QUALITATIVE RESEARCH WITH VULNERABLE ADOLESCENTS: REFLEXIVITY, ETHICS, EMANCIPATORY PRACTICE
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3786-4772
Abstract
This study examines the ethical dilemmas associated with the collection of data from adolescents in involuntary contexts. It explores how ethical principles such as voluntariness, informed consent, and non-maleficence can be applied in research involving marginalized adolescents in these settings, while also examining the role of reflexivity in mitigating power asymmetries and methodological distortions. In these circumstances, underprivileged youth often face systemic power disparities and restricted research literacy, which compromise ethical norms, including voluntariness, informed consent, and non-maleficence. The present study employed a qualitative approach that combined problem-centered interviews, the documentary method, and grounded theory to capture the subjective experiences of vulnerable participants and the broader social dynamics at play. Data was collected from adolescents in settings such as juvenile detention centers and probation services, where participation is frequently influenced by oppressive institutional practices. In addition to strict reflective processes, a continuous consent strategy was implemented to address these issues. Reflective research diaries and interpretative groups were integrated into the process to facilitate the identification of methodological distortions, the monitoring of power asymmetries, and the assurance that participants’ concerns were addressed through repeated and transparent communication. The findings suggest that ethical dilemmas in these environments are multifaceted. Despite detailed briefings and assurances regarding data protection, some participants remained distrustful, and their decisions to participate might have been driven more by external pressures than by genuine voluntary consent. Nonetheless, ongoing consent and rigorous reflexivity were demonstrated to alleviate certain difficulties, enhancing trust and augmenting data authenticity. The study emphasizes the need for systematic intervision, external supervision, and specialized training programs to enhance research procedures in these demanding environments. The insights provided by this study are expected to enhance a vital, reflexive ethics framework that complies with existing ethical standards while advancing social justice and scientific integrity in research involving disadvantaged people.
Downloads
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2026 New Trends in Qualitative Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
openAccess
openAccess
Auerswald, C. L., Piatt, A. A., & Mirzazadeh, A. (2017). Research with Disadvantaged, Vulnerable and/or Marginalized Adolescents. United Nations. https://doi.org/10.18356/a054ca5b-en
Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475
Bohnsack, R. (with Pfaff, N., & Weller, W.). (2010). Qualitative Analysis and Documentary Method: In International Educational Research (1st ed). Verlag Barbara Budrich.
Brehm, A., & Langer, P. C. (2025). Is It Really (All) About Empathy?—A Strong Reflexivity Approach to Emotionally Charged Research Experiences. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 26(1). https://doi.org/10.17169/FQS-26.1.4344
Brücklmayer, S. (2010). Vollstreckungs- und vollzugsrechtliche Probleme des Jugendarrests: Rechtfertigung von Abschaffung oder Reform des Zuchtmittels? [Kovac]. HU Berlin (ZwB Rechtswissenschaft).
Calmbach, M., Flaig, B. B., Möller-Slawinski, H., & Schleer, C. (with Bundeszentrale für Politische Bildung, Deutsche Kinder- und Jugendstiftung, Arbeitsstelle für Jugendseelsorge, Bund der Deutschen Katholischen Jugend, DFL Stiftung, & SINUS Markt- und Sozialforschung GmbH). (2024). Wie ticken Jugendliche? 2024: Lebenswelten von Jugendlichen im Alter von 14 bis 17 Jahren in Deutschland. Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. Sage Publications.
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Soziologie, & Berufsverband Deutscher Soziologinnen und Soziologen. (2017). Ethik-Kodex der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie (DGS) und des Berufsverbandes Deutscher Soziologinnen und Soziologen (BDS). https://soziologie.de/fileadmin/user_upload/dokumente/Ethik-Kodex_2017-06-10.pdf
Dickson-Swift, V., James, E. L., Kippen, S., & Liamputtong, P. (2007). Doing sensitive research: What challenges do qualitative researchers face? Qualitative Research, 7(3), 327–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794107078515
Döring, N., & Bortz, J. (with Pöschl, S.). (2023). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation in den Sozial- und Humanwissenschaften (5th rev. and expanded ed.). Springer.
Foucault, M. (2020). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Penguin Classics.
Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed). Continuum.
Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums; essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates. Anchor Books.
Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, Reflexivity, and “Ethically Important Moments” in Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(2), 261–280.
Hopf, C. (2016). Forschungsethik und qualitative Forschung. In C. Hopf, Schriften zu Methodologie und Methoden qualitativer Sozialforschung (pp. 195–205). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-11482-4_9
Hopf, C. (2017). Forschungsethik und qualitative Forschung. In U. Flick, E. von Kardorff, & I. Steinke (Eds.), Qualitative Forschung: Ein Handbuch (12th ed., pp. 589–600). Rowohlt.
Klykken, F. H. (2022). Implementing continuous consent in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 22(5), 795–810. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941211014366
Kühn, T., & Langer, P. C. (2020). Qualitative Sozialpsychologie. In G. Mey & K. Mruck (Eds.), Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie (pp. 1–20). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-18387-5_75-2
Kühner, A., Langer, P. C., & Schweder, P. (2013). Reflexive Wissensproduktion: Eine Einführung. In P. C. Langer, A. Kühner, & P. Schweder (Eds.), Reflexive Wissensproduktion (pp. 7–18). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-03112-1_1
Langer, P. C. (2018). Emanzipatorische Sozialforschung–Fürsorgeversprechen, Widerstandsdynamiken und eine Ethik der Zurückhaltung. In J. Lohl, E. Augello von Zadow, M.-S. Löhlein, & P. Schweder (Eds.), Widerstand und Fürsorge: Beiträge zum Thema Psychoanalyse und Gesellschaft (pp. 141–161). Vandenhoek & Rupprecht.
Lumby, C., Albury, K., McKee, A., & Hugman, S. (2018). Ethical issues in qualitative research addressing sensitive issues with children and young people Catharine Lumby, Kath Albury, Alan McKee, Sky Hugman. In Youth, technology, governance, experience (pp. 87–102). Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
Mey, G., Ottmar, K., & Mruck, K. (2006). “NetzWerkstatt”: Pilotprojekt zur internetbasierten Beratung und Begleitung qualitativer Forschungsarbeiten in den Sozialwissenschaften. In K.-S. Rehberg (Ed.), Soziale Ungleichheit, kulturelle Unterschiede (pp. 4794–4805). Campus.
Narimani, P. (2014). Zustimmung als Prozess: Informiertes Einverständnis in der Praxisforschung mit von Ausweisung bedrohten Drogenabhängigen. In H. Von Unger, P. Narimani, & R. M´Bayo (Eds.), Forschungsethik in der qualitativen Forschung (pp. 41–58). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-04289-9_3
Nohl, A.-M. (2010). Narrative Interview and Documentary Interpretation. In R. Bohnsack, N. Pfaff, & W. Weller (Eds.), Qualitative Analysis and Documentary Method: In International Educational Research (1st ed, pp. 195–218). Verlag Barbara Budrich.
Ortlipp, M. (2008). Keeping and Using Reflective Journals in the Qualitative Research Process. The Qualitative Report. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2008.1579
Roffee, J. A., & Waling, A. (2017). Resolving ethical challenges when researching with minority and vulnerable populations: LGBTIQ victims of violence, harassment and bullying. Research Ethics, 13(1), 4–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016116658693
Roth, W.-M., & Von Unger, H. (2018). Current Perspectives on Research Ethics in Qualitative Research. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol 19, No 3 (2018): Research Ethics in Qualitative Research. https://doi.org/10.17169/FQS-19.3.3155
Silverman, D. (2015). Interpreting Qualitative Data. SAGE.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1991). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques (3rd ed.). Sage.
Sugie, N. F., & Turney, K. (2017). Beyond Incarceration: Criminal Justice Contact and Mental Health. American Sociological Review, 82(4), 719–743. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122417713188
Swartz, S. (2011). “Going deep” and “giving back”: Strategies for exceeding ethical expectations when researching amongst vulnerable youth. Qualitative Research, 11(1), 47–68.
Tilley, S., & Taylor, L. (2018). Qualitative Methods and Respectful Praxis: Researching With Youth. The Qualitative Report. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2018.3482
Valentine, G., Butler, R., & Skelton, T. (2001). The Ethical and Methodological Complexities of Doing Research with “Vulnerable” Young People. Ethics, Place & Environment, 4(2), 119–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668790123540
Von Unger, H. (2014). Forschungsethik in der qualitativen Forschung: Grundsätze, Debatten und offene Fragen. In H. Von Unger, P. Narimani, & R. M´Bayo (Eds.), Forschungsethik in der qualitativen Forschung (pp. 15–39). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-04289-9_2
Wilke, T. (2023). „Ich bin Playboy schon mit 15...“. Sexuelle Werte und Lebensstilen bei prekären Jugendlichen. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Witzel, A., & Reiter, H. (2012). The problem-centred interview: Principles and practice. SAGE. Ordner sozialwissenschaftliche Methoden.
Woodgate, R. L., Tennent, P., & Zurba, M. (2017). Navigating Ethical Challenges in Qualitative Research With Children and Youth Through Sustaining Mindful Presence. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1609406917696743. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917696743