Culturally anchored research: Quandaries, guidelines, and exemplars for community psychology.

Abstract

Community psychologists have long been interested in studying phenomena in diverse cultural groups, whether they are defined by differences such as ethnicity, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, disabilities, or combinations of these and other characteristics. The meanings of culture are multiple; Rohner (1984) has identified four elements common to all cultures as conceptualized by anthropologists and cross-cultural psychologists. First, human beings develop in a cultural context, and thus their behavior is mediated and formed by culture. Second, socialization processes transmit values, norms, and behaviors of a culture from one generation to the next through social processes. Third, many aspects of culture cannot be overtly described or measured, such as "a way of life" and "heritage." These aspects are transmitted to individuals as they are socialized. Fourth, the last element common to all cultures is that one can find evidence of cultures in patterns and social regularities among members of a given culture.Overall, these elements suggest that culture is not simply a characteristic such as ethnic background. It is also the context in which individuals live or work and their shared interpretations of that context. The cultural context and interpretation of the context influence individuals' behaviors and values. There are dimensions of culture that are more salient than others depending on an individual's context. Given these cultural elements, Hughes, Seidman, and Williams (1993) suggested that culture has a pervasive influence in the research process. In community psychology, the guiding principle that has been used in developing culturally anchored methodology is that culture providesThe order of the first three authors is alphabetical; each contributed equally to this manuscript. We appreciate the contributions of Fabricio Balcazar, Jean Bartruel, Pennie G. Foster-Fishman, and David Henry to the ideas presented in this chapter.

“There’s Gotta Be Some Give and Take”

“…For example, all parties should take inventory of their own research competencies, skills, and training. Researchers have documented that meaningful participation is promoted when all parties possess some common research knowledge and practice (Harper & Salina, 2000; Keys, McMahon, Sanchez, London, & Abdul-Adil, 2004). Importantly, building community partners’ research capacity should be determined as desirable first.…”

Is Participation Having an Impact?

“…In their participatory research approach, Keys et al (2004) consider the controlling relationships that marginalized individuals often experience. The program participants that we interviewed exemplify this experience.…”

A Vision for the Future of Community Psychology Education and Training

“…Working with marginalized populations requires that we build genuine, trusting, and long‐term relationships, often based on having someone from these communities as part of our team (Rappaport, ; Jordan et al., ; Viola, Olson, Fromm Reed, Jimenez & Smith, ). If we are going to be effective in addressing the needs of underserved and marginalized communities, we need to reach those communities not only in the work that we do, but by recruiting from these communities to apply and enroll into our undergraduate and graduate programs (Keys, McMahon, Sánchez, London & Abdul‐Adil, ). In some programs, these efforts are made by particular faculty, and in other programs, there is a program‐level focus on recruiting students who have had similar life experiences as the community members with whom we work.…”