“Te Kore and the Artiste within: De-Tyrannizing Autistic Viewpoints in Life, Self, and Identity through Creative Methodologies”

IF 3.9 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
M. Whitehead
{"title":"“Te Kore and the Artiste within: De-Tyrannizing Autistic Viewpoints in Life, Self, and Identity through Creative Methodologies”","authors":"M. Whitehead","doi":"10.1177/16094069231189612","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The voices of the autistic community have been systematically forfeited in research and practice, both as a consequence of the double empathy problem and, as a direct result of albeist methodic approaches to researching and representing autism (Milton, 2012., Goodley, 2016, 2018., Heilker & Yergeau, 2011., Hobson et al, 2022., Ridout, 2017). Methodologically speaking, autism creates challenges for allistic researchers, particularly as there is an associated “exaggerated risk” of researching autistic people and as researchers frequently study and thus experience autism, from etic perspectives (Van De Hoonard, 2016, p. 585). This paper contends that these challenges have resulted in a lack of flexibility in methodologies designed to protect those at risk of harm, creating disproportionate fear and an over-surveillance of autistic research participants, despite their potential. Inertia is a direct consequence of this, which manifests itself twofold. Firstly, as the struggle researchers have in capturing meaningful and authentic autistic representation and secondly, of the methodic implications autistic inertia presents. What is suggested, therefore, is a subversion of homogeneous ways of knowing from the production of quasi-aesthetic representations of autistic voice, favoring those creative methodologies which appreciate that autism is not experienced diachronically. As to capture the realities of contemporary autistic life, dividing practices of ableism must be challenged (Goodley, 2018). Therefore, by centralizing autistic research participants as “insiders” to autistic worlds, researchers will have to lay aside academic habits and rethink, heuristically, how to privilege unobscured autistic voices through transabelism (Garland-Thompson, 2005). For in order to carve out hybrid dilatory spaces from which autistic people can develop their narrative capital, a transableist agenda must be pushed. What will ensue are creative and flexible methodologies that align with social justice beliefs and resist methodic stasis and inertia; as decisions to explore the lifeworlds we experience, as autists, comes with no modus operandi.","PeriodicalId":48220,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231189612","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The voices of the autistic community have been systematically forfeited in research and practice, both as a consequence of the double empathy problem and, as a direct result of albeist methodic approaches to researching and representing autism (Milton, 2012., Goodley, 2016, 2018., Heilker & Yergeau, 2011., Hobson et al, 2022., Ridout, 2017). Methodologically speaking, autism creates challenges for allistic researchers, particularly as there is an associated “exaggerated risk” of researching autistic people and as researchers frequently study and thus experience autism, from etic perspectives (Van De Hoonard, 2016, p. 585). This paper contends that these challenges have resulted in a lack of flexibility in methodologies designed to protect those at risk of harm, creating disproportionate fear and an over-surveillance of autistic research participants, despite their potential. Inertia is a direct consequence of this, which manifests itself twofold. Firstly, as the struggle researchers have in capturing meaningful and authentic autistic representation and secondly, of the methodic implications autistic inertia presents. What is suggested, therefore, is a subversion of homogeneous ways of knowing from the production of quasi-aesthetic representations of autistic voice, favoring those creative methodologies which appreciate that autism is not experienced diachronically. As to capture the realities of contemporary autistic life, dividing practices of ableism must be challenged (Goodley, 2018). Therefore, by centralizing autistic research participants as “insiders” to autistic worlds, researchers will have to lay aside academic habits and rethink, heuristically, how to privilege unobscured autistic voices through transabelism (Garland-Thompson, 2005). For in order to carve out hybrid dilatory spaces from which autistic people can develop their narrative capital, a transableist agenda must be pushed. What will ensue are creative and flexible methodologies that align with social justice beliefs and resist methodic stasis and inertia; as decisions to explore the lifeworlds we experience, as autists, comes with no modus operandi.
“韩国与内在的艺术家:用创造性的方法去压制生活、自我和身份中的自闭观点”
自闭症群体的声音在研究和实践中被系统地剥夺了,这既是双重共情问题的结果,也是研究和代表自闭症的非beist方法的直接结果(Milton, 2012)。, Goodley, 2016, 2018。, Heilker & Yergeau, 2011。, Hobson等人,2022。, Ridout, 2017)。从方法论上讲,自闭症给泛谱系研究人员带来了挑战,特别是因为研究自闭症患者存在相关的“夸大风险”,而且研究人员经常从遗传学的角度研究并因此经历自闭症(Van De Hoonard, 2016,第585页)。这篇论文认为,这些挑战导致了设计用于保护那些有伤害风险的人的方法缺乏灵活性,造成了不成比例的恐惧和对自闭症研究参与者的过度监视,尽管他们有潜力。惯性是这种情况的直接后果,它表现为两方面。首先,研究人员在捕捉有意义和真实的自闭症表征方面所做的努力,其次,自闭症惯性所呈现的方法含义。因此,我们所建议的是,从自闭症声音的准美学表征的生产中颠覆同质的认识方式,支持那些创造性的方法,这些方法认识到自闭症不是历时性的经历。为了捕捉当代自闭症患者生活的现实,必须挑战残疾歧视的划分做法(Goodley, 2018)。因此,通过将自闭症研究参与者集中为自闭症世界的“圈内人”,研究人员将不得不抛开学术习惯,启发式地重新思考如何通过跨标签主义(Garland-Thompson, 2005)来赋予未被遮蔽的自闭症声音以特权。因为,为了开辟出混合的延迟空间,让自闭症患者可以从中发展他们的叙事资本,必须推动一项可转换的议程。随之而来的是创造性和灵活的方法,这些方法与社会正义信念一致,并抵制方法上的停滞和惰性;作为自闭症患者,当我们决定探索我们所经历的生活世界时,没有固定的方法。
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
International Journal of Qualitative Methods
International Journal of Qualitative Methods SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
139
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal Highlights Impact Factor: 5.4 Ranked 5/110 in Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary – SSCI Indexed In: Clarivate Analytics: Social Science Citation Index, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and Scopus Launched In: 2002 Publication is subject to payment of an article processing charge (APC) Submit here International Journal of Qualitative Methods (IJQM) is a peer-reviewed open access journal which focuses on methodological advances, innovations, and insights in qualitative or mixed methods studies. Please see the Aims and Scope tab for further information.
×
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