Confidentiality, anonymity and power relations in elite interviewing: conducting qualitative policy research in a politicised domain

Abstract

While the methods used to study ‘elites’ are of particular relevance in policy research, to date there has been little examination of the particular challenges associated with ‘elite’ interviewing in this field. More specifically, the issues associated with interviewing ‘elites’ while conducting qualitative research in a contested policy domain, especially if policy processes are being studied as they play out in real time, remain underexplored. While the extant literature on ‘elite’ interviewing has begun to grapple with the notions of ‘power’ and ‘vulnerability’, the question of how these notions might need to be rethought in the context of a politicised policy domain remains open for examination. This article provides a methodological and reflexive account of the challenges associated with conducting research in one highly contested policy domain, namely, drug policy. Drawing on examples from a study which examined Australian drug policy processes, this article examines issues associated with anonymity and confidentiality produced through power relations between researcher and participant, particularly as these play out in a contested policy domain. In doing so, this article critically reflects on the practical and political implications for data collection, analysis and reporting of policy research.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 158 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.