Welcome to the SRN Midlands blog!

The SRN Midlands Blog is a space for our members to post their thoughts, ideas and news.

Reflections on the Emotionally Demanding Research Workshop

By Adam Chen

(June 25, 2025)

It's been a hectic few months! You may have seen our commentary, you may not, but it was great to see some updates in the guidelines for researchers working in emotionally demanding research! The Sprint Project team have added two additional guides - one regarding individual research wellbeing and another for conference organisers and delegates.

Alongside this, we were very fortunate to have Dr Georgia Bird come along and host a workshop focusing on EDR and highlighting the potential support and areas that need adressing. There's still a fair bit of work to be done around this area, but it is a great starting point. I'm very pleased to see what has been developed and look forward to seeing what else comes from this in the future.

View the guidelines here

Commentary on Quinton et al. (2025): A Step Towards a Framework for Supporting Researchers in Emotionally Demanding Research

By SRN Midlands

(June 09, 2025)

Abstract:

This commentary critically engages with Quinton et al.’s (2025) article, "Best practices for supporting researchers’ mental health in emotionally demanding research across academic and non-academic contexts." The original article offers a valuable framework to address the mental health toll of emotionally demanding research (EDR), emphasizing psychological culture, actionable practices, and boundary-setting. While these recommendations are both timely and important, this commentary argues that their practical implementation may be limited without deeper structural reform. It highlights the need for more robust engagement with institutional, cultural, and policy-level barriers that shape researchers’ mental health outcomes. Furthermore, it underscores the risks of over-relying on individual resilience in contexts marked by resource inequity and precarity. The commentary calls for clearer accountability mechanisms and a stronger whole-systems approach to ensure that researcher well-being is treated not as a personal responsibility, but as a collective, institutional imperative.

Cite as: Chen, AHC. and Ingham, M. (2025) 'Commentary on Quinton et al. (2025): A Step Towards a Framework for Supporting Researchers in Emotionally Demanding Research', 09 June. Available at: blog.srnmidlands.com

In the article "Best practices for supporting researchers’ mental health in emotionally demanding research across academic and non-academic contexts" (2025), Quinton et al. examine the mental health toll that emotionally demanding research (EDR) can have on researchers and propose a framework to mitigate its effects. Using thematic analysis of interviews, they propose three key areas of support: fostering a psychologically informed culture, implementing actionable practices, and setting clear boundaries. While their recommendations are thoughtful and timely, this commentary critiques their practical applicability and highlights areas where broader structural changes may be needed.

Quinton et al. rightly draw attention to the everyday emotional hazards encountered in EDR, such as secondary trauma, moral distress, and burnout. Their call for reflexive practice, supervisory debriefings, and institutional support mechanisms is especially welcome in a research landscape where emotional labour is often invisible and unsupported. However, the article stops short of fully grappling with the deeper institutional, cultural, and policy-level factors that perpetuate the very conditions researchers are expected to navigate. The authors acknowledge that meaningful improvements require a whole-systems approach, with active engagement from multiple organisational levels. However, this important caveat remains underdeveloped. Structural factors such as institutional policies, funding priorities, and cultural norms often lie beyond the immediate control of individual researchers or their teams, yet these factors critically shape researchers’ mental health outcomes.

As identified in Quinton et al.’s article, ethics committees are positioned at key decision-making junctures and could support and/or signpost researchers to relevant resources. Whilst they identify these gaps, what the article does not fully explore is how such committees can be systematically trained, incentivised, or held accountable for this responsibility. Without explicit mechanisms to embed mental health support into institutional governance, the risk is that such recommendations remain aspirational rather than actionable.

Furthermore, while improved access to tailored resources is rightly emphasised, further discussion is needed regarding the pervasive inequities in resource availability across institutions, especially in underfunded or precarious research settings. The reliance on individual researchers and their immediate networks to implement self-care, boundary-setting, and reflective practices shifts the burden of managing emotional risk onto those already vulnerable, rather than addressing systemic pressures.

The guidelines derived from these actionable points (available at https://www.sprintproject.org/guidelines) provide a helpful heuristic for individuals and institutional organisations. It is clear that the aims of these practices try to tackle a culture in which researchers' well-being is seen as a personal responsibility rather than a collective, organisational obligation, providing a whole-system approach to researchers’ well-being. Nonetheless, while Quinton et al. offer timely and necessary guidance, their work also opens the door to further discussion on how institutional structures can be reshaped to support researchers’ well-being in a more systemic and sustainable way.

CitationsQuinton, M. L., Shepherd, K. L., Cumming, J., Tidmarsh, G., Dauvermann, M. R., Griffiths, S. L., … Tresadern, C. (2025). Best practices for supporting researchers’ mental health in emotionally demanding research across academic and non-academic contexts. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2025.2464380

https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2025.2464380

Addressing Malignant Alienation and Culturally Sensitive Care: A Call for Systemic Change

By Henna Chumber

(February 05, 2025)

Mental health care is often shaped by systemic biases, gaps in cultural understanding, and the unintended consequences of professional disengagement. As a PhD researcher (and former mental health support worker of four years) exploring malignant alienation, the phenomenon where service-users feel abandoned or dehumanized by their care providers, I have seen how certain symptoms can result in differential treatment. My research seeks to understand why these disparities exist and how we can foster a more compassionate, equitable system.

In parallel, my business, ConnectedCulture, aims to bridge the gap in culturally competent mental health care. We recognize that individuals from diverse backgrounds often struggle to find therapists who understand their lived experiences. By providing access to culturally sensitive therapists and advocating for systemic change, we strive to create a model of care that acknowledges and respects cultural nuances.

The Sensitive Research Network (SRN) plays a crucial role in supporting research that tackles challenging, underrepresented issues. The themes of sensitivity in research, whether discussing marginalization, inequity, or overlooked patient experiences, resonate deeply with both my academic and business pursuits. SRN’s commitment to fostering inclusive research aligns with my goal of ensuring that mental health care is not only clinically effective but also ethically sound and socially just.

By collaborating with networks like SRN, we can push for policy changes that recognize the importance of cultural sensitivity and relational care in mental health treatment. The intersection of research and practice is vital, evidence-based insights must translate into real-world solutions that benefit those most affected by systemic shortcomings.

Through my work, I hope to contribute to a mental health landscape where no patient feels alienated or unheard, where care is responsive to both psychological and cultural dimensions, and where mental health professionals are equipped to engage with diverse experiences without bias.

If you are interested in these discussions or would like to collaborate, I invite you to connect with me through SRN or ConnectedCulture. Let’s work together to build a more inclusive, compassionate mental health systems.

https://www.connectedculture.co.uk/

SRN Midlands Research Network - A need to create a research group.

By Adam Chen

(January 28, 2025)

When starting my PhD I found a lack of formal and informal training and support around researching sensitive/emotionally demanding topics. Whilst there was an abundance of literature and workshops on ethical guidelines, there was a gap in practicalities.

When reviewing literature around sensitive and emotionally demanding research, one key theme stood out – reflexivity. After exploring different ways I could practice reflexive thinking – through journaling, discussions, mind mapping etc – I considered what methods I would most effectively engage in reflexive practice and ensure mutual benefit, to myself, the project and others. This led me to create a peer-led group for students who were researching sensitive topics. The initial idea for the group was to create a setting that was less formal than supervisory meetings and to create an open space for students to talk about their projects, potential challenges, mistakes and how we overcame them and support each other in a peer-led setting. Another key aim was to ensure the group was flexible and adapted to the needs of all its members, working as a collective to shape the networks goals. The Sensitive Research Network Midlands was thus created.

At first, it was a group for MGS ESRC DTP students, however, it expanded to all PhD students in the midlands with increased interest including students from different CDTs and those who are self-funded. In doing so we diversified our backgrounds creating a greater interdisciplinary group.