A1 Journal article (refereed)
Reasons for qualitative psychologists to share human data (2023)

Karhulahti, V. (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

JYU authors or editors

Publication details

All authors or editors: Karhulahti, Veli‐Matti

Journal or series: British Journal of Social Psychology

ISSN: 0144-6665

eISSN: 2044-8309

Publication year: 2023

Publication date: 06/09/2022

Volume: 62

Issue number: 4

Pages range: 1621-1634

Publisher: Wiley

Publication country: United Kingdom

Publication language: English

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12573

Publication open access: Openly available

Publication channel open access: Partially open access channel

Publication is parallel published (JYX): https://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/83206

Additional information: Special section paper

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.

Keywords: psychology; qualitative research; research material; personal data; informed consent; open science; research ethics

Contributing organizations

Related projects

Ministry reporting: Yes

Reporting Year: 2022

JUFO rating: 2