Afflexivity in post-qualitative inquiry: prioritising affect and reflexivity in the evaluation of a health information website.

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Health Sociology Review Pub Date : 2021-11-01 Epub Date: 2021-09-14 DOI:10.1080/14461242.2021.1976068
Jenny Setchell, Rebecca Olson, Merrill Turpin, Nathalia Costa, Tim Barlott, Kate O'Halloran, Britta Wigginton, Paul Hodges
{"title":"Afflexivity in post-qualitative inquiry: prioritising affect and reflexivity in the evaluation of a health information website.","authors":"Jenny Setchell,&nbsp;Rebecca Olson,&nbsp;Merrill Turpin,&nbsp;Nathalia Costa,&nbsp;Tim Barlott,&nbsp;Kate O'Halloran,&nbsp;Britta Wigginton,&nbsp;Paul Hodges","doi":"10.1080/14461242.2021.1976068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Increasingly, people turn to online sources for health information, creating human-non-human relationalities. Health websites are considered accessible in scope and convenience but can have limited capacity to accommodate complexities. There are concerns about who gets to 'assemble' with these resources, and who is excluded. Guided by Ahmed's socio-political theories of emotions, we questioned our feelings as we intra-acted with a consumer information website about back pain (MyBackPain). This encouraged us to approach resource evaluation in a way that alters conventional rational/cognitive judgement processes. Our inquiry was 'supra-disciplinary' involving public health, sociology, allied health and consumer collaborators. Specifically, we considered <i>relationality</i> - the feelings circulating between bodies/objects and implicated in MyBackPain's affective practices; <i>impressions</i> - the marks, images or beliefs MyBackPain makes on bodies/objects; and <i>directionality</i> - how these intra-actions pushed in some directions and away from others. Although Ahmed would likely not consider herself 'post-humanist', we argue that her socio-political theories of how objects and emotions entangle are of great interest to furthering critical post-human understandings of health. Rather than threatening decision-making, we suggest that feelings (and their affects) are central to it. The article demonstrates the productive potential of critical post-human inquiry in identifying/countering 'othering' possibilities, and catalysing a 'nomadic shift' towards new human-non-human formations.</p>","PeriodicalId":46833,"journal":{"name":"Health Sociology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Sociology Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14461242.2021.1976068","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/9/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Increasingly, people turn to online sources for health information, creating human-non-human relationalities. Health websites are considered accessible in scope and convenience but can have limited capacity to accommodate complexities. There are concerns about who gets to 'assemble' with these resources, and who is excluded. Guided by Ahmed's socio-political theories of emotions, we questioned our feelings as we intra-acted with a consumer information website about back pain (MyBackPain). This encouraged us to approach resource evaluation in a way that alters conventional rational/cognitive judgement processes. Our inquiry was 'supra-disciplinary' involving public health, sociology, allied health and consumer collaborators. Specifically, we considered relationality - the feelings circulating between bodies/objects and implicated in MyBackPain's affective practices; impressions - the marks, images or beliefs MyBackPain makes on bodies/objects; and directionality - how these intra-actions pushed in some directions and away from others. Although Ahmed would likely not consider herself 'post-humanist', we argue that her socio-political theories of how objects and emotions entangle are of great interest to furthering critical post-human understandings of health. Rather than threatening decision-making, we suggest that feelings (and their affects) are central to it. The article demonstrates the productive potential of critical post-human inquiry in identifying/countering 'othering' possibilities, and catalysing a 'nomadic shift' towards new human-non-human formations.

质后探究的反身性:健康资讯网站评价中情感与反身性的优先性。
人们越来越多地转向在线资源获取健康信息,创造了人类与非人类的关系。健康网站在范围和便利性方面被认为是可访问的,但处理复杂性的能力有限。人们担心谁可以“集结”这些资源,谁被排除在外。在艾哈迈德关于情绪的社会政治理论的指导下,我们在与一个关于背痛的消费者信息网站(MyBackPain)互动时,询问了自己的感受。这鼓励我们以一种改变传统理性/认知判断过程的方式来进行资源评估。我们的调查是“跨学科的”,涉及公共卫生、社会学、联合卫生和消费者合作者。具体来说,我们考虑了关联性——在身体/物体之间循环的感觉,并与MyBackPain的情感实践有关;impressions—MyBackPain在身体/物体上留下的标记、图像或信念;方向性——这些内部行为是如何向某些方向推进而远离其他方向的。虽然艾哈迈德可能不认为自己是“后人文主义者”,但我们认为,她关于物体和情感如何纠缠的社会政治理论对进一步批判性地理解后人类的健康有着极大的兴趣。我们认为感觉(及其影响)是决策的核心,而不是威胁决策。本文展示了批判性后人类探究在识别/对抗“他者”可能性方面的生产潜力,并促进了向新的人类-非人类形态的“游牧转变”。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: An international, scholarly peer-reviewed journal, Health Sociology Review explores the contribution of sociology and sociological research methods to understanding health and illness; to health policy, promotion and practice; and to equity, social justice, social policy and social work. Health Sociology Review is published in association with The Australian Sociological Association (TASA) under the editorship of Eileen Willis. Health Sociology Review publishes original theoretical and research articles, literature reviews, special issues, symposia, commentaries and book reviews.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信