Gender identity

x Sponsored content on Research Live and in Impact magazine is editorially independent.
Find out more about advertising and sponsorship.

The Market Research Society (MRS) issued its first Code of Conduct for the research industry in 1954. Since then, we have led the way, with high ethical standards that place the wellbeing of research participants and the integrity of their data at the centre of the research process. As MRS celebrates its 70th year, it is timely that our research community maintains its positions at the forefront of societal change by encouraging approaches to recording of demographic information that cover gender identity. 

Traditionally, researchers collected demographic information on biological sex with a standard ‘male’, ‘female’ (and perhaps ‘prefer not to say’) options. This approach must now change. All research participants need to feel equally valued and satisfied that their voice is being heard. Allowing participants to express their views in the way that they prefer is explicitly set out in the MRS Code of Conduct – and this also applies to describing their gender. So researchers should take steps to ensure this information can be recorded appropriately.

what is gender identity?

Gender identity is complicated. It is the way that an individual describes themselves and identifies with a gender category. A person’s identity may or may not correspond with their biological sex, and is quite separate and distinct from their sexual orientation. It is also not fully covered by the standard ‘male’ and ‘female’ categories. The wide range of non-binary gender identities means that some people may identify as male or female and some may identify with an alternative third-option gender identity. In short, gender identity may not be static and it can be complex.

should you collect this data in light of the privacy and methodological issues?

Privacy issues, always at the forefront for researchers, may arise because:

• Participants may not wish others to be aware of how they self-identify. The place in which data will be collected, the purpose for which it is to be used, or the level of guarantees on confidentiality may pose concerns for participants.
• Collecting information that discloses gender reassignment surgery is likely to be considered as sensitive personal data under the Data Protection Act 1998, requiring further conditions for lawful processing reflecting the nature of this type of information.

Methodological concerns of the effects on the robustness of research include: 

• Risk of inaccuracy and concerns that individuals – in completing open-ended questions – may give deliberately misleading, wrong or inaccurate responses, and lead to bias in the data. 
• Lack of baseline information. There is presently no consistent approach on collection of gender identity data and most studies do not currently capture this demographic information, or include measures to identify transgender and other gender minority participants.
• Possible adverse impact on male/female quotas for nationally representative samples. 

suggested steps toward best practice in gender identity data collection

First, the minimum expectation for any research project should be that the participant will be able to proceed through the research without being required to tick ‘male’ or ‘female’ if they do not identify as such. Even if you are working to male/female quotas for nationally representative samples, the low proportion in additional gender categories should not significantly affect this.

Second, try different avenues for capturing information in a way that allows participants to express their views – such as including male/female and ‘other’ (as a free field), allowing people to self-identify by asking an open-ended question, or adopting a two-step approach that covers assigned sex at birth and then current gender identity. 

Third, sensibly adapt the question and approach to the type of data-collection tool used, as different techniques will work better in online self-completion surveys such as in telephone interviews. Thought, foresight and a degree of flexibility will help make this work. 

Fourth, encourage clients to consider whether the demographic information is relevant or, alternatively, if the research project could benefit from more explicit gender-identity questions. Projects collecting equality information or investigating issues where there may be a particular impact on this section of the population – such as bullying, workplace harassment, discrimination in employment, access to health and social care, and homelessness – may wish to target this minority population. In all cases, obtaining informed consent from participants to collect this sensitive data is critical.

Fifth, as an industry we need to work with others for change. Best practice in this area will need to build on the position and practice of the Office for National Statistics, and the research carried out by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, to design and implement a consistent – and standard – gender-identity question that can be understood and answered by all people living in the UK. 

So how should MRS researchers start this 70th-anniversary year? By celebrating standards that are fit for purpose, promote equality across a wide and diverse demographic base, and that recognise the right of participants to express their preferred gender identity accurately. 

MRS will be issuing guidance on this subject, so stay up to date and read our website for further information on evolving best practice in this area. 

Dr Michelle Goddard is director of policy and standards at MRS