• Buy-in. Emphasize to participants that they are the expert on themselves and also the importance of working together. When participants and communities feel respected and valued, they are more likely to help. Furthermore, if they are fed back results and signs of success from their participation, short- and long-term, they are likely to continue to help. [18, 21, 22, 36, 45] |
• Trust. Communicate openly and honestly, erring on the side of over-informing. Alleviating immediate mistrust and misunderstanding could be accomplished by being transparent (e.g., showing one's notes, explaining each researcher action) and demonstrating that no harm is occurring during the research. If researchers are aware of possible longstanding issues of mistrust, they can dedicate more time to addressing community members' concerns and desires before launching into the research.[18, 21, 22, 36] |
• Transparency. Expectations should be clearly stated up front. While it is appropriate to redirect data collection toward research goals, it is important to not outright dismiss what participants want, say, or do not say. During recruiting and initial encounters, researchers can provide information on the study using teach-back guidelines (http://www.teachbacktraining.org), being as complete as possible about all that could happen.[18, 21, 22, 43, 45] |
• Accommodation. Because participants make time for researchers in their complicated schedules and life, researchers should make the most of their time. They must not over-impose or pursue goals unrelated to their research. It is helpful to call ahead of appointments or provide written or e-mail reminders as needed. Accommodations of location, travel, and timing may be necessary.Mutual flexibility is expected: in some cases, researchers concerned for safety or comfort can insist on a neutral location or other accommodations.[18, 21, 22, 36, 45] |
• Openness. Contextual data collection requires representative sampling, which can require additional work and an open mind when interacting with participants. Screening and recruitment may need to be controlled by the research team to avoid individuals or groups being excluded by gatekeepers, inadvertently or not. Researchers who differ from participants should be aware of the language they use, the assumptions they hold, and how their role or actions may be interpreted. Over time, researchers can develop vocabulary and style that participants understand without feeling patronized. Researchers should anticipate requests for help or advice and if appropriate should prepare responses, including connecting participants to resources. Openness requires understanding and empathy without overstepping one's role.[18, 21, 22] |
• Anticipation. Ask participant ahead of time whether others will be present, and have criteria for whether others (and who) will be included. After inclusion criteria are set, be open to hearing all that the multiple participants have to offer on the subject at hand—it can create valuable context for the collected data. Anticipate special privacy and confidentiality issues that will arise with multiple participants, vulnerable groups, and research carried out in people's homes; local human subjects bodies, other researchers, or community groups can help to identify potential issues.[22] |
• Compensation. Explain as early as possible the purpose of compensation and any regulations surrounding them, including delays in payment and the need to collect personal information. Participants may need to have an explanation of partial payments and different pay scales. Be prepared to provide participants with contact information of the researchers and human subjects regulatory body in case further questions about compensation arise. Some flexibility may be required, for example, obtaining cash or gift card alternatives for those unable to cash checks. Using food or food-related compensation (e.g., gift card for ice cream shop) should be carefully evaluated when working with individuals with disease-related dietary restrictions.[18, 21] |