Research under pressure

Around the world, authoritarianism has been rising, and with it, new barriers to producing and sharing scientific knowledge (Berggren & Bjørnskov, 2022; Yusupova, 2019). In their article published in Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, Yasemin Gülsüm Acar, Özden Melis Uluğ, and Nevin Solak (2025) examined how political repression influences the type of research that can be conducted, who can conduct it, and the safety risks associated with participation. Using Turkey as a case study, which is often described as a competitive authoritarian or hybrid regime (Economist Intelligence Unit, 2021; Esen & Gumuscu, 2016), Acar et al. focused on research related to the decades-long Turkish–Kurdish conflict and highlighted how broader political conditions reshape different stages of research process. The authors discussed that an authoritarian atmosphere not only restricts academic freedoms but also reshapes the everyday realities of researchers and the communities with which they work (Acar et al., 2025).

Drawing on published research, national and international data, and their own experiences conducting studies in Turkey, Acar et al. identified three levels at which authoritarianism alters the research landscape:

Social–psychological research on the Turkish–Kurdish conflict is surprisingly sparse, given its centrality to public life. Existing studies suggest that political pressure, limited academic freedom, and widespread stigmatization of the conflict discourage researchers from studying it (Taştan et al., 2020). When research is conducted, methodological constraints, including difficulty accessing Kurdish participants, language restrictions, and unrepresentative samples, can limit the generalizability of findings (Baysu et al., 2018; Orhan, 2022). These challenges reveal how political climates can directly shape the scope and quality of scientific knowledge.

Political contexts characterized by authoritarian features can contribute to a climate of fear that influences which topics academics feel safe pursuing (Aktas et al., 2019). In such contexts, researchers risk being monitored, investigated, or losing their jobs. Many avoid studying politically sensitive subjects altogether, leading to self-censorship in research questions, teaching, and public engagement. The experiences of scholars related to the 2016 Academics for Peace petition in Turkey, where hundreds of scholars faced dismissal, detention, or prosecution, illustrates the profound personal and professional risks associated with studying conflict and minority issues (Academics for Peace, 2022).

Authoritarian climates affect whether people feel safe participating in research. Concerns about surveillance makes many (potential) participants reluctant to share their experiences, sign consent forms, or engage with unfamiliar researchers (Uluğ et al., 2021). Participants look for cues of trust, such as shared identity, political alignment, or local relationships, before agreeing to speak. Even when individuals want to contribute, low political efficacy and concerns about being targeted can discourage participation.

Understanding how political contexts shape research is crucial for building a truly global psychology. Political conditions influence what data can be collected, whose voices are heard, and whose experiences remain missing from the scientific record. The analysis underscores the importance of methodological flexibility, including alternative consent procedures, narrative methods, and remote data collection, as well as international collaborations that safeguard both researchers and participants.

At a broader level, this work demonstrates that the pursuit of knowledge is often intertwined with political power. Supporting researchers in restrictive contexts; advocating for academic freedom; and designing ethical, context-sensitive research practices are crucial steps toward a more inclusive and globally representative psychological science.

This article is in the Social Psychology and Social Processes topic area.

Academics for Peace. (2022, December 17). Rights violations against Academics for Peace. https://barisicinakademisyenler.net/node/314opens in new window

Acar, Y. G., Uluğ, Ö. M., & Solak, N. (2025). The impact of authoritarian regimes on research: Insights from research, researchers, and participants. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 31(4), 441–451. https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000803

Aktas, V., Nilsson, M., & Borell, K. (2019). Social scientists under threat: Resistance and self-censorship in Turkish academia. British Journal of Educational Studies, 67(2), 169–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2018.1502872opens in new window

Baysu, G., Coşkan, C., & Duman, Y. (2018). Can identification as Muslim increase support for reconciliation? The case of the Kurdish conflict in Turkey. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 64, 43–53. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0147176716302255opens in new window

Berggren, N., & Bjørnskov, C. (2022). Political institutions and academic freedom: Evidence from across the world. Public Choice, 190(1), 205–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-021-00931-9opens in new window

Economist Intelligence Unit. (2021). Democracy index 2021: The China challenge. Retrieved January 29, 2023, from https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/democracy-index-2021/opens in new window

Esen, B., & Gumuscu, S. (2016). Rising competitive authoritarianism in Turkey. Third World Quarterly, 37(9), 1581–1606. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01436597.2015.1135732opens in new window

Orhan, Y. E. (2022). Social psychological dynamics of the intractable Kurdish conflict in Turkey. Ethnopolitics, 23(2), 103–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2022.2103994opens in new window

Taştan, İ. Ö., Ördek, A., & Öz, F. (2020). A report on academic freedoms in Turkey in the period of the state of emergency. Kaged. https://www.marcherin.be/images/actualites/Turkey-Scientists-Nature/Report-on-academic-freedoms-in-Turkey.pdfopens in new window

Uluğ, Ö. M., Acar, Y. G., & Kanık, B. (2021). Reflecting on research: Researcher identity in conflict studies from the perspectives of participants. European Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 847–861. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2776opens in new window

Yusupova, G. (2019). Exploring sensitive topics in an authoritarian context: An insider perspective. Social Science Quarterly, 100(4), 1459–1478. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ssqu.12642opens in new window

Yasemin Gülsüm Acar, PhD, is a lecturer in the School of Psychology and Neuroscience at the University of St Andrews. Yasemin’s research interests include experiences and outcomes of crowds and collective action, social (ethnic, religious, and political) identity, and intergroup conflict and reconciliation. Contact Yasemin Gülsüm Acar.

Özden Melis Uluğ, PhD, is an associate professor in the School of Psychology at the University of Sussex. Melis’ areas of research interest include intergroup conflict, intergroup contact, collective action, and solidarity between groups.

Nevin Solak, PhD, is a social psychologist whose research focuses on emotions, collective action, system justification theory, economic equality, and social class.