Q: When is it necessary to mask the name of a non-profit participant in case study research?

There are several aspects and nuances to your query. Let’s discuss them one by one.

Non-profit participant(s)

Firstly, the term “non-profit participant” is unfamiliar. It could mean a participant who doesn’t receive a fee for their participation in the study or one who isn’t a (direct) beneficiary of the study. In this case, we assume it is the latter.

Industry guidelines

As a case study involves few participants but potentially much sensitive data, it is preferable to de-identify all participants. You may also refer to guidelines of the respective industry ethics bodies.

The Declaration of Helsinki by the World Medical Association (WMA) has adopted several ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. According to Principle 24, “every precaution must be taken to protect the privacy of research subjects and the confidentiality of their personal information.”

In case of a social science case study, you may refer to the APA Ethics Code. Section 4.04 of the code recommends that care should be taken to minimize intrusions on privacy.

Journal guidelines

Just like manuscript guidelines, ethics guidelines can vary from journal to journal. You could refer to the journal’s guidelines again and defer to them in this matter. Additionally, because journal editors and reviewers work in the same broad area as your paper, they may insist on the de-identification so as not to inadvertently be privy to potentially sensitive participant information. In some cases, and without speculating too much, there may also end up being a conflict of interest for one or more entities.

Ethics committee advisory

You may also refer to your institutional review board (IRB) and go with their recommendations.

Precedence to confidentiality

While in most research, data is paramount, and should therefore be ‘retrievable’ – allowing other researchers (and informed readers) to inspect, analyze, and utilize the data as needed – in the case of human research data, confidentiality is paramount. According to the APA Publication Manual, “subject privacy… should never be sacrificed for clinical or scientific accuracy.”

Use of pseudonyms

Although pseudonyms do serve to mask participant identity, they may end up introducing a bias of their own, as names are usually markers of gender, nationality, ethnicity, religious leanings, and so on. Thus, unless carefully conceived, it is better not to have a pseudonym. If needed, you could use initials, even just one, such as M. The best practice though is to have a number or a letter for the participant, such as Participant 1, Participant 2, Participant A, Participant B, and so on.

In sum, in matters of ethics, it is always better to adopt a stance of caution.

Related reading:

• Informed consent
• Do journals' instructions for authors pay enough attention to ethical issues?
• Do we have to use journal-specific informed consent forms for case reports?