To what extent are people with intellectual disabilities (ID) active partners in focus group research? A literature review

Rosa Wright
{"title":"To what extent are people with intellectual disabilities (ID) active partners in focus group research? A literature review","authors":"Rosa Wright","doi":"10.1921/GPWK.V26I1.982","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Zarb’s (1992) criteria were used to inspect the emancipatory potential met in six pieces of focus group research and the level of collaboration and inclusion for people with ID as ‘active partners’ in research. Selected post-2010 research was sourced from a search of online databases pertinent to nursing, social work and ID. The exercise found that control mostly lies in the hands of academics and clinicians. Research is carried out with people with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities while those with more complex needs are excluded. Power relationships are not closely examined. It is possible to involve people with ID in research using adapted methods and disabled researchers. Firstly, the idea of power and control for active involvement of participants with ID in focus groups is examined. Then recent research is explored through comparative analysis and a discussion. The author concludes that researchers should account more fully for their own positions of power in the medical or social model of disability. Researchers should offer opportunities for criticism and account for the products of research. Turning abstract concepts into concrete examples may benefit participants with intellectual disabilities.Keywords: focus groups; intellectual disabilities; disability research; groupwork; group work","PeriodicalId":91690,"journal":{"name":"Groupwork : an interdisciplinary journal for working with groups","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Groupwork : an interdisciplinary journal for working with groups","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1921/GPWK.V26I1.982","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract: Zarb’s (1992) criteria were used to inspect the emancipatory potential met in six pieces of focus group research and the level of collaboration and inclusion for people with ID as ‘active partners’ in research. Selected post-2010 research was sourced from a search of online databases pertinent to nursing, social work and ID. The exercise found that control mostly lies in the hands of academics and clinicians. Research is carried out with people with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities while those with more complex needs are excluded. Power relationships are not closely examined. It is possible to involve people with ID in research using adapted methods and disabled researchers. Firstly, the idea of power and control for active involvement of participants with ID in focus groups is examined. Then recent research is explored through comparative analysis and a discussion. The author concludes that researchers should account more fully for their own positions of power in the medical or social model of disability. Researchers should offer opportunities for criticism and account for the products of research. Turning abstract concepts into concrete examples may benefit participants with intellectual disabilities.Keywords: focus groups; intellectual disabilities; disability research; groupwork; group work
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
智障人士在多大程度上是焦点小组研究的积极合作伙伴?文献综述
摘要:Zarb(1992)的标准用于检查六项焦点小组研究中所达到的解放潜力,以及ID人群作为研究“积极合作伙伴”的合作和包容水平。2010年后选定的研究来源于对与护理、社会工作和ID相关的在线数据库的搜索。研究发现,控制权主要掌握在学者和临床医生手中。研究对象是轻度至中度智力残疾的人,而那些有更复杂需求的人则被排除在外。权力关系没有得到仔细审查。有可能让有身份证的人使用适当的方法和残疾研究人员参与研究。首先,研究了焦点小组中ID参与者积极参与的权力和控制思想。然后通过比较分析和讨论,对近年来的研究进行了探讨。作者的结论是,研究人员应该更充分地考虑他们自己在残疾医学或社会模型中的权力地位。研究人员应该提供批评的机会,并对研究成果负责。将抽象概念转化为具体例子可能有利于智障参与者。关键词:焦点小组;智力残疾;残疾研究;小组工作;小组工作
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
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Amaru: rede de conhecimento em terapia ocupacional da América Latina “A place where I am always welcome”: A thematic analysis of what belonging to Alcoholics Anonymous means to its members Epistemological ruptures: Digital presence and group work Application of CHAT Analysis to a Community-Based Action Team Considering the rules of brainstorming in untrained idea generating groups
×
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:481959085
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