scholarly journals Situating Vulnerability in Research: Implications for Researcher Transformation and Methodological Innovation

Author(s):  
Joyce Arditti

In this paper, I broaden definitions pertaining to vulnerable participants and elaborate on issues in conducting research with justice-involved individuals and their families. I explore how special human subjects protections may inadvertently silence participants and further marginalize them, along with the social inequality that characterizes “at risk” research populations. Finally, I discuss how vulnerability can invite researcher transformation and methodological innovation and highlight the value of researcher reflexivity, community based participatory research and mixed methods approaches.

Author(s):  
Isibel Moreno

The following is a succinct review of the book: Research Design: Quantitative, Qualitative, Mixed Methods, Arts-Based, and Community-Based Participatory Research Approaches, written by Patricia Leavy and published in 2017. This review covers topics such as the book’s successful depiction of the basic concepts encompassed in research design for the social and behavioral sciences, the setup of the chapters, discussions about the author’s inclusion of Review Stops interweaved in each chapter, as well as the author’s discussions of social justice and ethical considerations for each topic explained in the book. In addition, there are brief notes on the author’s expertise in the field of research and a list of her other published works. Lastly, this review offers a recommendation to readers, students and professors alike, to consider this title in their journey towards understanding and/or explaining the basics of quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based and community-based participatory research design methods.


2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-61
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Heckel ◽  
Crystal Dea Moore

This article describes one small BSW program's engagement in community-based participatory research (CBPR) in which the college community was the focus of the social change effort and social work undergraduates were the research partners. Over a 3-year period students engaged college community stakeholders, collected data, and presented findings on student alcohol use and abuse to promote discussion and inclusion of harm reduction strategies in the college response to this issue. The project resulted in an ongoing dialogue among the student researchers and administration regarding revisions to the campus alcohol policy. Written from the perspectives of a student researcher and faculty mentor, an overview of CBPR as a research method is presented, associated challenges discussed, a case study using the method summarized, and suggestions for implementing this pedagogy are presented. CBPR conceptualized this way offers opportunities for students to engage more fully with research concepts while promoting social change on their campuses.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (s1) ◽  
pp. 96-96
Author(s):  
Karen D. Calhoun ◽  
Kent Key ◽  
E. Yvonne Lewis ◽  
Susan J Woolford ◽  
E. Hill DeLoney ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: o To review the community’s recommendations on how to rebuild trust in the Flint community. o To review effective community engagement strategies utilized with the Flint Special Projects for project conceptualization, participant recruitment, data analysis, project oversight, and dissemination. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The study population includes nearly two hundred residents representing seniors, youth and diverse ethnicities recruited to participate in eleven focus group meetings. The population also represents the general public who attended informational meetings in Flint, Michigan to learn about the crisis and allow residents to voice their opinions and concerns during the onset of the crisis. The project is a mixed methods community based participatory research effort that utilized community decision making in all phases of the effort such as pre-conception, implementation, dissemination and advocacy to encourage the community’s recommendations are adopted at policy and institutional responsiveness levels. It includes three community engaged research efforts: (project 1) A qualitative analysis of community sentiment provided during 17 recorded legislative, media and community events, and (projects 2-3) two mixed methods efforts utilizing purposive sampling of stakeholders whose voice may not have been heard. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The project presents a qualitative analysis of the community’s voice during the onset of the man-made disaster when the community first became aware of the emergency manager’s plans to switch the water source. It also reflects current perspectives of community voice since the projects are scheduled to end late February 2019. Findings from a trust measure administered to nearly two hundred residents will be presented, along with a qualitative analysis of focus group findings among segments of the population (seniors, youth, and diverse ethnicities) who may have been left out of narratives on the water crisis. Finally, the project will compare empowerment and resiliency approaches being utilized in Flint, Michigan to recover from the disaster with other approaches grounded in literature and theory. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Communities of color often experience social determinants of health which negatively impact their health, well-being and human rights. Some Flint citizens are experiencing negative health consequences (i.e., rashes, brain and behavioral sequelle, fertility, etc.) as a result of the disaster, and are uncertain of health outcomes in the future. This is the first project to rigorously document and analyze levels of trust and mistrust in the city of Flint since the water disaster occurred. The qualitative research will guide future clinical research that will benefit this traumatized community experiencing high levels of mistrust (i.e., government, elected officials, etc.). The community engaged methodology involved residents and study participants in all phases of the project including project oversight, validating and analyzing data, and dissemination. This methodology will contribute to existing literature and theory on community based participatory research, community engaged research, team science and citizen science. The approaches empowered a call to action among residents, for example, seniors who attended two senior focus group sessions shared “they are hopeful and have a purpose,” resulting in the creation of a council (with officers) at their housing complex to advocate for the well-being of seniors during the recovery process. Recruitment methodologies were extremely successful due to resident level trust in community leaders and community partner organizations. Finally, the project’s examination of approaches encouraging empowerment and resiliency will provide lessons learned for other communities challenged with crisis.


2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 172-177
Author(s):  
Whitney Boling ◽  
Kathryn Berlin ◽  
Rhonda N. Rahn ◽  
Jody L. Vogelzang ◽  
Gayle Walter

The institutional review board (IRB) process is often protracted and can be a source of frustration, especially when you want your research and publications to move apace. However, because of historical events, the IRB is an important requirement for conducting research with human participants and is regulated by federal oversite. When conducting research as part of a pedagogical study, it is important to identify which level of IRB review (exempt, expedited, or full board) is required. The purpose of this article is to highlight IRB basics within the United States for pedagogy research. Although there are guidelines internationally, this article specifically focuses on U.S. IRBs, including a brief history of the IRB, pedagogical and community-based participatory research, IRB review, tips for IRB submissions, and example case studies.


Author(s):  
David E. Jones ◽  
Robin Lindquist-Grantz ◽  
Melissa DeJonckheere

The aim of the paper was to methodologically review the intersection of mixed methods research (MMR) and community-based participatory research (CBPR) in the field of mental health research. We classify this intersecting approach as MMCBPR. The methodological review of empirical literature was conducted between October 2017 and March 2020 of full-text articles in Scopus, Pubmed, ProQuest Central, Web of Science, and EBSCOhost search engine databases in the English language. Twenty-nine studies meeting the inclusion criteria were included in the final analysis. We found some evidence of MMCBPR but it was limited by factors such as a lack of explicit rationales for the use of MMR and CBPR, limited evidence of long-term commitment to a community, and an ad hoc approach to the application of MMR and CBPR. These findings informed the development of practical recommendations for psychologists, mental health professionals, and researchers in the application of MMCBPR. In particular, our MMCBPR recommendations aim to advance the social justice agenda in counseling psychology, increase the rigor of MMCBPR approaches in mental health studies, and inform how advanced mixed methods applications can be used to address the complexities associated with mental health and well-being.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document