Caught up in power: Exploring discursive frictions in community research

IF 0.9 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Cindy Hanson, Adeyemi O. Ogunade
{"title":"Caught up in power: Exploring discursive frictions in community research","authors":"Cindy Hanson, Adeyemi O. Ogunade","doi":"10.5130/IJCRE.V9I1.4729","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article outlines the debate around the emancipatory claims of community-based research (CBR) and identifies discursive frictions as a pivotal point upon which much of CBR practice revolves. Using a Foucauldian theoretical lens, we suggest that CBR is neither inherently emancipatory nor repressive, but that research outcomes are more often a product of power asymmetries in CBR relationships. To illustrate how power asymmetries in research relationships produce discursive frictions, several studies from our work and the literature are presented. The article provides examples of CBR relationships between the researcher and community members and relationships within the community to illustrate how power asymmetries and discursive frictions in these relationships dynamically influence research outcomes and thus alert researchers to the need to address power asymmetries not just before initiating CBR projects, but during CBR projects as well. We interrogate how power asymmetries and discursive frictions operate and are constructed in CBR in an attempt to highlight how research might be conducted more effectively and ethically. Finally, we indicate that some of the tensions and challenges associated with CBR might be ameliorated by the use of participatory facilitation methodologies, such as photo-voice and story circle discussion groups, that draw attention to power asymmetries and purposefully use more creative participatory tools to restructure power relationships and ultimately address the inequities that exist in the research process. Because CBR is continually caught up in power dynamics, we hope that highlighting some examples might offer an opportunity for increased dialogue and critical reflection on its claims of empowerment and emancipation. Keywords: discursive friction, Foucault, participatory methodologies, power asymmetries, research relationships, emancipatory research","PeriodicalId":53967,"journal":{"name":"Gateways-International Journal of Community Research and Engagement","volume":"15 1","pages":"41-57"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gateways-International Journal of Community Research and Engagement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5130/IJCRE.V9I1.4729","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

This article outlines the debate around the emancipatory claims of community-based research (CBR) and identifies discursive frictions as a pivotal point upon which much of CBR practice revolves. Using a Foucauldian theoretical lens, we suggest that CBR is neither inherently emancipatory nor repressive, but that research outcomes are more often a product of power asymmetries in CBR relationships. To illustrate how power asymmetries in research relationships produce discursive frictions, several studies from our work and the literature are presented. The article provides examples of CBR relationships between the researcher and community members and relationships within the community to illustrate how power asymmetries and discursive frictions in these relationships dynamically influence research outcomes and thus alert researchers to the need to address power asymmetries not just before initiating CBR projects, but during CBR projects as well. We interrogate how power asymmetries and discursive frictions operate and are constructed in CBR in an attempt to highlight how research might be conducted more effectively and ethically. Finally, we indicate that some of the tensions and challenges associated with CBR might be ameliorated by the use of participatory facilitation methodologies, such as photo-voice and story circle discussion groups, that draw attention to power asymmetries and purposefully use more creative participatory tools to restructure power relationships and ultimately address the inequities that exist in the research process. Because CBR is continually caught up in power dynamics, we hope that highlighting some examples might offer an opportunity for increased dialogue and critical reflection on its claims of empowerment and emancipation. Keywords: discursive friction, Foucault, participatory methodologies, power asymmetries, research relationships, emancipatory research
陷入权力:探索社区研究中的话语摩擦
本文概述了围绕以社区为基础的研究(CBR)的解放主张的争论,并将话语摩擦确定为许多CBR实践所围绕的关键点。运用福柯式的理论视角,我们认为CBR本身既不是解放性的,也不是压抑性的,但研究结果往往是CBR关系中权力不对称的产物。为了说明研究关系中的权力不对称如何产生话语摩擦,本文介绍了我们的工作和文献中的几项研究。本文提供了研究人员与社区成员之间的CBR关系以及社区内部关系的示例,以说明这些关系中的权力不对称和话语摩擦如何动态影响研究成果,从而提醒研究人员不仅需要在启动CBR项目之前解决权力不对称问题,而且需要在CBR项目中解决。我们探究权力不对称和话语摩擦如何在CBR中运作和构建,试图突出如何更有效和更道德地进行研究。最后,我们指出,与CBR相关的一些紧张和挑战可能会通过使用参与性促进方法得到改善,例如照片声音和故事圈讨论小组,这些方法引起人们对权力不对称的关注,并有针对性地使用更具创造性的参与性工具来重构权力关系,最终解决研究过程中存在的不平等问题。由于CBR不断地陷入权力动力学,我们希望突出一些例子可能提供一个机会,以增加对话和对其授权和解放主张的批判性反思。关键词:话语摩擦,福柯,参与式方法论,权力不对称,研究关系,解放研究
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
28.60%
发文量
5
审稿时长
34 weeks
×
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