The long history of exploitation and oppression at the hands of the medical and academic communities, combined with ongoing political attacks, has left many members of the LGBTQ+ community distrustful and unwilling to participate in research. When individuals experience marginalisation, their feelings of discrimination, exclusion and research fatigue are often intensified.
Researchers, then, should not design and conduct studies without taking into account how gender and sexuality intersect with other social categories such as race, Indigeneity, disability, cultural or linguistic diversity, neurodiversity or geographic barriers. Another danger is that academics without lived experience of LGBTQ+ culture and communities could misinterpret and misrepresent beliefs, behaviours and practices. Nuance is flattened out and marginalised people are reduced to categories. Intersectionality recognises that the different facets of a person’s identity create combinations of both privilege and oppression.
- Weaving gold from EDI straw: an intersectional approach
- For diverse communities to thrive, we need intersectional policies and practices
- What matters to students’ sense of belonging?
An intersectional approach is also critical for researchers who are both researcher and “fatigued community member”. When engaging in research promotion, they can face rejection from their communities who are reticent to be involved in any research. This means institutions also have responsibility to ensure research with LGBTQ+ communities is conducted in way that considers diverse identities within communities, and to the staff and students they have a legal and ethical responsibility to support.
Key considerations when researching with participants from LGBTA+ communities
Here, we consider how intersectionality impacts research with LGBTQ+ communities and provide suggestions on how to recognise the diversity and complexity of participants’ experiences.
1. Design for intersectionality and accessibility from the outset
Having an intersectional research design from inception can improve participation and outcomes. Recognise that intersectional identities are not homogenous. Practical steps include flexible participation options (such as allowing for online or paper-based surveys, participation in larger group interviews or one on one), open-ended identity questions and culturally safe research practices, which can reduce barriers to those under-represented in research.
2. Avoid tokenism and tick-box inclusion
Superficial inclusion strategies, such as adding a single demographic question to a survey or consulting one person as a representative for an entire community, are rarely effective. Neither is trying to “tick off” every identity possible. Collecting and reporting on identities without sufficient knowledge could misrepresent the needs of a community or leave large “holes” in the research. This is why LGBTQ+ voices need to be intentionally involved in research to help guide intersectional practices. There is no “right amount of intersectionality” but researchers need to be transparent at all stages of the process about what experiences might be missing in their work.
3. Prioritise community-led research
Community‑led research shifts decision‑making power towards communities. Actions can include co‑designing research, involving community in data interpretation and dissemination, and establishing well‑resourced community advisory groups (with remuneration) to support accountability. Given the diversity of experiences within LGBTQ+ communities, it is important that community advisory groups embody different intersecting experiences (for example, different genders, sexualities and ages). A group might never be truly representative but open reflection with community members about missing voices and how this impacts decisions, and expanding community representation where needed, can be helpful.
4. Treat research participation as labour, not goodwill
A key challenge from an intersectional perspective is research fatigue. This can occur when individuals or groups see no change or impact from engaging with research. For intersectional communities, research fatigue reflects broader power imbalances in how knowledge is produced and shared, who controls it and who benefits. Addressing research fatigue requires institutions to design, communicate and translate research that benefits the populations involved.
Research of and within intersectional communities should recognise that participation requires time, expertise and often emotional labour. Remunerating participants should be standard practice wherever possible, framed not as an incentive but as an acknowledgement of their contribution. A challenge with remuneration can be that grassroots research often does not yet have financial backing to provide financial remuneration. Therefore, understanding what real benefit to communities looks like and ensuring research provides this can be a viable alternative – for example, if a specific resource can be developed that can be shared to raise awareness.
5. Build in reciprocity throughout every stage of research
Reciprocity is important to consider when the research project is being developed, when data is collected, when findings are analysed, and when outcomes are shared back to communities. In our experience, participants are often asked to dedicate time and energy to studies during data collection only and rarely see outcomes of the work. Researchers can ask participants directly about the most appropriate format for feeding findings back to community. This might be through accessible summaries, workshops, presentations or digital formats. Delivering results demonstrates accountability and ensures that knowledge circulates beyond academic publications.
6. Keep your LGBTQ+ researchers safe
A story that resonates across marginalised groups is the additional load placed on them to advocate for inclusion and representation of their communities within institutions and research. This responsibility should be diffused across an institution rather than put solely on one person’s shoulders.
Lived experience researchers also often grapple with added factors within academia, such as navigating identity in research promotion. For LGBTQ+ academics, ongoing attacks on human rights by academic, medical and political institutions mean this consideration continues to be relevant. So, institutions need to ensure safeguards, such as access to mental health support and providing supervisors with appropriate training are in place to protect their safety.
7. Promote a research culture that values positionality and self-reflection
Reflecting on intersectionality takes practice. These skills are essential for working with marginalised communities, and it’s important to build research cultures that encourage staff and students to critically reflect on their work, through practices such as peer discussion, regular training and structured reflexivity activities, regardless of the communities they seek to work with.
How intersectional approaches lead to better research
Intersectional approaches remind us that trust is built over time, through respect, accountability and shared benefit. As institutions continue to shape how knowledge is produced, research can move away from extractive practices and towards relationships that support dignity, safety and meaningful change for the diverse communities that research depends on.
Emerson Zerafa-Payne is senior lecturer, and Mackenzie Rubens and James A. Fowler are postdoctoral research fellows, all at the University of Southern Queensland.
If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter.
comment