期望、紧张和中介:南非社区参与健康研究的话语分析

Q2 Social Sciences
Sonja Klingberg, Catherine E. Draper
{"title":"期望、紧张和中介:南非社区参与健康研究的话语分析","authors":"Sonja Klingberg,&nbsp;Catherine E. Draper","doi":"10.1002/eahr.60012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Research is increasingly claimed to be done in collaboration with communities, but community members may have entirely different expectations of engagement and research participation than what typically follows the logic of academia. In South Africa, intersecting inequalities further complicate relationships with communities and stakeholders. To understand how different actors view and construct the relationships between academic institutions and communities, we undertook a multiperspective discourse analysis. We conducted 11 in-depth interviews with 12 participants categorized as researchers, community representatives, and community members. These interviews reflect three interconnected discourses: expectations, tensions, and brokerage. <i>Expectations</i> pattern intergroup dynamics, such as community members’ expectations of research benefits, while <i>tensions</i> primarily capture challenging relationships between different research actors. Our analysis also illustrates how, in the absence of comprehensive institutional support, community engagement relies on <i>brokerage</i> by community representatives, and how this reliance disproportionately burdens them. There is a need to lessen this ethical burden and invite community input without also burdening community members and representatives with the challenges of academia. Our findings also have wider relevance for community-based health research because engagement practices are often hindered by institutional and structural factors.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36829,"journal":{"name":"Ethics & human research","volume":"47 2","pages":"2-15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eahr.60012","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Expectations, Tensions, and Brokerage: A Discourse Analysis of Community Engagement with Health Research in South Africa\",\"authors\":\"Sonja Klingberg,&nbsp;Catherine E. Draper\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/eahr.60012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Research is increasingly claimed to be done in collaboration with communities, but community members may have entirely different expectations of engagement and research participation than what typically follows the logic of academia. In South Africa, intersecting inequalities further complicate relationships with communities and stakeholders. To understand how different actors view and construct the relationships between academic institutions and communities, we undertook a multiperspective discourse analysis. We conducted 11 in-depth interviews with 12 participants categorized as researchers, community representatives, and community members. These interviews reflect three interconnected discourses: expectations, tensions, and brokerage. <i>Expectations</i> pattern intergroup dynamics, such as community members’ expectations of research benefits, while <i>tensions</i> primarily capture challenging relationships between different research actors. Our analysis also illustrates how, in the absence of comprehensive institutional support, community engagement relies on <i>brokerage</i> by community representatives, and how this reliance disproportionately burdens them. There is a need to lessen this ethical burden and invite community input without also burdening community members and representatives with the challenges of academia. Our findings also have wider relevance for community-based health research because engagement practices are often hindered by institutional and structural factors.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36829,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethics & human research\",\"volume\":\"47 2\",\"pages\":\"2-15\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eahr.60012\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethics & human research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eahr.60012\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics & human research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eahr.60012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

越来越多的人声称研究是与社区合作完成的,但社区成员对参与和研究的期望可能与学术界通常遵循的逻辑完全不同。在南非,相互交织的不平等使与社区和利益攸关方的关系进一步复杂化。为了理解不同行为者如何看待和构建学术机构与社区之间的关系,我们进行了多视角话语分析。我们对研究人员、社区代表和社区成员等12名参与者进行了11次深度访谈。这些访谈反映了三个相互关联的话语:期望、紧张和中介。期望模式群体间动态,如社区成员对研究利益的期望,而紧张主要捕获不同研究参与者之间具有挑战性的关系。我们的分析还说明,在缺乏全面机构支持的情况下,社区参与如何依赖社区代表的中介,以及这种依赖如何不成比例地给社区代表带来负担。有必要减轻这种伦理负担,并邀请社区投入,同时又不让社区成员和代表承担学术界的挑战。我们的研究结果也与基于社区的健康研究具有更广泛的相关性,因为参与实践往往受到体制和结构性因素的阻碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Expectations, Tensions, and Brokerage: A Discourse Analysis of Community Engagement with Health Research in South Africa

Expectations, Tensions, and Brokerage: A Discourse Analysis of Community Engagement with Health Research in South Africa

Research is increasingly claimed to be done in collaboration with communities, but community members may have entirely different expectations of engagement and research participation than what typically follows the logic of academia. In South Africa, intersecting inequalities further complicate relationships with communities and stakeholders. To understand how different actors view and construct the relationships between academic institutions and communities, we undertook a multiperspective discourse analysis. We conducted 11 in-depth interviews with 12 participants categorized as researchers, community representatives, and community members. These interviews reflect three interconnected discourses: expectations, tensions, and brokerage. Expectations pattern intergroup dynamics, such as community members’ expectations of research benefits, while tensions primarily capture challenging relationships between different research actors. Our analysis also illustrates how, in the absence of comprehensive institutional support, community engagement relies on brokerage by community representatives, and how this reliance disproportionately burdens them. There is a need to lessen this ethical burden and invite community input without also burdening community members and representatives with the challenges of academia. Our findings also have wider relevance for community-based health research because engagement practices are often hindered by institutional and structural factors.

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
Ethics & human research
Ethics & human research Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信