Reasons for qualitative psychologists to share human data

12Citations
Citations of this article
21Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Qualitative data sharing practices in psychology have not developed as rapidly as those in parallel quantitative domains. This is often explained by numerous epistemological, ethical and pragmatic issues concerning qualitative data types. In this article, I provide an alternative to the frequently expressed, often reasonable, concerns regarding the sharing of qualitative human data by highlighting three advantages of qualitative data sharing. I argue that sharing qualitative human data is not by default ‘less ethical’, ‘riskier’ and ‘impractical’ compared with quantitative data sharing, but in some cases more ethical, less risky and easier to manage for sharing because (1) informed consent can be discussed, negotiated and validated; (2) the shared data can be curated by special means; and (3) the privacy risks are mainly local instead of global. I hope this alternative perspective further encourages qualitative psychologists to share their data when it is epistemologically, ethically and pragmatically possible.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Karhulahti, V. M. (2023). Reasons for qualitative psychologists to share human data. British Journal of Social Psychology, 62(4), 1621–1634. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12573

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free