痴呆症患者参与研究:解决认识论不公正问题的一种手段。

Ulla Halonen, Mari Aaltonen, Lina Van Aerschot, Jari Pirhonen
{"title":"痴呆症患者参与研究:解决认识论不公正问题的一种手段。","authors":"Ulla Halonen, Mari Aaltonen, Lina Van Aerschot, Jari Pirhonen","doi":"10.1177/14713012241299015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Epistemic injustice refers to wronging or mistreating individuals in terms of their capacity as knowers, based on prejudices or negative attitudes. Excluding people with dementia from research is a form of epistemic injustice. In this article, we discuss epistemic injustice associated with data collection processes and the participation of people with dementia in scientific research. The challenges of participation that we discuss pertain to the role of gatekeepers and ethical research perspectives. The arguments presented are based on previous research, experiences from our current project, and critical self-assessment regarding the latter. The aim is to shed light on what enables or prevents people living with dementia from participating in research, and how this is connected to epistemic injustice. It is known that prejudices related to dementia affect both researchers and people living with dementia: the former tend to exclude people with dementia, and the latter may practice self-silencing due to dementia-related stigma. In addition to these individual issues, we argue that epistemic injustice occurs at a structural level, where a major role is played by gatekeepers and research ethics panels. As close family members, health officials, and dementia-related associations are the main gatekeepers, their attitudes and perceptions are highlighted. In terms of ethical issues, the concept of informed consent needs to be elaborated. If the research is not expected to harm participants and may contribute to improving the lives of those with dementia, the perspective should be shifted from informed consent to ongoing consent assessment. While acknowledging the features and symptoms of dementia, researchers should be more courageous, trust in the good cause, and enable persons living with dementia to participate in research that concerns them. This is the only way for researchers to genuinely understand the social world, experiences, and needs of those with dementia and to address epistemic injustice.</p>","PeriodicalId":72778,"journal":{"name":"Dementia (London, England)","volume":" ","pages":"14713012241299015"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Participation of persons living with dementia in research: A means to address epistemic injustice.\",\"authors\":\"Ulla Halonen, Mari Aaltonen, Lina Van Aerschot, Jari Pirhonen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14713012241299015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Epistemic injustice refers to wronging or mistreating individuals in terms of their capacity as knowers, based on prejudices or negative attitudes. Excluding people with dementia from research is a form of epistemic injustice. In this article, we discuss epistemic injustice associated with data collection processes and the participation of people with dementia in scientific research. The challenges of participation that we discuss pertain to the role of gatekeepers and ethical research perspectives. The arguments presented are based on previous research, experiences from our current project, and critical self-assessment regarding the latter. The aim is to shed light on what enables or prevents people living with dementia from participating in research, and how this is connected to epistemic injustice. It is known that prejudices related to dementia affect both researchers and people living with dementia: the former tend to exclude people with dementia, and the latter may practice self-silencing due to dementia-related stigma. In addition to these individual issues, we argue that epistemic injustice occurs at a structural level, where a major role is played by gatekeepers and research ethics panels. As close family members, health officials, and dementia-related associations are the main gatekeepers, their attitudes and perceptions are highlighted. In terms of ethical issues, the concept of informed consent needs to be elaborated. If the research is not expected to harm participants and may contribute to improving the lives of those with dementia, the perspective should be shifted from informed consent to ongoing consent assessment. While acknowledging the features and symptoms of dementia, researchers should be more courageous, trust in the good cause, and enable persons living with dementia to participate in research that concerns them. This is the only way for researchers to genuinely understand the social world, experiences, and needs of those with dementia and to address epistemic injustice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72778,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dementia (London, England)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"14713012241299015\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dementia (London, England)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14713012241299015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dementia (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14713012241299015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

认识论不公正是指基于偏见或负面态度,在个人作为认识者的能力方面对其进行误解或虐待。将痴呆症患者排除在研究之外就是一种认识论不公正。在本文中,我们将讨论与数据收集过程和痴呆症患者参与科学研究相关的认识论不公正问题。我们讨论的参与挑战涉及把关人的角色和研究伦理观点。我们提出的论点基于以往的研究、当前项目的经验以及对后者的批判性自我评估。目的是阐明是什么促成或阻碍了痴呆症患者参与研究,以及这与认识论上的不公正是如何联系在一起的。众所周知,与痴呆症有关的偏见既影响研究人员,也影响痴呆症患者:前者倾向于排斥痴呆症患者,而后者则可能因为与痴呆症有关的耻辱感而自我沉默。除了这些个人问题之外,我们还认为,认识论上的不公正还发生在结构层面,其中起主要作用的是把关人和研究伦理小组。由于近亲属、卫生官员和痴呆症相关协会是主要的把关人,因此他们的态度和看法就显得尤为重要。在伦理问题方面,需要详细阐述知情同意的概念。如果研究预计不会对参与者造成伤害,而且可能有助于改善痴呆症患者的生活,那么研究视角就应从知情同意转向持续的同意评估。在承认痴呆症的特征和症状的同时,研究人员应该更加勇敢,相信美好的事业,让痴呆症患者参与到与他们相关的研究中来。只有这样,研究人员才能真正了解痴呆症患者的社会世界、经历和需求,并解决认识论上的不公正问题。
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
Participation of persons living with dementia in research: A means to address epistemic injustice.

Epistemic injustice refers to wronging or mistreating individuals in terms of their capacity as knowers, based on prejudices or negative attitudes. Excluding people with dementia from research is a form of epistemic injustice. In this article, we discuss epistemic injustice associated with data collection processes and the participation of people with dementia in scientific research. The challenges of participation that we discuss pertain to the role of gatekeepers and ethical research perspectives. The arguments presented are based on previous research, experiences from our current project, and critical self-assessment regarding the latter. The aim is to shed light on what enables or prevents people living with dementia from participating in research, and how this is connected to epistemic injustice. It is known that prejudices related to dementia affect both researchers and people living with dementia: the former tend to exclude people with dementia, and the latter may practice self-silencing due to dementia-related stigma. In addition to these individual issues, we argue that epistemic injustice occurs at a structural level, where a major role is played by gatekeepers and research ethics panels. As close family members, health officials, and dementia-related associations are the main gatekeepers, their attitudes and perceptions are highlighted. In terms of ethical issues, the concept of informed consent needs to be elaborated. If the research is not expected to harm participants and may contribute to improving the lives of those with dementia, the perspective should be shifted from informed consent to ongoing consent assessment. While acknowledging the features and symptoms of dementia, researchers should be more courageous, trust in the good cause, and enable persons living with dementia to participate in research that concerns them. This is the only way for researchers to genuinely understand the social world, experiences, and needs of those with dementia and to address epistemic injustice.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Exploring the effectiveness and experiences of people living with dementia interacting with digital interventions: A mixed methods systematic review. A scoping review of dementia education programs to assess for the inclusion of culture. Evolving dementia care: An explorative study on the lived experience of older adults living with dementia in nursing homes using observational and biometric sensor data. Community health workers supporting diverse family caregivers of persons with dementia: Preliminary qualitative results from a randomized home-based study. Participation of persons living with dementia in research: A means to address epistemic injustice.
×
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