What can physiotherapy learn by looking more closely at 'how' research insights come about? The role of reflexivity and representation.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 REHABILITATION Physiotherapy Theory and Practice Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-18 DOI:10.1080/09593985.2024.2368604
Sarah Barradell, Tai Peseta
{"title":"What can physiotherapy learn by looking more closely at 'how' research insights come about? The role of reflexivity and representation.","authors":"Sarah Barradell, Tai Peseta","doi":"10.1080/09593985.2024.2368604","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this paper, we draw on an example of heuristic inquiry - (<i>Re)imagining becoming a physiotherapist: a phenomenological approach</i> - to illustrate the role that reflexivity and representation can play in physiotherapy research outcomes and the meaning they might have for moving the profession forward. Qualitative research in physiotherapy tends to acknowledge reflexivity as a route to objectivity by making researcher biases overt, yet the debate about data representation (a researcher's decision-making about how data are represented in a text) barely feature. This contrasts with qualitative research in other fields, including other health professions, where matters of representation (i.e., how knowledge is conveyed) are routinely debated and contested. Reflexivity, in fact, is much more than being transparent. Together with representation, reflexivity helps to position both the voices of participants and researchers within the research. The heuristic inquiry described in this paper offers new insights about learning to be a physiotherapist; it challenged assumptions about care in physiotherapy practice and it changed the first researcher's identity and practice. These insights were generated through the synergies between reflexivity and representation, and we argue that physiotherapy research has an opportunity to be more expansive by taking a commitment to reflexivity and representation more seriously.</p>","PeriodicalId":48699,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Theory and Practice","volume":" ","pages":"890-900"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Theory and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2024.2368604","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper, we draw on an example of heuristic inquiry - (Re)imagining becoming a physiotherapist: a phenomenological approach - to illustrate the role that reflexivity and representation can play in physiotherapy research outcomes and the meaning they might have for moving the profession forward. Qualitative research in physiotherapy tends to acknowledge reflexivity as a route to objectivity by making researcher biases overt, yet the debate about data representation (a researcher's decision-making about how data are represented in a text) barely feature. This contrasts with qualitative research in other fields, including other health professions, where matters of representation (i.e., how knowledge is conveyed) are routinely debated and contested. Reflexivity, in fact, is much more than being transparent. Together with representation, reflexivity helps to position both the voices of participants and researchers within the research. The heuristic inquiry described in this paper offers new insights about learning to be a physiotherapist; it challenged assumptions about care in physiotherapy practice and it changed the first researcher's identity and practice. These insights were generated through the synergies between reflexivity and representation, and we argue that physiotherapy research has an opportunity to be more expansive by taking a commitment to reflexivity and representation more seriously.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过更仔细地研究 "如何 "产生研究见解,物理治疗学能学到什么?反身性和代表性的作用。
在本文中,我们通过一个启发式探究实例--"(重新)想象成为一名物理治疗师:一种现象学方法"--来说明反思性和代表性在物理治疗研究成果中所扮演的角色,以及它们对推动该行业发展的意义。物理治疗领域的定性研究倾向于通过公开研究人员的偏见来承认反思性是实现客观性的途径,但关于数据表征(研究人员关于如何在文本中表征数据的决策)的争论却很少出现。这与其他领域(包括其他卫生专业)的定性研究形成了鲜明对比,在这些领域中,有关表述(即如何传达知识)的问题经常受到辩论和争议。事实上,反身性不仅仅是透明。与代表性一起,反身性有助于将参与者和研究人员的声音定位在研究中。本文所述的启发式探究为学习成为一名物理治疗师提供了新的见解;它对物理治疗实践中的护理假设提出了挑战,并改变了第一位研究者的身份和实践。我们认为,物理治疗研究有机会通过更加认真地致力于反身性和代表性而变得更加广阔。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: The aim of Physiotherapy Theory and Practice is to provide an international, peer-reviewed forum for the publication, dissemination, and discussion of recent developments and current research in physiotherapy/physical therapy. The journal accepts original quantitative and qualitative research reports, theoretical papers, systematic literature reviews, clinical case reports, and technical clinical notes. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice; promotes post-basic education through reports, reviews, and updates on all aspects of physiotherapy and specialties relating to clinical physiotherapy.
期刊最新文献
Functional immersive rehabilitation for a severely burned patient with refractory pain: A case report. Effect of an evidence-based modified developmental physiotherapy intervention on muscle tone, motor functions, and trunk control in a child with hereditary spastic paraplegia type 47: A case report. Physical therapists' perspectives on a large language model-powered knowledge translation tool for guideline adherence: A qualitative focus group study. Sacral osteoblastoma masquerading as sacroiliac joint dysfunction: A case report. Effects of blood flow restriction training on the function of chronic ankle instability: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1