Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to explain the significance of contextually localized strategies and to engage researchers in critical reflection about the ethical dilemmas of researching in volatile situations.

Design/methodology/approach

Based on 14 months of research experience, the paper reflects on the challenges and difficulties in qualitative data collection through conventional methodology in dangerous fields.

Findings

The paper argues that conventional methodology and the established codes of ethics and their guidelines certainly provide a useful starting point but each dangerous setting requires different localized approaches whereas ethics need to be considered as a process approach.

Practical implications

This paper not only suggests the significance of “intermittent interview method” and its effectivity but also the importance of “respondent pyramiding” and “mutual confidentiality” in a dangerous field.

Originality/value

The paper reflects on the original 14 months of ethnographic accounts which will add value to the existing literature on qualitative research in dangerously hazardous fields.

中文翻译：

---

你是间谍吗？关于传统方法在恐怖缠身民族志中的不便之处

目的

本文的目的是解释情境局部化策略的重要性，并促使研究人员对动荡环境下的研究伦理困境进行批判性反思。

设计/方法/方法

基于14个月的研究经验，本文回顾了在危险领域通过常规方法进行定性数据收集所面临的挑战和困难。

发现

该论文认为，常规方法论和既定的道德规范及其准则无疑提供了有用的起点，但是每种危险环境都需要不同的局部方法，而道德则应被视为一种过程方法。

实际影响

本文不仅提出了“间歇式访谈法”的重要性及其有效性，而且还提出了在危险领域中“回应金字塔”和“相互保密”的重要性。

创意/价值

该文件反映了民族志记录的最初14个月，这将为危险领域中定性研究的现有文献增加价值。