How to find remote research methods that are effective for your context

In an ideal world, researchers would have unfettered access to their target populations, enabling them to conduct in-depth, on-the-ground studies that yield rich, contextual data. However, the reality of information behavior research reveals significant challenges, particularly when studying populations in restricted or inaccessible environments.

This blog post explores considerations and strategies for survey recruitment and distribution when direct access to subjects is limited or impossible, as is the case with our target group. We hope others can take advantage of our documented process and apply it to other distinctive research.

Special considerations for remote research

One of the primary differences in remote research is the shift in establishing trust and rapport with participants. In traditional fieldwork, researchers often rely on their physical presence, body language, and shared experiences to build connections. In remote settings, we must find new ways to create a sense of safety and openness. This might involve leveraging trusted community intermediaries, using culturally appropriate digital platforms, or developing more robust informed consent processes that clearly communicate the purpose and potential risks of participation.

Another key consideration is the digital divide and its impact on representation. While digital technologies offer unprecedented access to some populations, they can also inadvertently exclude the most vulnerable or least connected members of a community. For example, we must be acutely aware that our remote research methods might be biased towards those with better access to smartphones and the internet. This potential skew in our sample must be acknowledged, and, where possible, mitigated through creative outreach strategies.

The nature of data collection also shifts dramatically in remote research. Instead of direct observation and in-person interviews, we might rely more heavily on digital ethnography, analyzing social media posts, online forums, and other digital footprints left by our target population. This approach offers rich insights but also raises new ethical questions about privacy and consent in digital spaces.

Asynchronous communication becomes a more prominent feature of remote research. While this can be a challenge for building rapport, it also offers participants more time for reflection and can lead to more considered responses. For example, we might use a combination of real-time video interviews and follow-up email or messaging exchanges to allow for deeper exploration of topics that emerge during initial conversations.

The inability to physically observe participants in their environments means we must find creative ways to capture contextual information. This might involve asking participants to share photos or videos of their living and working spaces, or using digital mapping tools to understand their geographic distribution and movement patterns. We might also leverage existing datasets or collaborate with on-the-ground organizations to fill in contextual gaps that we cannot observe directly.

Remote research also demands a heightened awareness of security and privacy concerns. When working with potentially vulnerable populations in a restrictive environment, we must be vigilant about data protection, secure communication channels, and the potential for surveillance or interception of research activities. This might involve using encrypted communication tools, anonymizing data at the point of collection, and being extremely cautious about storing or transmitting any information that could identify participants.

Perhaps most importantly, remote research in restricted environments demands a heightened ethical awareness. We must constantly question our methods and their potential impact on participants. Are we inadvertently putting anyone at risk by engaging them in our research? How can we ensure truly informed consent when we can't be physically present to explain the study? How do we balance the need for rich, detailed data with the imperative to protect participants' identities and privacy?

Leverage technology and domestic ventures for survey recruitment

Identifying effective methods for recruiting participants in a remote setting is critical to any remote research project. Given the challenges posed by our operating context, we undertook a thorough evaluation of various recruitment methods, comparing their costs, security implications, efficiency, and overall usability.

Here's an overview of our findings:

1. VPN pop-up recruitment: This method involves displaying recruitment messages to users of VPN services. While the cost is yet to be determined, it offers a quick recruitment process with no security risks. However, it tends to bias the sample towards more tech-savvy users. Filtering is possible via screeners, and participants self-declare their information. This method allows for sensitive questions and optional incentives, but confidence levels in the data quality are generally low. 
2. Redirected or advertising domains pop-up or embeds: This approach uses pop-ups on redirected domains to recruit participants. It's relatively inexpensive and poses no security risks. It's a quick method that may attract less tech-savvy users, potentially providing a different demographic than VPN pop-ups. Like the VPN method, it allows for sensitive questions and optional incentives, with medium confidence levels in data quality.
3. Overseas recruitment through agencies: This method involves using international agencies to recruit domestic participants. It costs relatively more per completed survey than methods 2 and 4, and poses no security risks. It offers quick recruitment and potentially high data quality when using reputable agencies. Participants are pre-recruited, and filtering is done by the intermediary. Sensitive questions may be possible, and incentives are typically part of the process. This method offers high confidence levels in data quality. 
4. Domestic recruitment: Using domestic agencies for recruitment costs somewhere in the middle of methods 2 and 3 per completed survey. While it offers quick recruitment and potentially high data quality, it poses security risks for the point of contact. Participants are pre-recruited, and filtering is done by the intermediary. Sensitive questions are not advisable, but incentives are part of the process. This method offers high confidence levels in data quality.
5. NGOs and personal contacts: This method leverages relationships with NGOs and personal networks for recruitment. While costs are yet to be determined, it poses security risks for both the point of contact and intermediaries. It's a slower process but can yield high-quality data. Filtering is done via contacts, and participants self-declare information. Sensitive questions may be possible, and incentives are optional. This method offers the highest confidence levels in data quality, but specific providers are yet to be determined.
6. Proxy populations: This approach involves recruiting from populations that can serve as proxies for the target group. Costs are yet to be determined, but it poses no security risks and offers quick recruitment. However, the data may be biased toward past experiences. Filtering can be done via screeners, and sensitive questions are possible with optional incentives. Confidence levels in data quality are low, and specific providers are yet to be determined.
7. Robocalls: This method uses automated phone calls for recruitment. While costs are yet to be determined, it poses no security risks and offers quick recruitment. It may attract less tech-savvy users, providing a different demographic perspective. Filtering depends on the available database, and participants self-declare information. Sensitive questions are possible, but there are typically no incentives. Confidence levels in data quality are low. 

This overview enables us to make informed decisions about participant recruitment, balancing factors such as cost, security, data quality, and the ability to ask sensitive questions in the complex research environment in which we are working. 

When weighing different options, we considered various selection criteria. For example, domestic recruitment was a clear winner for us because of the high confidence level of the data offered, speed of service promised, and low cost. 

Therefore, we consulted six survey distribution and recruitment ventures, inquiring the following information about their service:

• Target group eligibility: We aimed to recruit a specific subset of our population who fit a defined metric about their life events. With a clear definition, we consulted these ventures on whether they can target those who meet our criteria. 
• Distribution methodology: How will the survey attract and reach participants. While there is always bias in remote research due to limited control over sample participants, we wanted to minimize its impact by being informed of the way to reach participants.
• Price and payment method: Price is another factor in choosing the right venture. Because we are paying them from overseas, accepting international transactions or currency saves us time and effort.
• Security and privacy: Privacy is another important consideration. Because of potential restriction and censorship to any foreign entity, we wouldn’t want to disclose all details of our research projects other than the necessary parts. Some survey recruiting platforms require enterprise verification for distribution, which is troublesome and hard to acquire.
• Time: what is the estimated time to get a target number of valid surveys.
• Survey data validation: How to validate the survey responses is effective and truthful. As an omnipresent question for all social quantitative studies involving any surveys, this is especially hard for remote research.

With this information from domestic survey recruitment businesses, we picked one venture that we found to be an independent, stable survey business in our target country. It helps reach populations through the most prevalent media and communication tool used by our target population. It offers affordable quotes and accepts foreign currency for payment. It does not require enterprise verification, which is friendly to foreign organizations like us that are not registered in the country. 

One of the most significant challenges - and opportunities - of remote research is the potential for larger sample sizes and more diverse participation. Without the constraints of physical travel, we can potentially reach a wider geographic spread of individuals across different regions of the country. However, this also requires careful sampling strategies to ensure we're capturing a representative cross-section of experiences and not just the most easily accessible participants.

Adapting traditional research methodologies to remote settings requires both creativity and rigor. By carefully considering the ethical and security implications, leveraging technological solutions, and creatively adapting our recruitment and data collection strategies, we can strive to reach even the most inaccessible communities. We hope our lessons learned in navigating the specific challenges of research in our operating environment offer valuable insights for anyone working on similar studies in other restricted or remote contexts. 

If you have feedback, questions, don’t hesitate to get in touch at hello@gazzetta.xyz