The Study
The researchers collected information from 967 people using 19 Salvation Army residential/day centres in regions around the UK. Around nine in ten of those interviewed were men, with an average age of 35.6 years old. The diagnostic psychological testing highlighted the significance of early life experiences in influencing later life outcomes, particularly in relation to issues of attachment/bonding between parent/primary carer and child, and also the related issues of nutrition, educational support, and addictive behaviours.
Dr Luscombe talked to Rebecca Harrocks (SRA Blog editorial team member) about methodological considerations when working with people experiencing homelessness.
What are some key considerations for research people experiencing homelessness?
Carrying out research involving marginalised groups on sensitive topics can be difficult. It requires additional methodological and risk management protocols to ensure the safety of the participants, researchers, and services, and also to maximise the uptake and retention of participants.
Gaining the confidence and support of the services
Firstly, if you are carrying out research through and with services such as homelessness centres, it is essential to maximise the engagement and confidence of their staff. This is especially important if they will be supporting in the recruitment of participants and the collection of their data, or advocating for participants, for example in cases of illiteracy. It would involve visiting each homelessness centre to meet with their management and asking them and the research team to sign up to protocols outlining the roles and responsibilities of each party. At this point, staff should also be given the opportunity to raise any questions or concerns.
One of the most significant details of these protocols is the requirement to breach confidentiality should the participant reveal anything to suggest that they or someone else may be at harm. Ideally, in these circumstances a written form outlining the topics to be discussed and with whom the information can be discussed should be completed and signed by the participant and the interviewer before any confidential information is divulged. In these cases, the services have responsibility to manage whatever risk is identified once it is disclosed to them.
Raising awareness of the study with potential participants
In order to let potential participants know that they might be invited to participate in the research project and to optimise uptake it is best to raise awareness in advance. This can be done by displaying information posters around the centres so residents are aware of the study. In addition, flyers can also be given to all new admissions explaining a little about the study and the fact that individuals might be contacted to participate.
To avoid bias towards literate participants, the project lead and other researchers should attend residents’ meetings or ‘client involvement groups’ within centres in order to introduce themselves and the study and to answer any questions. In addition, we also used random sampling to knock on certain residents’ doors to ask if they were interested in participating.
Gaining the confidence of potential participants
Gaining the confidence of potential participants is vital for the success of both the recruitment of participants and their confidence in answering sensitive questions within the research study. Spending time in services is a useful way to do this, particularly when social areas are available such as TV or games rooms because they tend to have a more relaxed atmosphere. This enables potential participants to pose questions in a non-threatening environment. Such socialisation also encourages the building of trust and rapport between interviewers and potential participants, and helps in alleviating any fear or suspicion about research motivations.
Respect for the participant
There is no primary research without participants. It is therefore very important that participants feel valued by the researchers for their time and participation, and that they leave the study knowing that they have contributed positively to it. In addition, this prevents other participants being put off if they hear of others having negative research experiences.
To enable this and to avoid a ‘hit and run’ sensation, it’s imperative that participants feel they have been given sufficient time to be listened to. This can be done by empowering interviewers to take as much time as they need with participants and to make them feel comfortable expanding on answers, even if this goes outside of the information requested on an assessment form. In addition, if participants consent to interview but are not able to attend the allocated day/time, there is great value in researchers rescheduling the interview to a time convenient to the participant, as this demonstrates respect.
Incentive, compensation and reciprocity
Payment for participation can be a contentious issue, especially when dealing with individuals who may be vulnerable, however it is important that some form of compensation is given to participants. In times past this has not always been monetary, and ‘in kind’ rewards were also appreciated such as food, drink and fruits; however, nowadays, vouchers are usually deemed most appropriate. In addition, as well as conveying the purpose of the study and what was going to be done with the information collected via the participant information sheet, it is a good idea to offer all participants the opportunity to receive a copy of the final report upon request. This demonstrates transparency, engagement, and appreciation.
Sensitivity and flexibility
It is very important to be sensitive to the needs of participants and also, where possible, to work around their lifestyles. Agree risk management boundaries between the service/s and research team (for example in cases where there may be a need to break confidentiality).
Researchers should be flexible with service users and accommodate the timings and locations for interviews that best suit them. Seek advice from services as to the most appropriate time to carry out the research. For example, I have experienced welfare benefits being given on a specific day in one region, which meant that attempting to interview on this day was very unproductive as very few people would be within services.
I also found afternoons unproductive with many potential interviewees being out of services then, but they would usually return in the evenings as meals were provided; in this scenario it was best for researchers to work split shifts, (i.e. morning and evening) to accommodate the patterns of the service users.
Other considerations
An important thing to be mindful of is the researchers involved, and aware that they may well need space to decompress after interviews. If a participant is recalling traumatic experiences this may affect the interviewer as well as the interviewee, and it is important that this is anticipated, and measures built into the research study to address this.
Finally, other considerations when working with people experiencing homelessness might be to ask the service/s to provide details of local support services to interviewers in case participants request assistance from them. And from a wider holistic perspective, at the beginning of the process I have found that feasibility studies are helpful because they enable researchers to test the research methods and protocols, allowing opportunities for modification; a feasibility study is a bit like a pilot, in which you try out instruments and/or data collection methods, and find solutions to any potential problems prior to the main study commencing.
Author Bio:
Dr Claire Luscombe holds a doctorate from the University of Kent for a thesis investigating mental health and social exclusion in people experiencing homelessness. She works as the Head of Mission Data Quality with The Salvation Army UK and Ireland and oversees the collection of data from key frontline social services. This anonymised data is used to improve services and identify unmet needs.
Enjoyed this blog? Why not read...
SRA North seminar: understanding health inequalities – three approaches