…And (epistemic) justice for all: a cautionary tale of knowledge inequality in participatory research

被引:3
作者
Fletcher, Andrew [1 ]
机构
[1] Northumbria Univ, Coach Lane Campus, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Tyne & Wear, England
来源
QUALITY IN AGEING AND OLDER ADULTS | 2024年 / 25卷 / 01期
关键词
Care work; Co-design; Epistemic injustice; Interdisciplinary; Knowledge equality; Older workers; Participatory methods;
D O I
10.1108/QAOA-03-2023-0021
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学]; R592 [老年病学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100203 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Purpose - Significant funding has been made available in the UK for social, behavioural and design research that aims to improve health and wellbeing for older adults. The growing importance and use of participatory and co-creative approaches in this field not only reflects a general turn in social research but also seeks to redress power imbalances between researchers and researched. This paper aims to use Miranda Fricker's concept of "epistemic injustice" as a lens to describe the author's experience with one such project, and highlight the cautions and considerations that must be made when navigating, handling and amalgamating "other people's knowledge".Design/methodology/approach - Personal and theoretical reflection. Primary data for this paper consists of first-hand insider observations on how different forms of knowledge were treated in an interdisciplinary, intersectoral participatory research context.Findings - Some participatory studies are hampered by insufficient consideration for a range of ways of thinking, including between researchers and participants, younger and older adults, different academic disciplines or academia and industry. This can harm project integrity and outcomes, potentially eroding trust in academic research.Originality/value - By reflecting on a recent participatory study in healthy ageing, this paper outlines a theoretical basis to increase the benefits of working with different stakeholders across health and care, design, business and academia. It concludes by suggesting ways that researchers might address epistemic injustice, and so recognise and properly value the range of knowledge types encountered in participatory research.
引用
收藏
页码:68 / 79
页数:12
相关论文
共 39 条
[21]  
Hinton E.L., 2004, DIVERSITYINC MAGAZIN
[22]   Funding intergenerational initiatives to strengthen local communities [J].
Knight, Annabel Davidson .
QUALITY IN AGEING AND OLDER ADULTS, 2012, 13 (04) :307-316
[23]   Phronesis (Practical Wisdom) as a Type of Contextual Integrative Thinking [J].
Kristjansson, Kristjan ;
Fowers, Blaine ;
Darnell, Catherine ;
Pollard, David .
REVIEW OF GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2021, 25 (03) :239-257
[24]   Epistemic injustice in workplace hierarchies: Power, knowledge and status [J].
Kwok, Chi .
PHILOSOPHY & SOCIAL CRITICISM, 2021, 47 (09) :1104-1131
[25]   The manifestation of participation within a co-design process involving patients, significant others and health-care professionals [J].
Lindblom, Sebastian ;
Flink, Maria ;
Elf, Marie ;
Laska, Ann Charlotte ;
von Koch, Lena ;
Ytterberg, Charlotte .
HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2021, 24 (03) :905-916
[26]  
Lindsay J., 2020, EPISTEMIC VIOLENCE N
[27]  
Longino, 2023, PLUR SOC KNOWL WHY T
[28]  
Medina J., 2017, The Routledge companion to the philosophy of race, P247
[29]  
ONeill M., 2019, Walking methods: Research on the move
[30]   The possibility of addressing epistemic injustice through engaged research practice: reflections on a menstruation related critical health education project in South Africa [J].
Paphitis, Sharli Anne .
CRITICAL PUBLIC HEALTH, 2018, 28 (03) :363-372