Qualitative research in business and society is increasingly undertaken in environments marked by surveillance, research securitisation, and political constraint. However, dominant models of qualitative rigour continue to privilege transparency and openness, assuming stable, low-risk research settings that are increasingly rare in many contexts. We argue that, in such settings, practices traditionally associated with rigour can expose participants and researchers to harm, generating ethical tensions that cannot be addressed through procedural compliance. Accordingly, prevailing understandings of qualitative rigour must be rethought for constrained environments. Drawing on work in qualitative methodology, research ethics, and research integrity, we advance the concept of rigour under constraint as a normative orientation for qualitative research. Rigour under constraint reframes methodological adaptation and selective disclosure not only as methodological weaknesses but also as ethically justified, epistemically necessary, phronetic responses to risk. The article articulates three guiding principles—contextual responsibility, ethical opacity, and adaptive accountability—and considers implications.
Ghouse et al. (Mon,) studied this question.