Using Dyadic Interviews to Explore Recovery as Collaborative Practices: Challenging the Epistemic Norm of the Single Person Perspective

Abstract

The method dyadic interviews involves interviewing a pair of participants, focusing explicitly on the interaction between them and how it develops data. Dyadic interviews with persons who are involved in ongoing, working relationships can be a feasible means of exploring research topics that are related to collaboration and collaborative practices. The concept of recovery is considered highly relevant to different kinds of relationship-based practices, involving a person and context centered shift within the field of mental health. What is referred to as recovery-oriented practices, is best understood as developed through collaboration. This involves a shift in the understanding of who beholds the expert knowledge and what knowledge “is,” acknowledging the importance of including different types and sources of knowledge when new knowledge is to be developed. In this paper we explore how dyadic interviews with pairs consisting of mental health service users and professionals can facilitate co-created knowledge about recovery as collaborative practices through collaboration. We argue that dyadic interviews can enable development of dialogic and collaborative knowledge, potentially blurring and challenging boundaries between knowledge-bases and roles.

Dyadic Interviews versus In-Depth Individual Interviews in Exploring Food Choices of Norwegian Older Adults: A Comparison of Two Qualitative Methods

“…What follows is a brief outline of the power relationships that might present between two members of a dyad. It is widely acknowledged that one possible way to neutralize the power dynamic is by asking the participant to identify and invite the person they considered most helpful [12,30]. At the same time, power relationships within families (parent and child) seem inevitable.…”

“…Food choice involves an isolated choice, but what a person decides to eat and how they arrive at a decision is often a form of collaborative decision with others in everyday life, for example, significant others, family members, or work [11]. It has been suggested that the use of dyadic interviews in exploring research topics related to collaboration can contribute to the co-creation of new knowledge [12].…”

Part I: Dynamics of Recovery: A Meta-Synthesis Exploring the Nature of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Recovery

“…This also includes how social conditions, inequity, and marginalization related to such issues affect people's lives and possibilities [19][20][21]. With its subjective, collaborative, and relational nature, recovery can be understood as a dynamic and open concept that cannot be "implemented" in services [15,22,23]. More specifically, in a research context, this could be perceived as shifting the focus from aiming to define what recovery is to describing and exploring how it can be understood in terms of personal and social contexts.…”

Mutual learning: exploring collaboration, knowledge and roles in the development of recovery-oriented services. A hermeneutic-phenomenological study

“…Based in different traditions and practices and having different goals, this broad division of definitions implies that in understanding recovery and recovery-orientation, there is a need to clarify from which position one is speaking. In this study, we position our understanding of recovery and recovery orientation of services within a critical mental health paradigm in line with the social justice roots of the original recovery movement (Beresford et al, 2016 ; Davidson, 2016 ; Klevan et al, 2020 ; Pilgrim, 2009 ; Rose, 2014 ). In a broader perspective, the original recovery movement paradigm can also be seen as part of the de-institutionalization that has characterized mental health and substance abuse services in the Western world since the 1950s (Davidson, 2021 ; Topor et al, 2016 ).…”

“…(Hansen et al, 2020 ; Reid et al, 2020 ; Topor, 2021 ; Topor et al, 2011 ). Within the context of community services, developing helpful strategies that can support the service user in resuming a meaningful life and valued roles involves a relationship with professional helpers based on core values such as role-blurring, balancing of power, and exchange and negotiation of skills, expertise, and various types of knowledge (Klevan et al, 2020 ; Ness et al, 2014 ). Rather than being perceived as “expert/helper” and “help-receiver,” professionals and service users are considered collaborators, working together in a dynamic relationship, where they co-produce knowledge and practices about recovery and helpful help in each unique case based on a variety of expertise and experiences (Kidd et al, 2016 ; Klevan et al, 2020 ; Ness et al, 2014 ).…”