{"title":"论恢复性有效性:调整探究方向,以实现和平、正义和康复","authors":"Giovanni Dazzo","doi":"10.46743/2160-3715/2024.5690","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This work begins with a simple premise: (re)imagining a healing and restorative space for inquiry. Drawing on the work of John H. Stanfield II (2006), who first suggested the restorative functions of qualitative inquiry, this manuscript forms the basis for an axiologically-actuated conceptual model, restorative validity, which asks what it would take to (re)humanize researcher and researched alike. Beginning with the knowledge of co-researchers in our collective, the formulation of this framework was organized to understand the importance of orienting our research and ourselves toward relationships, justice, and liberation. After this review, I discuss a series of reflexive questions, rooted in the trans-disciplinarity of restorative justice, which researchers and practitioners can use to consider the potential and real harms in/from inquiry. By unsettling expertise and examining the implicit intersection of validity and ethics, I question: What would it take to be part of a research project that leaves those involved feeling greater than how we have all been defined? What happens when we do not question what our research does for/to us and our participants, especially when it spurs intellectual debate with little benefit in the way of peace, justice, or healing of past traumas and loss?","PeriodicalId":510558,"journal":{"name":"The Qualitative Report","volume":"181 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On Restorative Validity: Reorienting Inquiry Toward Peace, Justice, and Healing\",\"authors\":\"Giovanni Dazzo\",\"doi\":\"10.46743/2160-3715/2024.5690\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This work begins with a simple premise: (re)imagining a healing and restorative space for inquiry. Drawing on the work of John H. Stanfield II (2006), who first suggested the restorative functions of qualitative inquiry, this manuscript forms the basis for an axiologically-actuated conceptual model, restorative validity, which asks what it would take to (re)humanize researcher and researched alike. Beginning with the knowledge of co-researchers in our collective, the formulation of this framework was organized to understand the importance of orienting our research and ourselves toward relationships, justice, and liberation. After this review, I discuss a series of reflexive questions, rooted in the trans-disciplinarity of restorative justice, which researchers and practitioners can use to consider the potential and real harms in/from inquiry. By unsettling expertise and examining the implicit intersection of validity and ethics, I question: What would it take to be part of a research project that leaves those involved feeling greater than how we have all been defined? What happens when we do not question what our research does for/to us and our participants, especially when it spurs intellectual debate with little benefit in the way of peace, justice, or healing of past traumas and loss?\",\"PeriodicalId\":510558,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Qualitative Report\",\"volume\":\"181 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Qualitative Report\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2024.5690\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Qualitative Report","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2024.5690","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
这项工作从一个简单的前提开始:(重新)想象一个治疗和恢复性的探究空间。约翰-H-斯坦菲尔德二世(John H. Stanfield II,2006 年)首次提出了定性研究的修复功能,本手稿借鉴了他的研究成果,形成了一个以公理为动力的概念模型--"修复有效性"(restorative validity)--的基础。从我们集体中的共同研究者的知识开始,这个框架的制定被组织起来,以理解我们的研究和我们自己面向关系、正义和解放的重要性。回顾之后,我将讨论一系列反思性问题,这些问题植根于恢复性正义的跨学科性,研究者和实践者可以利用这些问题来考虑调查中/调查后的潜在和实际伤害。通过对专业知识的颠覆和对有效性与伦理道德之间隐含交叉的审视,我提出了这样一个问题:如何才能参与到研究项目中去,让参与其中的人感到自己比我们被定义的更伟大?如果我们不质疑我们的研究对我们和我们的参与者有什么影响,特别是当研究引发了智力辩论,但对和平、正义或治愈过去的创伤和损失却没有什么益处时,会发生什么?
On Restorative Validity: Reorienting Inquiry Toward Peace, Justice, and Healing
This work begins with a simple premise: (re)imagining a healing and restorative space for inquiry. Drawing on the work of John H. Stanfield II (2006), who first suggested the restorative functions of qualitative inquiry, this manuscript forms the basis for an axiologically-actuated conceptual model, restorative validity, which asks what it would take to (re)humanize researcher and researched alike. Beginning with the knowledge of co-researchers in our collective, the formulation of this framework was organized to understand the importance of orienting our research and ourselves toward relationships, justice, and liberation. After this review, I discuss a series of reflexive questions, rooted in the trans-disciplinarity of restorative justice, which researchers and practitioners can use to consider the potential and real harms in/from inquiry. By unsettling expertise and examining the implicit intersection of validity and ethics, I question: What would it take to be part of a research project that leaves those involved feeling greater than how we have all been defined? What happens when we do not question what our research does for/to us and our participants, especially when it spurs intellectual debate with little benefit in the way of peace, justice, or healing of past traumas and loss?