropriate is often public task: ‘processing necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority vested in the controller.
• Collection and use of personal data should not have adverse effects on individuals and handled in a way they would reasonably expect.
• When processing special category personal data, you must specify both a lawful basis and a separate condition for processing.
• Researchers must be clear, open and honest about how personal data will be used in a way that is easily accessible and easy to understand, including through use of Privacy Notices and Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs).

Principle: Purpose limitation

Personal data must be obtained for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a manner incompatible with those purposes

In practice

• Researchers should specify why they are collecting personal data to comply with accountability obligations and ensure transparency.
• Privacy notices should be provided if collecting personal data to ensure participants understand why it is being collected, what will be done with it and who it will be shared with.
• Personal data can only be used for a different purpose when new purpose is ‘compatible’ with the original purpose. If the original lawful basis is consent, then you must get specific consent for the new purpose or identify a different lawful basis.

Principle: Data minimisation

Personal data must be adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary

In practice

• Personal data should be relevant to the research and limited to what is necessary for the purpose of the research.

Principle: Accuracy

Personal data must be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date

In practice

• Researchers should take reasonable steps to ensure personal data is recorded correctly.
• Incorrect or misleading personal data must be corrected or erased.
• Where necessary, data should be updated periodically.

Principle: Storage limitation

Personal data must not be kept longer than is necessary

In practice

• Personal data should only be kept for as long as it is needed and if no longer needed should be deleted securely or anonymised.
• The length of storage should be justified, and research participants made aware of the intended retention period.

Principle: Integrity and confidentiality

Appropriate technical and organisational measures put in place to guard against unauthorised or unlawful processing, loss, damage or destruction

• Personal data should be processed and stored securely. Researchers should analyse the risks associated with data processing and put in place the appropriate level of security to prevent the data being compromised (this may include pseudonymising and/or encrypting data).
• It should be made clear to research participants what measures will be taken to ensure confidentiality.

Principle: Accountability

You must take responsibility for what you do with personal data and demonstrate how you comply with the other principles

In practice

• Researchers should take responsibility for what they do with personal data and have appropriate records in place to demonstrate compliance with the above principles.

2.23. The ICO encourages the anonymisation of data wherever possible. Care should be taken to ensure data is truly anonymous under the GDPR. If individuals could be re-identified through any reasonably available means, the data is only pseudonymised and the researcher is continuing to process personal data. In those instances, researchers should consider whether the data can be made anonymous.

2.24. Where anonymous data is to be used for secondary data analysis, particular care must be taken to ensure it retains the anonymity of respondents. Special care should be taken with small or very localised samples, and with the rich data generated by qualitative research, which may enable research participants to be identified from their characteristics alone.

2.25. The identity of all research participants and potential participants (including information about the decision to participate) should be protected throughout the research process. For example, by ensuring that participants are not identified or identifiable in the research outputs. Clear and transparent procedures should be developed to protect the identities of any research participants. Names and addresses should only be collected if pertinent to the research in question and should be kept securely and separately from responses to minimise the likelihood of breaches of security and anonymity. Suspected data breaches must be reported in accordance with ICO guidance and in line with Scottish Government policy.

2.26. Information relating to a deceased person does not legally constitute personal data and is not subject to GDPR. However, researchers should consider ethical issues around the disclosure of, or access to the deceased person’s data, such as collecting and processing the personal data of relatives.

2.27. Guidance for social researchers included in the Social Research Professional Guidance for Scottish Government Social Researchers provides more information on the above principles and the practical steps social researchers should follow to ensure compliance with data protection legislation.

Principle 4: Participation in research should be based on specific and informed consent

2.28. Participation in research is always voluntary, unless required by law as with the census. Research participants should provide their specific and informed consent based on accurate information outlining what it means for them to take part. People should not be pressurised into participation, and they should be given sufficient information to enable them to make an informed decision, including on how any data collected will be used. The use of recording equipment requires explicit consent of the participant.

2.29. Consent can be considered a legal basis for processing personal data. This includes ensuring consent is being given freely, the ability for research participants to refuse consent without detriment and be able to withdraw consent easily at any time. If researchers are not using consent as a legal basis, it is still important to consider the points raised here so research participants can make an informed decision about taking part.

Checklist for achieving valid consent

To achieve valid consent, the information required for research participants to make an informed decision must be prominent, concise, in plain language, and separate from any other terms and conditions. If appropriate it should be provided in different languages, Braille or audio recorded. The information provided to participants should include:

• A summary of what the research is about and what it is being used to inform;
• Details on who is conducting the research and the organisation it is for;
• That they have the option to refuse to answer any individual questions without explanation;
• That they can withdraw from the research at any point up to a specified date (usually dictated by data analysis and reporting), who to contact and how to contact them if they choose to withdraw at a later date;
• Whether or not they will be identified in reporting;
• How their data and responses will be processed, stored or shared with any other organisations;
• Whether any audio or visual recording equipment will be used;
• Whether expenses are covered (travel, subsistence, accommodation) and if an incentive is offered.

2.30. The consent process must start with giving research participants information about the research, the opportunity to reflect on this and ask any questions. The researcher should obtain explicit consent through reiterating the terms of the research, which the research participant must agree to before taking part. It is important to remember that consent must be sought from participants each time they take part in research, for example in separate waves of a longitudinal study or if they are being re-interviewed as part of another separate piece of research.

2.31. Consent should be captured in a consent form which is separate to any other research documentation. This should include details of who consented and what they consented to, including any audio or visual recordings. Consent can be sought either in person or remotely and must be time and date recorded. Consent forms should be saved and stored securely to ensure a clear audit trail.

2.32. Covert research, where participants are unaware of their involvement in a study, raises ethical and legal concerns and should be approached very carefully. Where covert research is planned it must by default be subjected to Ethics Peer Review as set out in this document, and legal advice should be sought before it is conducted.

Consent via gatekeepers or proxy, including with children

2.33. Where possible, research participants should be approached directly for consent. It can be assumed that adults have the capacity to consent unless there is reason to believe the contrary. Where researchers believe someone lacks the capacity to understand the consequences of taking part and cannot give informed consent, a third party with a legal right to make decisions on their behalf can provide consent to participate. When negotiating consent via gatekeepers or proxies, reasonable care should be taken to safeguard the relationship between gatekeeper/proxy and participant and to protect the research participant’s privacy. See Principle 6 for more information on how to consider additional needs when working with specific groups.

2.34. Generally, for research involving children aged under-16, best practice would be that their parents or legal guardians should be approached for consent to enable their children under-16 to participate in research. However Guidance from the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children presents a slightly more nuanced approach. They advise that consent should be obtained from the parent, carer or other appropriate adult for all children under the age of 8, and in most cases for children aged 8-15. For young people aged 16 and 17, you should carefully consider whether parental consent is appropriate. If you don’t seek parental consent for children aged under-16, you should justify your approach and consider whether parents should be informed of the research. A decision not to seek parental consent should be recorded as a highly significant ethical issue in the ethics checklist process, which will automatically trigger an Ethics Peer Review (further details in preceding sections of this guidance).

2.35. If a child doesn’t consent or assent to participate in research, this overrides the consent from the parent, guardian, carer, or other appropriate adult with a duty of care. In addition to parental consent, reasonable efforts must be made to inform children under-16 about the purpose of the research and seek their consent to participate as well.

2.36. Getting It Right For Every Child (GIRFEC) provides specific guidance on collection and handling of information from children.

Active and passive consent

2.37. Active consent means ensuring the parent of each participant has consented to the research, and informed the researchers. This must be the default for Government funded research as is increasingly the case internationally, because it provides clarity to the researcher and gives unequivocal assurance to parents. In some cases active consent may significantly depress response rates, and/or introduce sample bias if those who are allowed to participate are not representative of their target group. Therefore, in exceptional cases where it can be reasonably shown that the use of active consent will damage the integrity of the research to the extent it is not fit for purpose, passive consent can be considered. Passive consent assumes participation, unless the parent chooses to withdraw the child from the research after having been properly informed. An example of passive consent is a message sent to parents asking them to inform the researcher if they do not wish their child to participate. Passive consent can significantly enhance response rates. However it also introduces a highly significant ethical risk; whereby for whatever reason the message requesting consent might not reach the relevant parent.

2.38. Children who are 16 or over will usually be able to give their own consent but researchers should consider whether it is appropriate for parents, legal guardians or other gatekeepers (like schools) to be informed when their child has been invited to participate in research.

Secondary Research

2.39. Secondary data analysis, including research synthesis, must be conducted in a way that is consistent with the original consent provided by participants, based on the information given at the time, for example in privacy notices or information sheets. Any changes to the way data are used may require additional consent from research participants.

Incentives

2.40. Separate GSR and Scottish Government guidance on the role of incentives is available. The use, or not, of incentives should be part of the overall strategy of any social research process with a focus on improving quality of responses – they are not a default option. Incentives should not be offered if they could encourage research participants to take risks that they otherwise would not have taken.

2.41. Incentives are often used to encourage participation in research and can be in the form of cash, shopping vouchers, or charitable donations made on the research participant’s behalf. Those responsible for conducting or commissioning research on behalf of government need to satisfy themselves that offering incentives, including the amount and type, is appropriate.

2.42. It is important to note that accepting the incentive should not prevent the research participant from withdrawing consent at a later stage.

Principle 5: Research should enable participation of the groups it seeks to represent

2.43. Robust and meaningful research must engage the groups it seeks to represent. Therefore, enabling participation of these groups must be an integral part of its design and considered at the start.

2.44. Reaching and recruiting participants from a range of backgrounds and identities ensures the research can meaningfully and accurately include the views of those who will be impacted by the policies the research will inform. This includes the consideration of protected characteristics such as ethnicity, gender, sex, and sexual orientation amongst others. In line with the Public Sector Equality Duty (see Principle 2 for more information), researchers should identify potential barriers to participation and take measures to facilitate participation where practical.

Possible measures for enabling participation

• User involvement - co-production or consulting with stakeholders when designing research helps to ensure that research is relevant and necessary. Consulting with seldom heard groups and/or their representatives on research design can ensure that possible barriers to participation are identified and minimised.
• Recruitment and sampling - consider how the design of these will ensure fair representation. Care should be taken where methods such as snowball sampling are employed; this might be the only way to access seldom heard groups, but may introduce challenges around excluding, rather than enabling, participation. It is also important to consider the implications of excluding sparsely populated areas in highly clustered sample designs and considering the case for oversampling under-represented or seldom heard groups.
• Ensuring information, venues and formats for meetings are accessible to all - for example, providing access to translators or translated materials where required, ensuring locations are safe and private for all participants, providing induction loops for those with hearing impairment or guides for the visually impaired, and offering meetings/sessions at different times of the day.
• Methods of data collection - for example, offering a choice between self-completion and interviewer-assisted interviewing where respondents may have difficulty reading or comprehending written material, or where the content of the research is particularly sensitive or may be triggering. Or a choice between online or paper completion for those without access to the technology or internet.
• Assistance with costs incurred in research participation - for example, to help with childcare whilst participating in the research, or transport costs to and from research venues.

Principle 6: Research should be conducted in a manner that minimises personal and social harm

2.45. Researchers have a responsibility to consider any possible harmful consequences of research processes and outcomes. They must ensure these consequences are identified, assessed, and minimised at all stages of the research and for all groups involved in the research, including for:

• The research participants actively taking part
• Organisations to which the research participants belong
• Any wider social groups with an interest in the research topic
• The researchers / contractors / interviewers themselves
• Other people involved in the research process (e.g. interpreters, stakeholder organisations etc.)
• Individuals who choose to opt out of the research

2.46. Individuals who choose to opt out of the research may have done so because the topic is particularly sensitive or distressing for them. It is therefore important that everyone invited to take part in the research is provided with the same support/information regardless of whether they choose to take part in the research.

2.47. Harm is defined as any threat, or potential threat, to physical, social and psychological well-being. This may include injury, illness, feelings of distress or fear as well as the disclosure of sensitive or embarrassing information without care.

2.48. An objective assessment of potential personal or social harms should be included in any research proposal or strategy. This is necessary to ensure minimisation of harm to participating individuals. Assessments of harm should, where relevant, include:

• Procedures for dealing with disclosures of abuse, self-harm or suicidal ideation
• The means of protecting participants and researchers from undue stress loss of self-esteem, or psychological injury
• Procedures for assessing interview sites, recruitment methods and whether potential participants are under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of the research taking place
• Consideration of whether the harm of not conducting the research is greater than carrying it out
• Consider whether the harm of participating in research is greater than the harm of some experiences/voices not being heard.

2.49. Although not a prescriptive or exhaustive list, topics, participant groups or methods that might be considered high risk are outlined below. In practice, it is often the context of the research or a combination of factors that results in a project being judged as presenting ‘more than minimal risk’.

Avoid unnecessarily or inappropriately intrusive methods

2.50. Research should not be inappropriately intrusive (in terms of method, relevance of the questions asked, or time commitment), raise false hopes, adversely affect the reputation of the participant in their social group or organisation, or cause avoidable anxiety or distress.

2.51. The research process should also not involve unwarranted material gain or loss for any participant.

Examples of topics, methods of participant groups that may elevate levels of risk to personal and social harm

Sensitive topics

• Illegal behaviour and contact with the criminal justice system.
• Stigmatised behaviours that are not illegal.
• Experience of violence, abuse or exploitation.
• Health (including behaviours detrimental to health, addictions, mental health, loneliness, pregnancy, death, sexual behaviour, ageing, weight, cognitive impairment, genetics).
• Gender identity.
• Income, unemployment, debt and benefit receipt.
• Children and family life circumstances.
• Declarations of suicidal ideation and self-harm.
• Confidential business activities or interests.

Participant groups

• Vulnerable participant groups – including children and young people, vulnerable older people, those with a learning disability or cognitive impairment, individuals in a dependent or unequal relationship, those at risk of violence, groups at risk of marginalisation.
• Groups accessed via gatekeepers – including ethnic or cultural groups, asylum seekers and refugees especially where English is not the first language.

Research methods

• Covert research where it is not proposed to seek full and informed consent at the outset, and/or participant observation.
• Accessing/combining/linking data from multiple sources – especially where this involves personal or confidential information of identifiable individuals.
• Intrusive interventions – including the collection of biological samples.
• Use of ‘practitioner’ and citizen researchers.

2.52. For primary research, these harms can be minimised by making adjustments such as avoiding long interviews or surveys (although this needs to be balanced against the need to give adequate time on sensitive topics and/or to vulnerable participants) and adapting them based on participant needs, for example including breaks or extending the time given for complex tasks. The privacy of participants should be respected, particularly if undertaking observational studies, see Principle 2 for more information on choosing the most appropriate method.

Consider any additional needs when working with specific groups

2.53. Special care should be taken to protect the interests of vulnerable participants (including children, elderly and other vulnerable groups). Plans for primary research with vulnerable groups, or those with a high risk of distress, should ensure that:

• The research is clearly needed and information or research results cannot be obtained by other means
• Post-interview support for respondents and interviewers is provided
• The impact of the research on non-participating members of the target group is considered.

2.54. Researchers should consider engaging with relevant stakeholders (such as support groups or charities) who will have greater experience and awareness of the potential harms that may arise from vulnerable groups taking part. Engaging with these groups when planning such research can help to ensure that all potential risks are understood and mitigated as much as possible at the design phase.

2.55. The impact of research on wider social groups and organisations to which individuals belong should also be considered and the research design adapted to minimise harm. This can involve consideration of the local political/social/cultural context in which research takes place, for example:

• Where meeting with a government official would be considered as disloyalty to a group and result in exclusion or harm
• Where the research topic is particularly sensitive or contentious due to the cultural or social values/norms of the target populations
• Where the timing of the research could be harmful, such as during the COVID19 pandemic or immediately after a traumatic incident

Consider harm around secondary uses of data

2.56. Minimising risk of personal and social harm also applies to analysis of secondary data sources. It is a legal requirement under the GDPR to minimise risk of harm when processing data. The ICO guidance on completing Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIA) can be used to help identify and minimise the data protection risks of a project. These harms can be further minimised by:

• Ensuring confidentiality agreements are made and maintained
• Informing participants of how their data will be used either at the point of collection or once a decision to use this data in research has been made
• Reporting research sensitively and transparently including clear information on methodological decisions and where these may impact inclusion or exclusion of particular groups
• Ensuring that research methodology design and outputs have been through the appropriate level of quality assurance
• Carefully considering the reporting of findings including the potential for disclosure, and harmful impacts on any reader

Consider the research team

2.57. Alongside the wellbeing of research participants, the physical, social and psychological wellbeing of researchers and those producing the research or analysis should be protected. This includes taking account of risks that arise from research environments, the data collection process and the content of the research or analysis. Interviewers must be properly trained and appropriate employment checks must have been undertaken. The research team should:

• Have the appropriate knowledge and training to carry out robust and ethical research;
• Have access to effective channels to raise concerns about the research or ask for support;
• Be aware of disclosure protocols regarding potential harm/abuse;
• Undertake appropriate employment checks, including those conducted by Disclosure Scotland, especially where research involves vulnerable respondents or sensitive data, relevant checks must be undertaken where research involves children;
• Consider any potential personal affiliation with the subject of the research that could cause emotional harm or vicarious trauma;
• Report sensitive subjects in an appropriate way to ensure the wellbeing of readers and audience.

2.58. Note that these considerations can also apply to research facilitators, including interpreters, project managers, and peer reviewers.