Publication: Gatekeeping, rapport, and ethical vulnerability: elite ethnography on sensitive topics
Program
KU-Authors
KU Authors
Co-Authors
Editor & Affiliation
Compiler & Affiliation
Translator
Other Contributor
Date
Language
eng
Type
Embargo Status
N/A
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Alternative Title
Kapı bekçiliği, ilişki kurma ve etik kırılganlık: hassas konular üzerine seçkin etnografisi
Abstract
This article examines how access, rapport, and ethical vulnerability shape knowledge production in elite qualitative research on sensitive topics, particularly in politically sensitive and illiberal contexts. Drawing on year-long ethnographic fieldwork with conservative business elites in Turkey, it argues that access cannot be understood primarily through formal procedures, institutional affiliation, or interviewer skill alone. Rather, it is produced through relational and moral evaluations in which trust, discretion, and reputational risk shape who can be approached, what can be asked, and what remains unsayable. The article conceptualizes gatekeeping as a moral economy of access in which introductions, endorsements, delays, and refusals operate as judgements about the researcher’s positional safety. It further shows that rapport functions as an interactional politics of visibility and meaning, calibrated through tone, pacing, restraint, and managed proximity. Moments of stalled interaction, silence, and requests for dilution or retraction are treated as methodological evidence of the boundaries of acceptable inquiry and the conditions under which elite knowledge becomes accessible. Together, these dynamics give rise to ethical vulnerability, as the researcher’s position remains contingent on discretionary trust and shifting moral boundaries. The article concludes by reflecting on the implications of these dynamics for qualitative research in settings where access, disclosure, and ethical responsibility remain continuously negotiated rather than procedurally secured.
Source
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Subject
Social sciences, Sociology, Political science
Citation
Has Part
Source
International Journal of Qualitative Methods
Book Series Title
Edition
DOI
10.1177/16094069261455129
