‘Keen as fuck’: youth participation in qualitative research as ‘parallel projects’

Abstract

Youth researchers continue to pursue the ideals of youth participation in research. This pursuit reflects a broader concern for the problems of participant-researcher power dynamics in qualitative research. Youth researchers develop and adopt a variety of techniques and ethical principles that attempt to position young people as active research participants. However, these methods and principles have not solved the challenges of participation. In this article, I argue that there is a need to accept that some of the power asymmetries of participation might be unsolvable, and to reposition the power relationship between young people and researchers. A central concern in this article is the paradoxically unethical outcomes produced by adult-centric ethics review processes. I argue that youth participation in qualitative research can be understood as parallel projects and that in doing so researchers can value young people’s reasons for participation. In fact, young people might be ‘keen as fuck’ (participant quote) to participate.

Co‐creating youth justice practice with young people: Tackling power dynamics and enabling transformative action

“…We were quick to shed the pursuit of any ideals we may have initially had about their participation, that is, that we would have full participation at each stage of the research process. Rather than viewing this as a reason not to pursue a participatory research approach, we suggest that by documenting the challenges we had to navigate, we have augmented the debate on the tensions of undertaking participatory research with marginalised groups (see Lohmeyer, 2020). While not all 28 young people participated in the workshops (a total of 15 participated, five of whom attended more than one), they each influenced the development of the research through their participation in the earlier stages (interviews and informal conversations); thereby developing participative ownership of specific elements of the project; Franks refers to this as pockets of participation (2011:22).…”

Engaging Youth in the Bipolar Youth Action Project: Community-Based Participatory Research

“…At the same time, academic research team members focused more on enacting research goals. A recent publication in youth participatory research posits that, rather than exercising paternalistic direction over youth peer researchers in the interest of promoting research goals, it can be beneficial to consider youth goals “in parallel” to those of academic researchers: distinct, yet proceeding in the same direction [ 30 ].…”

“…Unequal power differentials are a perennial challenge within participatory research [ 20 , 26 , 30 , 43 ], with academic researchers holding an advantage of greater scholarly knowledge, research experience, and status within research projects [ 44 ]. Peer researchers hold power and expertise in their own right, through lived experience [ 39 , 45 ], but this power may not be broadly acknowledged [ 44 ].…”

“…The potential assets of community-based participatory research approaches in youth mental health research are clear. However, there are particular challenges in participatory research with youth, including difficulties concerning power differentials [ 30 ], problems maintaining engagement [ 31 ], concerns of disclosure and anonymity [ 32 ], and differing research goals between academic and peer research teams [ 30 ].…”

Youth partnerships in suicide prevention research: A failed investigator survey

“…The importance of involving young people with lived experience as active partners in health research is becoming increasingly recognized, with many policy makers and funding bodies now mandating consumer involvement. As a result, more and more studies are published regarding ways of engaging youth in research and making recommendations for the field (e.g., Bevan Jones et al, 2020; Hawke et al, 2018; Lohmeyer, 2020; Tsang et al, 2020). Benefits to youth partnerships include greater relevance of the research question, improved recruitment and retention rates, better long‐term outcomes, and ensuring that interventions and methodologies are youth‐friendly (Faithfull et al, 2019).…”