Columnist Julie Corney Protecting the vulnerable I n January 2016, MRS produced a best-practice guide and checklist to help practitioners identify, understand and respond to research-participant vulnerabilities effectively and consistently. Since the Data Protection Act 2018 was introduced which emphasises showing accountability throughout the data-collection process a new section on vulnerable people has been added to the 2019 Code of Conduct. This will help ensure the needs of vulnerable participants are considered in developing products and services, policy-making and regulatory supervision and enforcement. Best ethical practice is reinforced by new code rules covering vulnerable people, underlining the importance of our members professional activities being widely accessible: Rule 23. Members must take reasonable steps to assess, identify and consider the particular needs of vulnerable people involved in their professional activities. Rule 24. When working with vulnerable people, members must ensure that such individuals are capable of making informed decisions and are not unfairly pressured to cooperate with a request to participate, and that they are given an opportunity to decline to take part. These rules require members to make every reasonable effort to ensure that their professional activities do not cause harm either to those who have participated directly or, more broadly, to anyone affected by it. This includes members taking reasonable action to ensure that others do not breach or cause a breach of the code. Vulnerability can affect anyone Participant vulnerability is a complex, dynamic state that can affect anyone at any time, for many different reasons. All participants are different, with a wide range of needs, abilities and personal circumstances. Some peoples ability to participate effectively in the research may be affected by certain individual characteristics. These can be short-term or long-term, might fluctuate over time, and may not be obvious. Participants may be vulnerable because their 72 competence to give informed consent is uncertain; because, socially, they are in a position where it is difficult for them to give informed consent; or their circumstances may affect their decision to consent. Additionally, being involved in the research project can increase participants potential vulnerability. It is also important to recognise that not all the risk factors will be relevant all of the time, and the important point is to manage the relevant risks rather than seek to avoid risks involved in researching individuals or populations in vulnerable positions. Permanent vulnerabilities Permanent or long-term characteristics could include: people who have learning disabilities or other permanent or long-term disabilities; those on a low income; people with low literacy levels; or communities that have cultural barriers to participation. These characteristics can affect large numbers of people. Fluctuating vulnerabilities People can be made vulnerable by transitory situations that are not necessarily obvious at first glance. Fluctuating characteristics might include: mental health issues; English not being a first language; health problems; location; or lack of internet access. Short-term vulnerabilities Short-term characteristics causing vulnerability could be factors related to sudden changes in circumstances, such as loss of employment or income, bereavement, relationship breakdown, or caring responsibilities. Methodologies matter The impact of vulnerability on the data-collection exercise will also vary according to the type of methodology used in the project, for example: Telephone Some participants find it difficult to differentiate between genuine research calls and selling under the guise of research (sugging), fundraising under the guise of research (frugging), or personal protection insurance (PPI). Members must realise that calling a telephone number after a firm refusal has been given is