Do You Know Who You’re Talking To? Methodological Reflections on Maintaining Inclusivity and Research Integrity When Responding to Inauthentic Encounters in Online Qualitative Research

Journal article

There is an ongoing debate around how to design online synchronous qualitative research studies, and respond in the moment, when researchers suspect that they are engaging with ‘impostor’ or ‘fraudulent’ participants. Initial literature framed ineligible participants as a threat to data quality and the integrity of the research itself, calling for reactionary approaches to potential participants. This paper contributes to the growing literature cautioning that strict screening approaches may negatively harm genuine participants and undermine inclusion efforts. This paper explores the concept of ‘knowing’ research participants in qualitative research, focusing on methods that enhance how we genuinely come to know the participants we seek to include, particularly in reclaiming interactions that may have become curtailed during online research. Through consideration of researchers’ ethical responsibilities in relation to what is presumed or learned, we offer methodological reflections on how researchers’ skilful attention to the research encounter may be all that is required to ensure continued research integrity within the context of inauthentic participants. Taking actions to better know participants upholds our ethical responsibilities to them and also has the effect of identifying inauthentic participants who intentionally falsify their accounts.

Authors: Lough Dennell, BL; Dowrick, A; Evered, JA; Jones, A

• Publication status: Published
• Peer review status: Peer reviewed
• Publisher: SAGE Publications
• Journal: International Journal of Qualitative Methods
• Volume: 24
• Article number: 16094069251384112
• Publication date: 2025-10-04
• Acceptance date: 2025-09-11
• DOI: 10.1177/16094069251384112
• EISSN: 1609-4069
• ISSN: 1609-4069
• Language: English
• Keywords: virtual interviews; authenticity; trust; methodology; inclusivity; imposter participant; online research; ethics