When you recognize a respondent
In close-knit communities, enumerators sometimes realize mid-interview that the respondent is a neighbor, a relative, or someone they know from another part of their life. The protocol says proceed if consent is given, but the dynamic has already changed. Has anyone withdrawn from an interview for this reason, and how do you make that call in the moment without embarrassing the respondent or revealing why?
This is an important issue because consent alone may not fully address the power dynamics created by a pre-existing relationship. If an enumerator recognizes the respondent, I think they should have the option to pause and discreetly consult the supervisor rather than automatically proceeding.
This is an important ethical and methodological issue because consent alone may not fully resolve the change in power dynamics when an enumerator discovers a pre-existing relationship with the respondent. In close-knit communities, continuing the interview may influence what the respondent is willing to disclose, even where consent is given, particularly for sensitive topics such as VAWG.
I would suggest that the protocol should allow the enumerator to pause discreetly and consult the supervisor, rather than automatically proceeding. The respondent should also be given a neutral opportunity to continue, pause, or request another interviewer without being required to explain why. For example, the enumerator can simply say that the study permits interviews to be rescheduled or conducted by another team member if the respondent prefers. This avoids embarrassing the respondent, revealing the reason for the change, or inadvertently disclosing a pre-existing relationship.
The decision should therefore be guided by confidentiality, voluntariness, privacy, and risk minimization, rather than consent alone. The research team and ethics committee should establish the protocol and escalation pathway beforehand, while the respondent retains the right to decide whether the interview continues. Where the relationship could reasonably affect disclosure, confidentiality, safety, or perceived freedom to decline, reassignment to another trained enumerator may be the most appropriate option. Importantly, the situation should be documented as a protocol event without recording unnecessary personal details that could identify the relationship.