Participatory action research (PAR) is a methodological approach that seeks to maximize the participation of people whose lives it researches. It is underpinned by an ethical concern to research "with" people, rather than "on" people. However, this ethical approach to research is often, paradoxically, problematized by universities' research ethics committees (RECs). This article explores one site of tension between PAR and RECs-the requirement for anonymity for below 18-year-olds. It explores this tension by exploring a case study of a peer-to-peer research project undertaken by young women in East London, and using our own experiences and perspectives, it argues that anonymity can be unjust, disempowering, and unnecessary, and can reduce "pride." Without wanting to develop specific recommendations, given the limited scope of our case study, this article uses firsthand experiences to add weight to the broader discussions calling for a critical rethink of REC guidelines.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 June 2026.
All research outputs
#4,379,906
of 33,076,184 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics
#52
of 450 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,407
of 336,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,076,184 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 450 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 336,022 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them
