Skip to main content

Accessible Research: Lowering Barriers to Participation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Qualitative Methodologies in Organization Studies

Abstract

In this chapter, I aim to provide a review and practical guidance on making research participation accessible by lowering barriers to participation. I outline how barriers to participation constitute barriers to representation. This is at odds with our ethos as qualitative researchers and there are strong ethical and methodological arguments for improving access to research participation. Individual sections discuss possible accommodations and adjustments throughout the research process, from the planning phase, to approaching and recruiting participants, preparing and presenting material, general communication with participants, up to presenting and disseminating research findings. I conclude by stressing that accessible research is necessary, possible and productive.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Of course, this can always be subject to publication layout limitations, as is the case with the chapter in this book.

  2. 2.

    A good overview is listed here: https://www.w3.org/standards/webdesign/accessibility.

  3. 3.

    List of resources here: http://www.ict4ial.eu/guidelines/making-electronic-documents-accessible/resources-help-make-electronic-documents-accessible.

  4. 4.

    In addition, reducing the extent of the use of metaphors or humour could benefit non-neurotypical participants (Samson and Hegenloh 2010; Lyons and Fitzgerald 2004).

  5. 5.

    I use ‘people who are pregnant’ rather than ‘pregnant women’ to acknowledge pregnant trans men.

References

  • Abberley, P. (1992). Counting Us Out: A Discussion of the OPCS Disability Surveys. Disability, Handicap & Society, 7(2), 139–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, J., & Kirk, S. (2000). Running Focus Groups with Elderly and Disabled Elderly Participants. Applied Ergonomics, 31(6), 621–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belfrage, S. (2016). Exploitative, Irresistible, and Coercive Offers: Why Research Participants Should Be Paid Well or Not at All. Journal of Global Ethics, 12(1), 69–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentley, J. P., & Thacker, P. G. (2004). The Influence of Risk and Monetary Payment on the Research Participation Decision Making Process. Journal of Medical Ethics, 30(3), 293–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bigby, C., Frawley, P., & Ramcharan, P. (2014). Conceptualizing Inclusive Research with People with Intellectual Disability. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 27(1), 3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bigham, J. P., Brady, E. L., Gleason, C., Guo, A., & Shamma, D. A. (2016). An Uninteresting Tour Through Why Our Research Papers Aren’t Accessible. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems – CHI EA ’16, San Jose, 621–631.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, E., Zhong, Y., & Bigham, J. P. (2015). Creating Accessible PDFs for Conference Proceedings. Proceedings of the 12th Web for All Conference on – W4A ’15, Florence, 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • British Academy of Management. (2013). The British Academy of Management’s Code of Ethics and Best Practice. London: BAM.

    Google Scholar 

  • British Sociological Association. (2006). Statement of Ethical Practice for the British Sociological Association–Visual Sociology Group. Durham: BSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheyns, E. (2014). Making ‘Minority Voices’ Heard in Transnational Roundtables: The Role of Local NGOs in Reintroducing Justice and Attachments. Agriculture and Human Values, 31(3), 439–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Couper, M. P., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2003). Understanding the Effects of Audio-CASI on Self-Reports of Sensitive Behavior. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67(3), 385–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drümmer, O., & Chang, B. (2014). PDF/UA in a Nutshell: Accessible Documents with PDF https://www.pdfa.org/wp-content/until2016_uploads/2013/08/PDFUA-in-a-Nutshell-PDFUA.pdf. Last accessed March 31, 2017.

  • Easton, C. (2013). An Examination of the Internet’s Development as a Disabling Environment in the Context of the Social Model of Disability and Anti-Discrimination Legislation in the UK and USA. Universal Access in the Information Society, 12(1), 105–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Economic and Social Research Council. (2010). Guidance Note for Researchers and Evaluators of Social Sciences and Humanities Research. http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/fp7/89867/Social-sciences-humanities_en.pdf. Last accessed 13 Sept 2017.

  • Farmer, M., & Macleod, F. (2011). Involving Disabled People in Social Research. Office for Disability Issues.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garbutt, R. (2009). Is There a Place within Academic Journals for Articles Presented in an Accessible Format? Disability & Society, 24(3), 357–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gradišar, M., Humar, I., & Turk, T. (2007). The Legibility of Colored Web Page Texts. Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Technology Interfaces, ITI, Cavtat, 233–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greco, M., Stucchi, N., Zavagno, D., & Marino, B. (2008). On the Portability of Computer-Generated Presentations: The Effect of Text-Background Color Combinations on Text Legibility. Human Factors, 50(5), 821–833.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammel, J., Magasi, S., Heinemann, A., Gray, D. B., Stark, S., Kisala, P., Carlozzi, N. E., Tulsky, D., Garcia, S. F., & Hahn, E. E. (2015). Environmental Barriers and Supports to Everyday Participation: A Qualitative Insider Perspective From People with Disabilities. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 96, 578–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Head, E. (2009). The Ethics and Implications of Paying Participants in Qualitative Research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 12(4), 335–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. K. (2016). Disability and Perceptions of Work and Management. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 54(1), 83–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kavanagh, A. M., Krnjacki, L., Aitken, Z., Lamontagne, A. D., Beer, A., Baker, E., & Bentley, R. (2015). Intersections between Disability, Type of Impairment, Gender and Socio-Economic Disadvantage in a Nationally Representative Sample of 33,101 Working-Aged Australians. Disability and Health Journal, 8(2), 191–199. Elsevier Inc.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroll, T. (2011). Designing Mixed Methods Studies in Health-Related Research with People with Disabilities. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 5(1), 64–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazar, J., Allen, A., Kleinman, J., & Malarkey, C. (2007). What Frustrates Screen Reader Users on the Web: A Study of 100 Blind Users. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 22(3), 247–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leeuw, Edith de, Hox, J., & Kef, S. (2003). Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing Tailored for Special Populations and Topics. Field Methods, 15(3), 223–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockyer, S. (2015). ‘It’s Really Scared of Disability’: Disabled Comedians’ Perspectives of the British Television Comedy Industry. The Journal of Popular Television, 3(2), 179–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, V., & Fitzgerald, M. (2004). Humor in Autism and Asperger Syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(5), 521–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, K. E., & Keys, C. B. (2008). How the Powerful Decide: Access to Research Participation by Those at the Margins. American Journal of Community Psychology, 42(1–2), 79–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, K. E., Keys, C. B., & Balcazar, F. E. (2007). Disability, Race/Ethnicity and Gender: Themes of Cultural Oppression, Acts of Individual Resistance. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39(1–2), 145–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mik-Meyer, N. (2015). Gender and Disability: Feminizing Male Employees with Visible Impairments in Danish Work Organizations. Gender, Work and Organization, 22(6), 579–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mik-Meyer, N. (2016). Disability and ’Care: Managers, Employees and Colleagues with Impairments Negotiating the Social Order of Disability. Work, Employment & Society, 30(6), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Union of British Sign Language Interpreters. (2017). Freelance Fees for Interpreting Engagements for BSL/English Interpreters. Accessed March 28. http://www.nubsli.com/guidance/interpreter-fees/.

  • Nind, M. (2008). Learning Difficulties and Social Class: Exploring the Intersection through Family Narratives. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 18(2), 87–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nind, M., & Vinha, H. (2012). Doing Research Well? Report of the Study: Quality and Capacity in Inclusive Research with People with Learning Disabilities. https://www.southampton.ac.uk/assets/imported/transforms/contentblock/UsefulDownloads_Download/97706C004C4F4E68A8B54DB90EE0977D/full_report_doing_research.pdf Last accessed March 30, 2017.

  • Nind, M., & Vinha, H. (2013). Methodological Review Paper. Practical Considerations in Doing Research Inclusively and Doing It Well: Lessons for Inclusive Researchers. National Centre for Research Methods: Methodological Review Paper. http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/3187/1/Nind_practical_considerations_in_doing_research_inclusively.pdf. Last accessed 30 Mar 2017.

  • Office for National Statistics. (2014). Official Statistics: Disability Facts and Figures. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/disability-facts-and-figures/disability-facts-and-figures. Last accessed September 13, 2017.

  • Olkin, R. (2004). Making Research Accessible to Participants with Disabilities. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 32, 332–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, J. A., Baum, S., & Johnson, T. P. (2000). Inclusion of Disabled Populations in Social Surveys: Reviews and Recommendations. Chicago: Survey Research Laboratory, University of Illinois for the National Center for Health Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, A. J. (2012). Imagining the Possibilities: Qualitative Inquiry at the Intersections of Race, Gender, Disability, and Class. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 25(6), 801–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Postle, K., Wright, P., & Beresford, P. (2005). Older People’s Participation in Political Activity—making Their Voices Heard: A Potential Support Role for Welfare Professionals in Countering Ageism and Social Exclusion. Practice, 17(3), 173–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid, P. T. (1993). Poor Women in Psychological Research: Shut Up and Shut Out. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 17(2), 133–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samson, A. C., & Hegenloh, M. (2010). Stimulus Characteristics Affect Humor Processing in Individuals with Asperger Syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 40(4), 438–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroedel, J. G. (1984). Analyzing Surveys on Deaf Adults: Implications for Survey Research on Persons with Disabilities. Social Science and Medicine, 19(6), 619–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, M., & Beresford, P. (2005). User Controlled Research: Its Meanings and Potential. Commissioned Report for INVOLVE.

    Google Scholar 

  • UKAAF. (2012). Creating Clear Print and Large Print Documents. http://www.ukaaf.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/G003-UKAAF-Creating-clear-print-and-large-print-documents.pdf. Last Accessed 30 Mar 2017.

  • Ville, I., & Ravaud, J. F. (1998). Work Values: A Comparison of Non-Disabled Persons with Persons with Paraplegia. Disability and Rehabilitation, 20(4), 127–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wellcome Trust. (2017). Guidelines on Good Research Practice. https://wellcome.ac.uk/funding/managinggrant/guidelines-good-research-practice. Last accessed March 30, 2017.

  • Whitney, G. (2006). Enabling People with Sensory Impairments to Participate Effectively in Research. Universal Access in the Information Society, 5(3), 287–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, E., Campain, R., Moore, M., Hagiliassis, N., McGillivray, J., Gottliebson, D., Bink, M., Caldwell, M., Cummins, B., & Graffam, J. (2013). An Accessible Survey Method: Increasing the Participation of People with a Disability in Large Sample Social Research. Telecommunications Journal of Australia, 63(2), 24.1–24.13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilton, R. D. (2008). Workers with Disabilities and the Challenges of Emotional Labour. Disability & Society, 23(February 2015), 361–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Rudloff, D. (2018). Accessible Research: Lowering Barriers to Participation. In: Ciesielska, M., Jemielniak, D. (eds) Qualitative Methodologies in Organization Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65217-7_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics