Chloé Dierckx, Lynn Hendricks, Sara Coemans, K. Hannes
{"title":"第三个领域:在基于社区的参与性研究实践中重新定义盟友关系","authors":"Chloé Dierckx, Lynn Hendricks, Sara Coemans, K. Hannes","doi":"10.1080/14780887.2020.1854402","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT A central tenet in the conduct of community-based participatory research is the establishment of an allyship between researchers and other actors, a relation that ideally should be reciprocal in nature. In theory, true allyship would stand for a mutual search for understanding and potential transformation of life circumstances through investigation and argumentation, in the absence of coercive force or preset boundaries. However, in practice, researchers often behave as privileged guests that enter a particular local reality at predefined moments in time and leave when they are satisfied with what they got. We critically reflected on the challenge of developing equitable and sustainable relationships that cut across time-space dimensions of collective engagement and action in community-based research. We offer a critique of the project-based logic of participatory research practice and how this may unwittingly affirm actions that work against the concept of true allyship. We advocate for the creation of a ‘third sphere’ that unfolds itself as an experimental laboratory for constructive and disruptive thought, wherein every stakeholder is equally subjected to the centripetal force of meeting each other in the middle. This increases the likelihood that unanticipated and new ways of thinking and acting will emerge from the collective.","PeriodicalId":48420,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research in Psychology","volume":"18 1","pages":"473 - 497"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14780887.2020.1854402","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The third sphere: Reconceptualising allyship in community-based participatory research praxis\",\"authors\":\"Chloé Dierckx, Lynn Hendricks, Sara Coemans, K. Hannes\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14780887.2020.1854402\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT A central tenet in the conduct of community-based participatory research is the establishment of an allyship between researchers and other actors, a relation that ideally should be reciprocal in nature. In theory, true allyship would stand for a mutual search for understanding and potential transformation of life circumstances through investigation and argumentation, in the absence of coercive force or preset boundaries. However, in practice, researchers often behave as privileged guests that enter a particular local reality at predefined moments in time and leave when they are satisfied with what they got. We critically reflected on the challenge of developing equitable and sustainable relationships that cut across time-space dimensions of collective engagement and action in community-based research. We offer a critique of the project-based logic of participatory research practice and how this may unwittingly affirm actions that work against the concept of true allyship. We advocate for the creation of a ‘third sphere’ that unfolds itself as an experimental laboratory for constructive and disruptive thought, wherein every stakeholder is equally subjected to the centripetal force of meeting each other in the middle. This increases the likelihood that unanticipated and new ways of thinking and acting will emerge from the collective.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48420,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Qualitative Research in Psychology\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"473 - 497\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14780887.2020.1854402\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Qualitative Research in Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1854402\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Research in Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1854402","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The third sphere: Reconceptualising allyship in community-based participatory research praxis
ABSTRACT A central tenet in the conduct of community-based participatory research is the establishment of an allyship between researchers and other actors, a relation that ideally should be reciprocal in nature. In theory, true allyship would stand for a mutual search for understanding and potential transformation of life circumstances through investigation and argumentation, in the absence of coercive force or preset boundaries. However, in practice, researchers often behave as privileged guests that enter a particular local reality at predefined moments in time and leave when they are satisfied with what they got. We critically reflected on the challenge of developing equitable and sustainable relationships that cut across time-space dimensions of collective engagement and action in community-based research. We offer a critique of the project-based logic of participatory research practice and how this may unwittingly affirm actions that work against the concept of true allyship. We advocate for the creation of a ‘third sphere’ that unfolds itself as an experimental laboratory for constructive and disruptive thought, wherein every stakeholder is equally subjected to the centripetal force of meeting each other in the middle. This increases the likelihood that unanticipated and new ways of thinking and acting will emerge from the collective.
期刊介绍:
Qualitative Research in Psychology is an international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes high-quality, original research. It aims to become the primary forum for qualitative researchers in all areas of psychology, including cognitive, social, developmental, educational, clinical, health, and forensic psychology. The journal also welcomes psychologically relevant qualitative research from other disciplines. It seeks innovative and pioneering work that advances the field of qualitative research in psychology.
The journal has published state-of-the-art debates on various research approaches, methods, and analytic techniques, such as discourse analysis, interpretative phenomenological analysis, visual analyses, and online research. It has also explored the role of qualitative research in fields like psychosocial studies and feminist psychology. Additionally, the journal has provided informative articles on ethics, transcription, interviewee recruitment, and has introduced innovative research techniques like photovoice, autoethnography, template analysis, and psychogeography.
While the predominant audience consists of psychology professionals using qualitative research methods in academic, clinical, or occupational settings, the journal has an interdisciplinary focus. It aims to raise awareness of psychology as a social science that encompasses various qualitative approaches.
In summary, Qualitative Research in Psychology is a leading forum for qualitative researchers in psychology. It publishes cutting-edge research, explores different research approaches and techniques, and encourages interdisciplinary collaboration.