How do you identify?

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

Gender identity is complex. It is defined by the Equality and Human Rights Commission as “the way in which an individual identifies with a gender category”. Based on an individual’s self-perception, it may not match the sex registered at birth. People are increasingly understanding gender in a diverse way, to include non-binary and gender-fluid identities – although this is not always the case – and discussion on the issue generates passionate, sometimes insightful, debates about what the approach should be.

Inclusive National Census 2021

Against this background, it is helpful that the England and Wales National Census 2021 will – for the first time – include a voluntary question on gender identity for over-16s.

There is ongoing testing across communities on the preferred approach, and the specific question wording is still to be determined, but this development is to be welcomed. It underscores how important it is to ensure that all members of society can see themselves reflected in this important data-collection exercise. A similar move is being undertaken for Scotland’s Census 2021, while the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency has identified a user need for information on gender identity.

Information collected through the census is critical. Of course, it is vital that – as is intended – information on sex continues to be collected and to be comparable. But, based on user requirements, the addition of collecting gender-identity information should mean better quality information for monitoring and supporting anti-discrimination duties under the Equality Act 2010. In particular, it is hoped that it can provide official data about the size of the transgender population and a better basis for identifying inequalities, needs, services and support for transgender people. Official census data on this segment of the population should also assist market researchers in weighting samples and meeting quotas in studies where this is required.

MRS approach to gender identity 

MRS first issued a Best Practice Guidance Note on this topic in 2016, and is the only research association across the globe to have attempted to tackle this issue. Of course, it is a developing area. Evolving best practice, evidenced societal changes and new privacy frameworks mean an update of the gender identity guidance is vital.

Revision and update of gender identity guidance and suggested questions is a complicated task, which needs to take account of multiple factors, such as:

• the need to ensure there is no conflation of sex and gender identity in question design, analysis and reporting
• differing views across communities on the appropriate non-binary and binary response options for both sex and gender identity
• the design of an appropriate approach that ensures the questions can produce robust data while not confusing or excluding any individuals
• substantive ethical and privacy concerns on collection of special category personal data (which is inherently sensitive) and especially on allowing children under 16 to self-identify on gender
• varied cultural norms and public acceptability of the approach in different countries. Being complicated does not mean it should not be done. The information is important for inclusion and, if it is to be used for robust research insights, it is equally important that it is asked in the most appropriate way.

As refining our approach continues, some fundamental points remain best ethical practice. Researchers need to ensure that:

• participants can proceed through research studies without being required to tick male or female if they do not identify as such 
• participants can easily express their views, which can often best be accomplished by including a write-in box – male/female and other (free field) – or allowing people to self-identify by asking an open-ended question 
• the gender identity question is separate from a sex question and, where both are required, consider adopting a two-step approach that covers assigned sex at birth and current gender identity 
• a ‘prefer not to say’ response option is included
•  the approach used for capturing the information is tailored to the platform or technique used. Questions and approaches that work in online, self-completion surveys may not be appropriate for face-to-face or telephone interviews.

Finally, researchers must always start by considering whether this demographic information is relevant or necessary. If it is not going to be used, there is no need to collect it.

What next? 

MRS is continuing to work with research suppliers and other interested stakeholders in the sector to develop an evidence-based approach to our new guidance. This includes working with the Office for National Statistics and participating in a special interest group to unpick and deliberate on all these issues.

If you are interested in working further with us on developing new parameters for gender identity guidance, then get in touch.

Dr Michelle Goddard is director of policy and standards at MRS

This article was first published in Issue 25 of Impact.