CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 106Children's Rights and ParticipationQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFocus Groups and Qualitative Methods

Interviewing with Children in their Homes: Putting Ethical Principles into Practice and Developing Flexible Techniques

Bushin, Naomi·2007·Children's Geographies
DOI 10.1080/14733280701445796
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Children-focussed geographers have begun to move beyond highlighting ethical problems that may occur when researching with children, instead focusing on the development of successful research strategies. This piece is intended to contribute to this work in two ways. Firstly, I reflect critically on how ethical guidelines were put into practice during a migration research project which involved interviewing children in their homes. In relation to researching with children, conversations concerning ethical issues such as access, gatekeeping, informed consent, payment, confidentiality and disclosure are not new. However, putting ethical principles into practice is rarely straightforward and requires further discussion. Secondly, I evaluate the practical, flexible techniques that I developed to try to ensure successful interviewing with children in their homes and emphasise the need for further discussions of this kind.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14733280701445796

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Bushin notes that using the child's home as a research site offers flexibility compared to a rushed interview in a school setting, but parental gatekeeping requires discussion and negotiation, and there are concerns that children may have been told to participate and not given a choice, that an interview could be overheard, and/or that an arranged time convenient for the parent may not be so from

    “For example, Bushin (2007) discusses benefits and concerns regarding researching with children in their homes; she notes the flexibility involved in using the child's home as a research site, as opposed to trying to set up a rushed interview in a school setting. She reports parental gatekeeping requires discussion and negotiation, as she expected. However, she notes her concerns that children may”

    From Adults researching with children (2023) · cites this paper as Bushin, 2007

  • Bushin noted that telling parents whether a topic had been discussed potentially put the child in a difficult position, as the child may have been confronted post-interview by the parent about the content of the interview.

    “She noted that this potentially put the child in a difficult position, as the child may have been confronted post-interview by the parent about the content of the interview.”

    From Adults researching with children (2023) · cites this paper as Bushin (2007)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 71 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Bushin, N.
Affiliations
National University of Ireland (IE)
Corresponding author
Bushin, Naomi
Venue
Children's Geographies
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2007-08
Volume
5
Issue
3
Pages
235-251
ISSN
  • 1473-3277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-3285
DOI
10.1080/14733280701445796
OpenAlex
W1974982485
Cited by
105
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 8
FWCI
13.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Children s Geographies (publishedVersion)
Funders
Swansea University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Children's Rights and Participation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods
Keywords
children's interviews, research ethics, home interviews, migration studies, informed consent, confidentiality, disclosure, gatekeeping

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review