The intersection of conflict research and research ethics is already a complex and fraught one, particularly in exchanges between researchers from the Global North and researched communities from the Global South. There are many examples (and years) of exploitation, fraud, and violence in these exchanges, and more recent scholarship on fieldwork ethics has established new norms of reciprocal exchange rather than exploitation in these relationships. However, the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, asymmetric access to health care, and global vaccine inequality has added yet another layer of complexity here. How do we continue move forward with the push to make our research exchanges ethical while dealing with the additional complexity of the pandemic? In this article, I reflect on the ethics of these exchanges and concerns around security for interlocutors in replacing in person fieldwork with virtual fieldwork, drawing from examples of my own doctoral dissertation research in the Pacific region of Colombia, which was interrupted by the outbreak of COVID-19.

What accounts for the creation, design, and outputs of quasi-judicial institutions in autocracies? Prior research demonstrates that autocrats co-opt electoral, legislative, and judicial institutions to curtail opponents’ power and curry international patrons’ favor. However, scholarship on co-optation neglects quasi-judicial mechanisms, such as truth commissions, that can be useful for arranging a political narrative that bolsters a leader’s image while undermining his rivals. In this article, we formalize the concept of autocratic truth commissions—which account for one-third of truth commissions globally—and develop and test a novel theory of their origins, inputs, and outputs.

States facing sovereignty challenges, especially in human rights, may use them for political goals through negotiation and legitimation. Colombia’s interactions with the ICC show that, rather than resisting, successive governments leveraged ICC scrutiny to shape domestic human rights debates, particularly during FARC peace talks.

Criminal actors publicize threats to assert control and define social order. Analyzing threats from groups in Colombia and Mexico reveals varying ideological and local influences, highlighting communication’s role in criminal governance beyond violence.

Despite emphasis on gender in peacebuilding, real policy often falls short. This study examines women’s roles in pre-negotiation and framework-setting during Colombia’s 2012–2016 peace talks with FARC, highlighting the impact of women and feminist groups.

This study examines how legacies of violence shape electoral behavior, especially in elections focused on peace. Using data from Colombian elections and a violence dataset (1991–2012), it explores whether exposure to violence makes voters more or less conciliatory.

This study finds racial disparities in quantitative confidence among political science PhD students, especially Black and Middle Eastern/North African students, contributing to underrepresentation in political methodology.

This research explores how female scholar representation influences Ph.D. students’ academic self-efficacy. In a syllabus experiment, increased gender diversity did not boost female students’ confidence but lowered self-efficacy among male students and those unsupportive of diversity. A secondary, non-interventional survey analysis showed that students with more role models, regardless of gender, had higher academic confidence, though female students — especially those valuing diversity — were more likely to seek female mentors.