多机构参与研究中的政治和伦理困境:缓冲区的作用

Q1 Social Sciences
Hayley Bennett, R. Brunner
{"title":"多机构参与研究中的政治和伦理困境:缓冲区的作用","authors":"Hayley Bennett, R. Brunner","doi":"10.1177/20597991221129775","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The ‘buffer zone’ frames the contested space that university researchers must persistently animate and mediate to successfully pursue participatory research with public and third sector partners. This article explores this conceptualisation through a consideration of political and ethical dilemmas in participatory research practice. We contend that participatory researchers must identify, respond to and reflect on everyday and momentous dilemmas by combining technical, relational and political skills. We illustrate this by drawing on extensive collaborative action research conducted with public service partners as part of the What Works Scotland programme (2014–2019). By critically reflecting on university research realities, this article shares insights into complex multi-agency participatory research dilemmas; offers methodological, conceptual, ethical and political evidence to help university researchers navigate such contexts, notably by engaging the buffer zone and finally, considers how universities and research funders should better support participatory research practices.","PeriodicalId":32579,"journal":{"name":"Methodological Innovations","volume":"15 1","pages":"387 - 399"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Political and ethical dilemmas in multi-agency participatory research: The role of the buffer zone\",\"authors\":\"Hayley Bennett, R. Brunner\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20597991221129775\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The ‘buffer zone’ frames the contested space that university researchers must persistently animate and mediate to successfully pursue participatory research with public and third sector partners. This article explores this conceptualisation through a consideration of political and ethical dilemmas in participatory research practice. We contend that participatory researchers must identify, respond to and reflect on everyday and momentous dilemmas by combining technical, relational and political skills. We illustrate this by drawing on extensive collaborative action research conducted with public service partners as part of the What Works Scotland programme (2014–2019). By critically reflecting on university research realities, this article shares insights into complex multi-agency participatory research dilemmas; offers methodological, conceptual, ethical and political evidence to help university researchers navigate such contexts, notably by engaging the buffer zone and finally, considers how universities and research funders should better support participatory research practices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32579,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Methodological Innovations\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"387 - 399\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Methodological Innovations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20597991221129775\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Methodological Innovations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20597991221129775","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

“缓冲区”构成了一个有争议的空间,大学研究人员必须坚持不懈地推动和调解这个空间,才能成功地与公共和第三部门合作伙伴进行参与式研究。本文通过对参与式研究实践中的政治和伦理困境的思考,探讨了这一概念。我们认为,参与式研究人员必须结合技术、关系和政治技能,识别、应对和反思日常和重大的困境。我们通过与公共服务合作伙伴进行的广泛合作行动研究来说明这一点,该研究是苏格兰工作计划(2014-2019)的一部分。通过批判性地反思大学研究的现实,本文分享了对复杂的多机构参与式研究困境的见解;提供方法论、概念论、伦理和政治证据,帮助大学研究人员驾驭这种环境,特别是通过参与缓冲区,并最终考虑大学和研究资助者应如何更好地支持参与式研究实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Political and ethical dilemmas in multi-agency participatory research: The role of the buffer zone
The ‘buffer zone’ frames the contested space that university researchers must persistently animate and mediate to successfully pursue participatory research with public and third sector partners. This article explores this conceptualisation through a consideration of political and ethical dilemmas in participatory research practice. We contend that participatory researchers must identify, respond to and reflect on everyday and momentous dilemmas by combining technical, relational and political skills. We illustrate this by drawing on extensive collaborative action research conducted with public service partners as part of the What Works Scotland programme (2014–2019). By critically reflecting on university research realities, this article shares insights into complex multi-agency participatory research dilemmas; offers methodological, conceptual, ethical and political evidence to help university researchers navigate such contexts, notably by engaging the buffer zone and finally, considers how universities and research funders should better support participatory research practices.
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
Methodological Innovations
Methodological Innovations Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
15 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书