“我会玩这个象征性的游戏,我只是想要一些对我的社区有用的东西”:对同行研究危害的体验和抵制

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Critical Public Health Pub Date : 2023-10-20 DOI:10.1080/09581596.2023.2268822
Lori E. Ross, Merrick Pilling, Jijian Voronka, Kendra-Ann Pitt, Elizabeth McLean, Carole King, Yogendra Shakya, Kinnon R. MacKinnon, Charmaine C. Williams, Carol Strike, Adrian Guta
{"title":"“我会玩这个象征性的游戏,我只是想要一些对我的社区有用的东西”:对同行研究危害的体验和抵制","authors":"Lori E. Ross, Merrick Pilling, Jijian Voronka, Kendra-Ann Pitt, Elizabeth McLean, Carole King, Yogendra Shakya, Kinnon R. MacKinnon, Charmaine C. Williams, Carol Strike, Adrian Guta","doi":"10.1080/09581596.2023.2268822","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hiring peer researchers – individuals with lived experience of the phenomenon under study – is an increasingly popular practice. However, little research has examined experiences of peer research from the perspectives of peer researchers themselves. In this paper, we report on data from a participatory, qualitative research project focused on four intersecting communities often engaged in peer research: mental health service user/consumer/survivor; people who use drugs; racialized; and trans/non-binary communities. In total, 34 individuals who had worked as peer researchers participated in semi-structured interviews. Transcripts and interviewer reflections were analyzed using a participatory approach. Many participants reported exposure to intersecting forms of systemic oppression (racism, transphobia, ableism, and classism, among others) and disparagement of their identities and lived experiences, both from other members of the research team and from the broader institutions in which they were working. Peer researchers described being required to perform academic professionalism, while simultaneously representing communities that were explicitly or implicitly denigrated in the course of their work. Practices of resistance to these harms were evident throughout the interviews, and participants often made strategic decisions to permit themselves to be tokenized, out of the expectation of promised benefits to their communities. However, additional harms were often experienced when these benefits were not realized. These findings point towards the need for a more reflexive and critical approach to the use of peer research.","PeriodicalId":51469,"journal":{"name":"Critical Public Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘I will play this tokenistic game, I just want something useful for my community’: experiences of and resistance to harms of peer research\",\"authors\":\"Lori E. Ross, Merrick Pilling, Jijian Voronka, Kendra-Ann Pitt, Elizabeth McLean, Carole King, Yogendra Shakya, Kinnon R. MacKinnon, Charmaine C. Williams, Carol Strike, Adrian Guta\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09581596.2023.2268822\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Hiring peer researchers – individuals with lived experience of the phenomenon under study – is an increasingly popular practice. However, little research has examined experiences of peer research from the perspectives of peer researchers themselves. In this paper, we report on data from a participatory, qualitative research project focused on four intersecting communities often engaged in peer research: mental health service user/consumer/survivor; people who use drugs; racialized; and trans/non-binary communities. In total, 34 individuals who had worked as peer researchers participated in semi-structured interviews. Transcripts and interviewer reflections were analyzed using a participatory approach. Many participants reported exposure to intersecting forms of systemic oppression (racism, transphobia, ableism, and classism, among others) and disparagement of their identities and lived experiences, both from other members of the research team and from the broader institutions in which they were working. Peer researchers described being required to perform academic professionalism, while simultaneously representing communities that were explicitly or implicitly denigrated in the course of their work. Practices of resistance to these harms were evident throughout the interviews, and participants often made strategic decisions to permit themselves to be tokenized, out of the expectation of promised benefits to their communities. However, additional harms were often experienced when these benefits were not realized. These findings point towards the need for a more reflexive and critical approach to the use of peer research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51469,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Public Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2023.2268822\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2023.2268822","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

雇佣同行研究者——对所研究的现象有亲身经历的人——是一种日益流行的做法。然而,很少有研究从同行研究人员自己的角度来考察同行研究的经验。在本文中,我们报告了一个参与式定性研究项目的数据,该项目侧重于经常从事同伴研究的四个交叉社区:心理健康服务用户/消费者/幸存者;使用毒品的人;种族主义;以及跨性别/非二元群体。总共有34名曾担任同行研究人员的人参加了半结构化访谈。使用参与式方法分析笔录和采访者的意见。许多参与者报告说,他们受到了各种形式的系统性压迫(种族主义、跨性别恐惧症、残疾歧视和阶级歧视等),他们的身份和生活经历受到了来自研究小组其他成员和他们所在的更广泛机构的贬低。同行研究人员描述说,他们被要求表现出学术专业精神,同时又代表着在他们的工作过程中被明确或暗中诋毁的群体。在整个采访过程中,抵制这些危害的做法是显而易见的,参与者经常做出战略性决策,允许自己被代币化,这是出于对社区承诺利益的期望。然而,当这些好处没有实现时,往往会经历额外的伤害。这些发现表明,需要一种更具反思性和批判性的方法来使用同行研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
‘I will play this tokenistic game, I just want something useful for my community’: experiences of and resistance to harms of peer research
Hiring peer researchers – individuals with lived experience of the phenomenon under study – is an increasingly popular practice. However, little research has examined experiences of peer research from the perspectives of peer researchers themselves. In this paper, we report on data from a participatory, qualitative research project focused on four intersecting communities often engaged in peer research: mental health service user/consumer/survivor; people who use drugs; racialized; and trans/non-binary communities. In total, 34 individuals who had worked as peer researchers participated in semi-structured interviews. Transcripts and interviewer reflections were analyzed using a participatory approach. Many participants reported exposure to intersecting forms of systemic oppression (racism, transphobia, ableism, and classism, among others) and disparagement of their identities and lived experiences, both from other members of the research team and from the broader institutions in which they were working. Peer researchers described being required to perform academic professionalism, while simultaneously representing communities that were explicitly or implicitly denigrated in the course of their work. Practices of resistance to these harms were evident throughout the interviews, and participants often made strategic decisions to permit themselves to be tokenized, out of the expectation of promised benefits to their communities. However, additional harms were often experienced when these benefits were not realized. These findings point towards the need for a more reflexive and critical approach to the use of peer research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
7.10%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Critical Public Health (CPH) is a respected peer-review journal for researchers and practitioners working in public health, health promotion and related fields. It brings together international scholarship to provide critical analyses of theory and practice, reviews of literature and explorations of new ways of working. The journal publishes high quality work that is open and critical in perspective and which reports on current research and debates in the field. CPH encourages an interdisciplinary focus and features innovative analyses. It is committed to exploring and debating issues of equity and social justice; in particular, issues of sexism, racism and other forms of oppression.
期刊最新文献
Factors influencing patients’ engagement with ChatGPT for accessing health-related information Australian burden of disease study: health equity through data disaggregation Indian dance (Bharatanatyam) to ease social loneliness and isolation in older adults Association between menopause and occupational burnout in healthcare workers: a cross-sectional study Enriching the evidence base of co-creation research in public health with methodological principles of critical realism
×
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