Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) and anti-oppression (AO) policies are implemented in research to address intersecting systemic barriers for marginalized populations. Grant applications now include questions about EDI to ensure researchers have considered how research designs perpetuate discriminatory practices. However, complying with these measures may not mean that researchers have engaged with AO as praxis. Three central points emerged from our work as a women's research collective committed to embedding AO practices within the research methodology of our community-based study. First, research ideas must be connected to larger pursuits of AO in and across marginalized communities. Secondly, AO as praxis in the research design is an exercise in centering cultural knowledge and pragmatic research preparation and response that honours the collective. Lastly, AO approaches are not prescriptive. They must shift, adapt, and change based on the research project and team, creating space for transformative resistance and emancipation of racialized researchers and community workers.

Side comments and conversations in focus groups can pose challenges for facilitators. Rather than seeing side comments as problematic behavior or "failed" data, we argue that they can add to and deepen analyses. Drawing on focus group data with grade nine students from a study on early work, in this methodological paper we discuss three patterns. First, side comments have highlighted where participants required clarification, and illustrated their views and questions about the research process. Second, side comments added new data to our analysis, including personal reflections, connections to others' comments, and information about participants' uncertainties about the research topics. Third, these comments offered insight into peer relations and dynamics, including participants' reflections on age, and how they deployed gender relations in their discussions. Provided that their use fits within established ethical protocols, we argue that there is a place for attention to side comments, especially in focus group research with young people where adult-teen hierarchies and peer dynamics might lead young people to engage more with peers than directly respond to researchers' questions.

Social distancing and public safety measures enacted in response to COVID-19 created a surge in methodological "advice" for researchers facing disruption to fieldwork. Resources and publications frequently encouraged changes vis-a-vis digitally enhanced methods or employment of digital ethnography. For ethnographers, the establishment and maintenance of ethnographic relationships in pandemic contexts restricted to virtual interactions has not been thoroughly explored, leaving those trained in recruitment, rapport-building, and field engagement with fewer resources to navigate this integral topic. Here, we provide insights into how ethnographic relationships may be developed when there is limited access to the field and traditional relationship building is not possible. We argue that as ethnographic methods change and adapt, so too must perspectives on ethnographic relationship development. By closely examining ethnographic relationships confined to digital spaces in the context of the Tennessee tornado recovery amid the COVID-19 pandemic, this project sheds light on how to overcome this challenge.

In this paper, I outline an innovative remote participatory video (PV) methodology that makes use of participants' smartphones. It was developed as an alternative to co-production research and can be employed when face-to-face contact is impossible or undesirable. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, face-to-face research interactions have been disrupted or become impossible. Yet it is vital to reach those who are most affected by emergencies and to include their voices. The research reported here was a collaboration between women in Medellín, Colombia, and a team of filmmakers and researchers. We developed an innovative remote PV methodology using participants' smartphones, researching how women from poorer neighbourhoods were affected by the pandemic in their everyday lives. Here, I reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of the remote PV methodology, arguing that it offers new avenues for participants to take control of the filming and editing process, and builds technical skills and capacities that have value beyond the timeframe of the project. I conclude that the remote PV method has great potential as a stand-alone method, moving the landscape of co-production research away from a requirement for geographical co-presence and potentially shifting power and ownership towards local co-researchers and participants.

Online research methods have risen in popularity over recent decades, particularly in the wake of COVID-19. We conducted five online workshops capturing the experiences of participatory health researchers in relation to power, as part of a collaborative project to develop global knowledge systems on power in participatory health research. These workshops included predominantly academic researchers working in 24 countries across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas. Here, we reflect on the opportunities, limitations, and key considerations of using online workshops for knowledge generation and shared learning. The online workshop approach offers the potential for cross-continental knowledge exchange and for the amplification of global South voices. However, this study highlights the need for deeper exploration of power dynamics exposed by online platform use, particularly the 'digital divide' between academic partners and community co-researchers. Further research is needed to better understand the role of online platforms in generating more inclusive knowledge systems.

This paper provides insights from experiences in data gathering and recruitment from two research projects on disability/mental health in Ghana. The focus of the study explores stigma amongst individuals diagnosed with mental illness and their caregivers. The study investigates the positioning of the researcher in a superior light by participants which often wrests power from those who should be considered the true experts of their own circumstances. Inequality in the interview process thus carried the risk of impacting the quality of the data, as some participants did not consider themselves as 'experts' of their condition. The paper explores strategies for addressing these challenges of hierarchy and inequality in the research process in the Global South. Based on the study, we report on our experiences as follows: (1) ensuring that participants are empowered to engage with researchers; and (2) training local researchers to engage in culturally sensitive research processes.

For many social science scholars, the COVID-19 pandemic has forced us to re-think our approaches to research. As a result of new social distancing measures, those of us who conduct in-person qualitative and ethnographic research have faced significant challenges in accessing the populations and fields we study. Technology served as an incredibly useful tool for social interaction and research prior to the pandemic, and it has since become even more important as a way to engage with others. Although not all types of social research, or even all projects, lend themselves to online activities, digital communication platforms like Zoom, Skype, and Facebook have allowed many of us to continue our studies from a distance-in some cases, significant temporal and spatial distances away from our research sites. As such, it is important to consider how these different methodological approaches challenge our understandings of fieldwork. While the disadvantages of not physically accessing the places we study are clear, can mediated approaches offer (any) hope of the immersion we experienced with in-person fieldwork? If many of us are able to continue ethnographic research (in some form) without co-locating with our participants in our field sites, how are our studies fundamentally affected, as well as the ways we conceptualize the 'field' more largely? This paper explores these methodological and epistemological questions through reflections on conducting online research during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.

This article contributes to scholarship on digital sociology by addressing the methodological challenge of gaining access to hard-to-reach online communities. We use assemblage theory to argue how collaborative efforts of human participants, digital technologies, techniques, authorities, cultural codes and the human researcher co-determine aspects of gaining access to online subjects. In particular, we analyse how and are assembled in an online research context. This is exemplified by our own experiences of researching hackers that dispute surveillance and the social embeddedness of darknet drug market users. In this article, we demonstrate the utility of an assemblage perspective for understanding the complexities involved in negotiating access to hard-to-reach communities in digital spaces.

The use of audio recordings has become a taken-for-granted approach to generating transcripts of in-depth interviewing and group discussions. In this paper we begin by describing circumstances where the use of a recorder is not, or may not be, possible, before sharing our comparative analysis of audio-recorded transcriptions and interview scripts made from notes taken during the interview (by experienced, well-trained interviewers). Our comparison shows that the data quality between audio-recorded transcripts and interview scripts written directly after the interview were comparable in the detail captured. The structures of the transcript and script were usually different because in the interview scripts, topics and ideas were grouped, rather than being in the more scattered order of the conversation in the transcripts. We suggest that in some circumstances not recording is the best approach, not 'second best'.

Laboratory ethnography extended the social scientist's gaze into the day-to-day accomplishment of scientific practice. Here we reflect upon our own ethnographies of biomedical scientific workspaces to provoke methodological discussion on the doing of laboratory ethnography. What we provide is less a 'how to' guide and more a commentary on what to look for and what to look at. We draw upon our empirical research with stem cell laboratories and animal houses, teams producing robotic surgical tools, musicians sonifying data science, a psychiatric genetics laboratory, and scientists developing laboratory grown meat. We use these cases to example a set of potential ethnographic themes worthy of pursuit: science epistemics and the extended laboratory, the interaction order of scientific work, sensory realms and the rending of science as sensible, conferences as performative sites, and the spaces, places and temporalities of scientific work.

Community-engaged approaches to research and practice continue to show success in addressing health equity and making long-term change for partnership relationships and structures of power. The usefulness of these approaches is either diminished or bolstered by community trust, which can be challenging for partnerships to achieve. In this research note we present an example process for recruiting, interviewing, and hiring community researchers as a starting place for capacity building and for laying the foundation for data collection and analysis in health-related community projects.

This article presents some of the emergent methods developed to fit a study of quality in inclusive research with people with learning disabilities. It addresses (i) the ways in which the methodology was a response to the need for constructive, transformative dialogue through use of repeated focus groups in a design interspersing dialogic and reflective spaces; and (ii) how stimulus materials for the focus groups involved imaginative and creative interactions with data. Particular innovations in the blending of narrative and thematic analyses and data generation and analysis processes are explored, specifically the creative use of metaphor as stimulus and the playful adaptation of I-poems from the Listening Guide approach as writing and performance. In reflecting on these methodological turns we also reflect on creativity as an interpretive lens. The paper is an invitation for further methodological dialogue and development.

'Multivoicedness' and the 'multivoiced Self' have become important theoretical concepts guiding research. Drawing on the tradition of dialogism, the Self is conceptualised as being constituted by a multiplicity of dynamic, interacting voices. Despite the growth in literature and empirical research, there remains a paucity of established methodological tools for analysing the multivoiced Self using qualitative data. In this article, we set out a systematic, practical 'how-to' guide for analysing multivoicedness. Using theoretically derived tools, our three-step method comprises: identifying the voices of I-positions within the Self's talk (or text), identifying the voices of 'inner-Others', and examining the dialogue and relationships between the different voices. We elaborate each step and illustrate our method using examples from a published paper in which data were analysed using this method. We conclude by offering more general principles for the use of the method and discussing potential applications.

Anonymising qualitative research data can be challenging, especially in highly sensitive contexts such as catastrophic brain injury and end-of-life decision-making. Using examples from in-depth interviews with family members of people in vegetative and minimally conscious states, this article discusses the issues we faced in trying to maximise participant anonymity alongside maintaining the integrity of our data. We discuss how we developed elaborate, context-sensitive strategies to try to preserve the richness of the interview material wherever possible while also protecting participants. This discussion of the practical and ethical details of anonymising is designed to add to the largely theoretical literature on this topic and to be of illustrative use to other researchers confronting similar dilemmas.

We describe the conceptualization and implementation of a research methodology in which "insider" community members work with "outsider" investigators as participant observers to document everyday conversations taking place in public settings in their communities. Our study took place in a resource-poor area of rural South Africa and focused on HIV/AIDS, yet we aim here to provide a road map for those interested in implementing this approach in other contexts for various empirical ends. Because this approach is unusual, we highlight considerations in selecting a team of ethnographers, describe the training process, and offer ways to ensure the data collected are trustworthy and confidential. We describe the advantages and limitations of utilizing "insider ethnography" in contexts where being indigenous to the study site provides access to perspectives that cannot be obtained through other methods. Finally, we examine how mutuality and the positionality of the research team affect data collection and quality.

We used participant-produced photography to investigate everyday commuting practices in Cambridge, UK. Photovoice served as an observational method for producing ethnographically rich data. A total of 19 participants produced over 500 photos about their journeys to and from work and took part in photo-elicitation interviews. Three themes emerged. First, many images depicted 'well-being' in commuting, for example, beautiful landscapes. Second, during elicitation interviews, participants described positive images that they intended but failed to capture in photos. Third, those participants who did not depict well-being described a lack of choice in their commuting, while those who acknowledged well-being seemed to do so in order to make practices of commuting meaningful and habitable. While our interpretations of photos of well-being could be subject to a methodological fallacy relating to a preference for positive over negative images in lay photography, we nonetheless suggest that the rich visual and oral narratives indicate a 'real' experience, albeit elicited through the photovoice.

Because the researcher is the instrument in semistructured or unstructured qualitative interviews, unique researcher characteristics have the potential to influence the collection of empirical materials. This concept, although widely acknowledged, has garnered little systematic investigation. This article discusses the interviewer characteristics of three different interviewers who are part of a qualitative research team. The researcher/interviewers - and authors of this article - reflect on their own and each other's interviews and explore the ways in which individual interview practices create unique conversational spaces. The results suggest that certain interviewer characteristics may be more effective than others in eliciting detailed narratives from respondents depending on the perceived sensitivity of the topic, but that variation in interviewer characteristics may benefit rather than detract from the goals of team-based qualitative inquiry. The authors call for the inclusion of enhanced self-reflexivity in interviewer training and development activities and argue against standardization of interviewer practices in qualitative research teams.

This paper responds to the criticism that "observer effects" in ethnographic research necessarily bias and therefore invalidate research findings. Instead of aspiring to distance and detachment, some of the greatest strengths of ethnographic research lie in cultivating close ties with others and collaboratively shaping discourses and practices in the field. Informants' performances - however staged for or influenced by the observer - often reveal profound truths about social and/or cultural phenomena. To make this case, first we mobilize methodological insights from the field of science studies to illustrate the contingency and partiality of all knowledge and to challenge the notion that ethnography is less objective than other research methods. Second, we draw upon our ethnographic projects to illustrate the rich data that can be obtained from "staged performances" by informants. Finally, by detailing a few examples of questionable behavior on the part of informants, we challenge the fallacy that the presence of ethnographers will cause informants to self-censor.