Continuing the Principles in practice series, this blog looks at how we make research accessible and what that actually looks like in social research.
Taking accessibility into account means everyone, whatever their background or circumstances, can participate properly. This doesn’t just mean physical barriers either, but systematic, behavioural and environmental ones as well.
It not only benefits those participating, by helping them feel respected and understood, but it also helps with developing insight and findings. People taking part more meaningfully means the evidence is stronger, as it can more accurately reflect the lived experiences and needs of the communities the research is intended to make a difference for.
What makes research accessible?
Inclusion from the outset
Accessible research needs to be thought about from the start: thinking carefully about who needs to be included and whether any groups are unintentionally excluded through the method, timing or the type of research.
For example, digital literacy skills can vary a lot from person-to-person, and we shouldn’t take it for granted that each participant has the knowledge or facilities needed. So, several different channels for communication (e.g. post, leaflets in public settings and SMS/phone calls) need to be considered for initially reaching out.
Removing barriers to participation
An awareness of communication, cognitive, sensory or situational requirements is key, and they need be integrated into any methods that are planned to be used. It makes participating easier and more comfortable.
These types of barriers are often best identified by the people directly affected by them. That’s where co‑production and co-design can come in. As previously explored in the series, working directly with participants helps to inform a better approach, which means better responses.
Diversity, transparency and responsibility
Accessibility is also important during analysis and reporting. Findings must be usable and meaningful for different audiences. Researchers need to use clear, non‑technical language, explain methods and limitations openly, and present findings in ways that support understanding rather than assuming specialist knowledge.
Visual formats like infographics make findings clear and engaging, whilst detailed practice learning notes can help practitioners understand the how our research affects or translates to their work.
A continuous process
What ‘accessible practice’ looks like in different contexts can change over time. Methods and outputs need to be adapted based on participant feedback and new evidence or information. Keeping up to date means a future projects on a similar topic area or the latest wave of a longitudinal survey remain as accessible as possible.
The ways we've been accessible
What accessibility looks like can vary from project to project. It is shaped by who the research is for, what is being explored, and where barriers to participation are most likely to be. These two examples from our research look at how different accessibility approaches are needed based on the context.
Neuro-inclusive output and processes.
Research for GambleAware
The team explored how gambling and gambling harms were experienced by neurodivergent people, as discussed before in our co-design and co-production blog. We look again at that research to show how accessibility was built in from the start, shaping participation and how the final tools for practitioners were created.
Sensitive and inclusive approaches for dementia post-diagnostic support
Evaluation for the Scottish Government
We were tasked by the Scottish Government to provide evidence on the effectiveness and impact of Scotland’s Dementia Post Diagnostic Support (PDS) – including on those living with dementia and their care partners or unpaid carers – to help inform future practice development.
Dementia can affect how people process and engage with information, so we wanted to make sure it was easy for them to do this.
Mel, one our researchers, reflects on the fieldwork and shows how a thoughtful, accessible approach can bring richer insight and a better understanding of processes and experiences:
Melanie Mackay, Research Manager at IFF:
“Conducting in-person fieldwork with people living with dementia and the people supporting them was a very enriching experience. I heard first-hand accounts of how PDS has impacted these people’s lives for the better. It was inspiring to see many of these people looking ahead with positivity, intent on making the best of their situation. I met a woman living with young, onset dementia whose story was particularly affecting. And, an unexpected benefit was getting a sense of how passionate and exceptionally competent all of the staff were at the site I visited.”
What's next in focus in the series?
Even small adjustments or changes to make something more accessible can have a real impact on the experience and insight of seldom-heard voices.
Next, we’re looking at informed consent, and how taking the time to obtain consent in ways that are clear, respectful and appropriate to different needs can help build trust, confidence and a sense of safety for those taking part in research.