Research participant vulnerability is a core consideration in ethical research practice. Vulnerability can arise for many reasons – personal circumstances, social conditions, health, environment – and may affect an individual’s capacity to engage meaningfully in research. Vulnerability is dynamic and may be short-term, long‑term or situational.

MRS has seen a notable rise in vulnerability‑related enquiries, reflecting wider issues such as financial pressure, mental health challenges and post‑pandemic impacts.

This revised guide summarises current expectations and highlights new legislative and standards‑based requirements that researchers must consider.

Understanding participant vulnerability

A participant may be vulnerable if their ability to provide informed consent or engage with research is limited. Vulnerability may be short-term, long-term or permanent, fluctuating or not immediately visible.

Vulnerability may arise when:

• Competence to give informed consent is uncertain
• Social or economic circumstances restrict free consent
• Personal situations influence decision-making capacity
• The design or topic of research increases risk or sensitivity.

Researchers must manage relevant risks with proportionality. Ethical research does not avoid engaging with vulnerable groups; instead, it ensures safe and appropriate participation.

Types of vulnerability

Permanent (long-term) vulnerabilities can affect large groups and may require adjustments:

• Learning disabilities
• Long-term disabilities
• Low income or financial hardship
• Low literacy levels
• Cultural or linguistic barriers.
  

Fluctuating vulnerabilities may be temporary or inconsistent:

• Mental health conditions
• English not being a first language
• Ongoing or episodic health issues
• Limited access to technology
• Social or geographic isolation.

Short-term vulnerabilities may also impact participation:

• Sudden loss of income
• Bereavement
• Relationship breakdown
• Increased caring responsibilities.

MRS guidance and ethical expectations

The MRS best practice guide and checklist provide practical tools to help practitioners identify, assess and respond to vulnerability. Key MRS Code rules include:

• Rule 23: Members must identify and consider the needs of vulnerable people.
• Rule 24: Vulnerable individuals must be able to make informed decisions and must not be pressured.

Researchers must ensure that no harm is caused and that all team members uphold these standards.

Recognising and responding to vulnerability

Teams should be prepared to identify and respond appropriately by understanding indicators of vulnerability, how to adapt engagement methods and what to do if serious crime or abuse is disclosed.

Research teams should receive role‑specific training, periodic assessment of safeguarding knowledge and clear escalation procedures.

When the topic is sensitive or the participant group is likely to include vulnerable individuals, practitioners should prepare: support materials; helpline and signposting resources; information from support organisations; and engagement with specialist groups.

New requirements and legislative context

The guidance has been updated to reflect new standards and legislative requirements: BS 30480:2025 – Suicide and the Workplace; and the Digital Information Act’s safeguarding condition.

BS 30480:2025: This standard highlights the impact of suicide on workplaces and outlines expectations for prevention, intervention and post‑incident support. Research organisations should ensure processes are in place for supporting staff and participants after critical incidents.

The safeguarding condition (Digital Information Act): This condition permits processing personal data when necessary to protect a vulnerable individual. It applies when:

• Processing qualifies as safeguarding
• The person is a child or an at‑risk adult
• Processing is necessary to protect wellbeing.

A vulnerable individual is: any child under 18; or an adult needing care/support, at risk of harm, and unable to protect themselves.

Practical guidance

To identify vulnerability, researchers should look for signs of confusion, distress or difficulty understanding consent. They should also consider environmental or temporary influences, and remember that vulnerability is not always visible.

Researchers should adapt research approaches accordingly by using plain, accessible language, allowing breaks or alternative methods, and avoiding coercion or pressure to continue.

To manage safeguarding risks, researchers should know who their safeguarding lead is, follow escalation pathways and document all safeguarding decisions.

Researcher checklist

• Have you assessed potential vulnerability?
• Is your consent process appropriate for varied needs?
• Do you have a plan for managing distress?
• Are safeguarding procedures clear and accessible?
• Have you recorded decisions relating to vulnerability?

This revised guidance will support ethical, safe and consistent research involving people who may be vulnerable.

Practitioners should apply these principles proportionately and stay up to date with MRS guidance and national legislative developments.

Julie Corney is standards and compliance manager at MRS

• Further resources can be found at the Market Research Society website.