Brushed under the carpet: Examining the complexities of participatory research

Abstract

Participatory research is sometimes difficult and risky, but there is a paucity of opportunities – and some reluctance – to reflect on its challenging aspects. In this article, we present subjective accounts of our everyday experiences of conducting participatory research as women researchers. We focus on four themes from our combined research experiences to explore some of the frustrations we encounter in participatory research. We argue that it is crucial to identify, reflect upon and address such aspects in academic outputs to broaden debates and scholarly discussions. We offer these reflections, and related strategies, as a contribution to critical debates on participatory research practice.

Reflexão metodológica sobre o trabalho de campo de pesquisa internacional multicêntrica Brasil-Canadá

“…In this collaborative project between members of the academy and the community for the production of knowledge with the potential for social changes, challenges imposed by gender identity and sexuality are foreseen, even requiring the negotiation of social roles. As warned by Lenette et al 29 participatory research is associated with social movements -as reported herewhich are generally conducted by female scientists who experience the impact of their gender on fieldwork. Being female scientists in participatory research brings investigators closer to the feminist perspective, of which the ultimate goals focus on caring for the other, empowerment, and social justice.…”

“…Humanization as a concept-experience provides the basis for expanding its ethical-aesthetic-political use in the field of obstetric care through a (new) analytical-evaluative look, in order to (trans)form the realities of work and care. 15 This proposal is aligned with the gap identified in Brazilian health research 29 regarding the distance in know-how, that is, a Display 5. Recommendations for a multi-site international research action plan.…”

Linking Disaster Risk Reduction and Healthcare in Locations with Limited Accessibility: Challenges and Opportunities of Participatory Research

“…Data can be compiled, compared, abstracted, and analyzed, leading to fundamental theories of data involving aspects such as scaling, measuring, categorizing, and connecting the information [ 74 , 75 , 76 ]. These decisions and interpretations lead to bias [ 50 ], meaning that data cannot be taken as neutral or objective, with some authors even questioning what data would be legitimate [ 57 ]. As [ 77 ] (p. 45) notes, “Data is in the eye of the beholder”.…”

“…The roles of academics and of academia within participatory research have been called into question [ 55 , 56 ] along with the risks and alleged inconsistencies which emerge due to the realities of dealing with people during fieldwork [ 57 ]. Based on these cautions, both healthcare and disaster researchers query how participatory such research necessarily is and especially where improvements ought to be enacted, because they document similar challenges in applying it for healthcare, DRR, their links, and their broader contexts [ 58 , 59 , 60 ].…”

Exploring the boundaries of ‘good’ Participatory Action Research in times of increasing popularity: dealing with constraints in local policy for digital inclusion

“…PAR scholars place the assessment of quality and critical reflection high on the agenda (Dedding and Slager 2013; International Collaboration for Participatory Health Research (ICPHR) 2013; Cook et al 2017;Abma et al 2019;Banks and Brydon-Miller 2019;Abma et al 2017;Lennette et al 2019). These scholars point to the ideal and rhetoric of participation and call for creative solutions, asking PAR practitioners to engage in selfanalysis of the tensions they encounter in conducting democratic collaborative research.…”