Anonymising Research Data

This document outlines some thoughts and discussions we have been having about strategies of anonymisation of data to be collected through the ESRC / NCRM Real Life Methods Node Connected Lives project1. It is commonplace for social science research to adopt a policy of ‘blanket anonymisation’, whereby all names, places and other identifying features are disguised across a data set, including from interview transcripts, diaries and field notes. Here, I consider the practical and theoretical implications of such a strategy and suggest that anonymisation is not a process to be conducted – and assumed completed – at just one stage of the research process. Moreover, anonymisation strategies cannot be separated out from other methodological (such as issues around archiving or mixing methods) or indeed substantive issues (such as enabling deeper appreciation of the relationality of networks, or the ways in which space might be constructed). The implications of whatever anonymisation strategy researchers adopt on the future ability to appreciate the social and spatial processes behind networks, neighbourhoods and communities, need to be made clear throughout the research process. In summation, this document argues for a more reflexive, iterative approach to anonymisation and confidential that situates these, and other ethical concerns, in the context of the social process.

[1]  R. Pawson Theorizing the interview , 1996 .

[2]  A. Clark Wish you were here?: experiences of moving through stigmatised neighbourhoods in urban Scotland , 2004 .

[3]  J. Morse Designing funded qualitative research. , 1994 .

[4]  Atsushi Naoi,et al.  The ethics of social research , 2006 .

[5]  Joseph Bensman,et al.  Small town in mass society , 1957 .

[6]  Simon Sheikh The Production of Space , 1996 .

[7]  D. Harvey,et al.  The Condition of Postmodernity , 2020, The New Social Theory Reader.

[8]  C. Christians ETHICS AND POLITICS IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH , 2005 .

[9]  Libby Bishop,et al.  Protecting Respondents and Enabling Data Sharing: Reply to Parry and Mauthner , 2005 .

[10]  Odette Parry,et al.  Whose Data are They Anyway? , 2004 .

[11]  Andrew Clark,et al.  Understanding Community: A review of networks, ties and contacts , 2007 .

[12]  Odette Parry,et al.  Back to Basics: Who Re-uses Qualitative Data and Why? , 2005 .

[13]  David M. Smith For Space , 2006, Ordinary Blessings.

[14]  J. Horner Research, ethics and privacy: the limits of knowledge. , 1998, Public health.

[15]  D. Anthony Evidence-based Policy: A Realist Perspective , 2007 .

[16]  J. MacLaughlin Postmodern geographies: The reassertion of space in critical social theory , 1994 .

[17]  Martyn Hammersley,et al.  Qualitative Data Archiving: Some Reflections on its Prospects and Problems , 1997 .

[18]  Nigel Fielding,et al.  Resistance and Adaptation to Criminal Identity: Using Secondary Analysis to Evaluate Classic Studies of Crime and Deviance , 2000 .

[19]  Odette Parry,et al.  The Data are Out there, or are They? Implications for Archiving and Revisiting Qualitative Data , 1998 .

[20]  Nigel Fielding,et al.  Resistance and adaptation to criminal identity: using secondary analysis to evaluate classic studies of crime and deviance , 2008 .