Archives

Uncategorized — No Comments
20
Nov 24

Addressing Housing Concerns and Health Inequities in Homeless Populations: The Role of Participatory Research

An astonishing 1.25 million people experienced sheltered homelessness in the United States in 2020 (USICH, 2024).  A record high number of people were homeless for the first time between 2019-2023 (Soucy et al., 2024).  In addition, a record number of individuals – 256,610 in 2023 – experienced unsheltered homelessness.  Homelessness affects individuals of all ages, genders, and ethnicities, although it disproportionately affects more who are non-Hispanic black, Hispanic or Latino, or Native American (USICH, 2024).  Contrary to common assumptions, most people who experience homelessness do not have a substance use issue or severe mental health problem.  There are a number of factors that can contribute to homelessness, including systemic failures such as high costs of housing and underfunded programs for affordable housing, wages that don’t keep up with rising costs of living, rising health care costs and inequitable or inadequate access, and mass incarceration (USICH, 2024).  Other common precipitants of homelessness include domestic violence, job loss, severe health problems, and dissolution of relationships (Williams-Arya et al., 2021).  Homelessness is both an individual issue and a public health issue; with the right policies and approaches, it is also a preventable problem.

Homeless shelters can provide those experiencing homelessness with a place to live and a sense of community.  However, individuals living in homeless shelters may also experience problems related to this type of housing, such as feeling unsafe or distrustful of others, emotional distress, lack of health care, and job instability.  Community-based participatory research (CBPR), in which participants can take an active role in the issues that affect them and their communities, can help address some of these challenges (Brydon-Miller, 1997).  This approach involves a commitment to working with members of communities that have often been exploited, underrepresented, or oppressed, to promote positive social change.  The CBPR approach “aims to be participatory, cooperative, empowering, and justice-oriented” (Kiser & Hulton, 2018, p. 2) to promote social change and positive outcomes for specific populations, such as the vulnerable population of homeless persons.

A team of individuals who experienced homelessness, along with academic researchers and community developers, undertook such a project to create a plan to improve the outcomes of a new housing community in Minneapolis (Olson et al., 2024).  They worked together to identify concerns expressed by homeless individuals who lived in shelters, such as feeling distrustful of other residents, concerns over predators gaining access to the community, and not knowing how to handle commonly anticipated problems and situations.  They then worked together to develop concepts to improve the operation of the community, based on these identified issues.  In Cincinnati, a CBPR project focused on family homelessness shelters to identify the needs of families living in these shelters (Williams-Arya at al., 2021).  Together, they identified common issues and needs that were then shared with shelter and community leaders to improve policies and practices.  These needs included improvements in the logistics of daily life, better support for families with young children, job stability and timely communication of opportunities, skill development, and emotional support.  The CBPR approach to improving shelter operations and utility to individuals and families can have a positive impact on the sense of community, support, and well-being for people experiencing homelessness.

As housing is a social determinant of health, homelessness can have a significant negative impact on individuals’ physical and mental well-being (USICH, 2024).  On average, individuals who experience homelessness have life expectancies that are almost 30 years shorter than the average American.  The severely shortened lifespan may be due to dangerous living conditions or illnesses, many of which are easily treatable with appropriate healthcare.  These health disparities can result from lack of access to health care and related resources, crowded shelter conditions, lack of transportation, low health literacy, lack of insurance, and low-paying jobs (Kiser & Hulton, 2018).  Much less is known about specific health needs in homeless populations, and different communities may have different needs.  A CBPR approach to understanding and addressing the health needs of individuals experiencing homelessness is appropriate for these underserved and understudied populations.

The Healthcare for Homeless Suitcase Clinic (HHSC) project has taken a CBPR approach, forming a coalition of public health nurses, nursing faculty, local community hospital leadership, local community shelter managers, and individuals experiencing homelessness in a mid-Atlantic state (Kiser & Hulton, 2018).  This coalition of community members worked together in cycles of data collection, interpretation, and reflection to make process improvements and develop innovative programs to address the health care needs of homeless individuals.  From this CBPR approach, mobile health care clinics, which they called Suitcase Clinics, were developed to better meet the needs of the homeless.  Needs they have been able to address include onsite urgent care, chronic disease management (e.g., hypertension, diabetes, and asthma), and preventative care at shelters.  In addition, they have developed specialized Suitcase Clinics for mental health care, podiatric care, and dental care.  They attribute the success of their program to the creation of strong community partnerships, recognition of community heterogeneity and willingness to adapt support services accordingly, as well as coordinated efforts to help every program participant get health care and housing.  The CBPR approach has also been successful in helping homeless populations in small cities in British Columbia in Canada get more equitable health care access through the development of outreach programs to address podiatric needs (D’Souza & Mirza, 2022).

These examples highlight the power and potential positive impact of taking a CBPR approach to addressing important individual and societal challenges, particularly in vulnerable populations.  With the goal of making a positive social change, CBPR makes use of key community stakeholders and academics to better the lives of those who may be most in need of advocacy.

References:

Brydon-Miller, M. (1997). Participatory action research: Psychology and social change. Journal of Social Issues, 53(4): 657-666.

D’Souza, M. S. & Mirza, N. A. (2022). Towards equitable health care access: Community participatory research exploring unmet health care needs of homeless individuals. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 54(4): 451-463.

Kiser, T. & Hulton, L. (2018). Addressing health care needs in the homeless population: A new approach using participatory action research. SAGE Open, July-September 2018: 1-7.

Olson, C., Grande, S. W., Toran, W., & Walsh, W. (2024). Program evaluation and improvement by a homeless community using a human centered design approach. Journal of Participatory Research Methods, 5(1): 1-21.

Soucy, D., Janes, M., & Hall, A. (2024). State of homelessness: 2024 edition. National Alliance to End Homlessness. https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/homelessness-statistics/state-of-homelessness/

United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH). (2024). Data & Trends. Usich.gov. https://www.usich.gov/guidance-reports-data/data-trends

Williams-Arya, P., Vaughn, L. M., Nidey, N., Sawyer, M., Porter, K., & Froelich, T. E. (2021). Striving for structure and stability in Cincinnati’s family homeless shelters. Family and Community Health, 44(4): 282-291.

Uncategorized — 1 Comment
16
Nov 23

Giving Voice to the Voiceless: A Paradigm Shift in Animal Welfare through Participatory Action Research

Action research, at its core, is a transformative methodology that seeks to bridge the gap between theory and practice by actively involving participants in the research process. It evolved out of disillusionment with the traditional positivist research model (Brydon-Miller, 1997) and  emp sizes collaboration, empowerment, and real-world social change. Within this realm, Participatory Action Research (PAR) stands out, striving to holistically comprehend social situations and instigate change through collaboration between researchers, participants, and communities (Cornish et al., 2023). PAR has been a useful tool for addressing issues of systemic inequalities and empowering marginalized communities, such as during the U.S. Civil Rights Movement and facilitating mental health programs for Australian Aboriginals (Tsey et al., 2004). 

PAR’s steadfast commitment to honoring diverse ways of knowing, coupled with its rejection of prioritizing the researcher over participants, prompts a profound question: Can PAR extend beyond human entities?

Historically, animal subjugation has long-been justified through science and Judeo-Christian decrees that argue for the absolute difference between humans and other creatures. These divisions often hinge on three primary contentions: the impossibility of intersubjectivity, lack of subjectivity, and absence of spoken language (Merskin, 2010). It is worth noting that these same arguments maintained grounds for the mistreatment of indigenous and mentally handicapped people (2004). The assumption of human superiority has driven much of our scientific inquiry. However, trans-species psychology challenges these narratives, asserting that animals, like humans, share commonalities in cognition and emotion conserved through evolution that evinces their sentience. It explores the psychological experiences, behaviors, and needs of animals beyond traditional behaviorism and considers them as individuals with subjective lives and emotions (Bradshaw, 2010). The shift in our scientific understanding and acceptance of animals as complex beings akin to ourselves is evident in contemporary zoos, which now recognize the psychological needs of animals. This paradigm restructuring challenges the ethical implications of poor animal welfare under human guardianship and underscores that animals deserve a place in the discourse on social change.

Trans-species psychology, coupled with PAR, provides a potential avenue to amplify the voices of animals (Merskin, 2010). However, implementing PAR necessitates adapting human-centric methodologies to accommodate the unique characteristics, behaviors, and communication methods of different species. Modern research is gradually acknowledging that animals possess unique cultural and contextual aspects to their communication that are not easily translatable into human terms. Many species, especially highly social animals like dolphins and primates, exhibit complex communication systems specific to their species. Attempting to interpret their behavior solely through an anthropocentric lens will inevitably distort our understanding. The language barrier between humans and other animals is a prominent challenge, and this is where ethology becomes fundamental to the PAR approach (Bradshaw, 2010). 

Ethology is the study of animal behavior with a particular focus on the observation and analysis of how animals interact with each other and their environment (Immelmann, 1980). It has already enriched our understanding of the social lives of species such as chimpanzees through the work of Jane Goodall. Keen and immersive observation of animal behaviors, social structures, and communication methods in natural environments must occur to grasp the intricacies of animal communities. Collaboration with experts and advocates, including animal caretakers with extensive field experience, will contribute to project insights. Innovative technologies, such as touchscreens for interactive communication, have shown promise and may be further instrumental in a PAR approach. Ethical considerations, rooted in respecting animal autonomy and natural behaviors, underpin the entire PAR process and evaluation metrics would diverge from typical human criteria to focus on behavioral changes and improved well-being. In this way, PAR on animals offers a novel avenue to deepen our understanding, enhance their welfare, and contribute to conservation efforts.

While the information within this blog may seem “crazy” or “over-anthropomorphizing,” PAR research remains open to equalizing all life on Earth. A reductionist science that draws distinct lines between species is complicit in the destruction of the natural world (Merskin, 2010, p.153). Animals having poor welfare under human guardianship does not bode well for the future of our world, as it reflects a continued collective passivity and apathy towards fellow organisms and environments. Indifference is a luxury we cannot afford. As our history unfolds in the Anthropocene era, marked by humanity’s profound influence on the planet since the Industrial Revolution (Rafferty, 2020), adopting a new mode of thinking about the creatures we share Earth with becomes imperative for our continued existence as a species.

Citations

Bradshaw, G. (2010). You see me, but do you hear me? The science and sensibility of trans-species dialogue. Feminism & Psychology, 20(3), 407-419. https://doi-org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.1177/0959353510368285

Brydon-Miller, M. (1997). Participatory Action Research: Psychology and Social Change. Journal of Social Issues, 53(4). 657-666.

Cornish, F., Breton, N., Moreno-Tabarez, U. et al. (2023) Participatory action research. Nat Rev Methods Primers 3,34 . https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-023-00214-1

Immelmann, K. (1980). Introduction to ethology. In Springer eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-1054-9

Merskin, D. (2010). Hearing voices: The promise of participatory action research for animals. Action Research, 9(2), 144–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750310388050

Rafferty, J. P. (2020, March 28). Anthropocene Epoch | Definition & Evidence. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved September 2, 2022, from https://www.britannica.com/science/Anthropocene-Epoch

Tsey, K., Patterson, D., Whiteside, M., Baird, L., Baird, B. C., & Tsey, K. (2004). A microanalysis of a participatory action research process with a rural Aboriginal men’s health group. Australian Journal of Primary Health, 10(1), 64. https://doi.org/10.1071/py04009

 

Uncategorized — No Comments
18
Nov 21

Photovoice: Techniques in Community-Based Participatory Action Research

In Lesson 11 on Community, we learned about Photovoice – a proven technique used in community-based participatory action research – a technique promoting individuals to take photos representing their unique experiences and by sharing what these images represent to them – has been proven to be a highly effective strategy in underserved communities or minority groups (Gruman et al., 2017). Photovoice in community-based participatory action research seeks to “engage community members” as it is “particularly well suited to document the experiences of ethnic minority groups” and sharing those experiences since it allows “unheard” individuals from “hard-to-reach communities” to “overcome language and cultural barriers in communicating with the researchers and others engaged in the research process” (Gruman et al., 2017). It was interesting to read from chapter 12 in our text how researchers utilized photovoice in community-based participatory action research projects among different communities such as the elderly and low-income, African American women, “Cambodian, Vietnamese, and Russian immigrants,” Bosnian and Hispanic immigrants, rural Chinese women, Latino/a/e youth, and Canadian Indigenous communities (Gruman et al., 2017).

The APA defines critical participatory action research (CPAR) as a “framework for engaging research with communities interested in documenting, challenging, and transforming conditions of social injustice” marking a dramatic paradigm shift in research design (Fine & Torre, 2021). CPAR looks to change traditional methods of study designs where “academics research and write ‘about’ or ‘on’ communities as objects of study” and instead aims to create a collaborative system that integrates the points of views of individuals as research through the “activist call” that there is “no research on us, without us,” (Fine & Torre, 2021). The APA adds that these marginalized and underserved communities have “traditionally been the objects of study” and include “children, youth, communities under siege, survivors of state or interpersonal violence, immigrants, struggling farmers, people in prison, LGBTQIA+ young adults, workers, mothers, educators” (Fine & Torre, 2021). Fine and Torre discuss that those individuals who are the objects of study should have an inherent right to research “as co-researchers” to help in the process (Fine & Torre, 2021). One community project referenced in the text was the Public Science Project, which also has open research projects available for different communities to engage in. 

“Attempting to liberate the oppressed without their reflective participation in the act of liberation is to treat them as objects that must be saved from a burning building.” – Paulo Freire

In 1994, Dr. Caroline Wang and Dr. Mary Ann Burris introduced photo novella or photovoice – the process of documenting experiences through photography – to capture non-verbal communication in underserved communities and citing that “participation” is a “key element of empowerment” (Wang, C., and Burris, M. A., 1994). Wang and Burris developed photo novella by utilizing a combination of  Paulo Freire’s pedagogical approaches for “education for critical consciousness” along with “empowerment education, feminist theory, and documentary photography” in a community of rural Chinese women (Wang, C., and Burris, M. A., 1994). The researchers further identified the Freirian approach in photovoice that takes “the discussion and codification of visual images a step further” noting that this documentation process “belongs not to outsiders, strangers, nor photojournalists, but rather to the people who experience powerlessness as their dominant social reality” (Wang, C., and Burris, M. A., 1994). 

There are three main goals in the use of photovoice as described by Dr. Wang which include 1) to enable individuals to “record and reflect their community’s strengths and concerns,” 2) enabling individuals to “promote critical dialogue and knowledge about personal and community issues” through group discussion on the images captured, and 3) the goal to “reach policymakers” in her efforts to raise awareness on the use of photovoice among women to improve health and wellbeing (Wang, C., 1999). The process of photovoice or photo novella allows participants to utilize the “images and words form” to mold the research discussion through codification, by utilizing Freire’s framework of creating “word lists for literacy classes” from their life experiences while avoiding “vocabulary removed from their experience” as well as “approaches that foster dependency or powerlessness” since the essence of photovoice is an individual’s authentic “portrayal of their lives and community” (Wang, C., and Burris, M. A., 1994).  Photovoice in CPAR encourages community participants to analyze next steps while identifying societal factors that “contribute to and detract from their health status” (Wang, C., and Burris, M. A., 1994). 

Our text also referenced a controversial case study involving Latino adolescents’ photovoice images where some observers without proper context to the images became upset which caused  “friction” (Gruman et al., 2017). It was the researcher’s point of view that this is not “necessarily regarded as a bad thing in that it could serve as a catalyst for further dialogue that could stimulate meaningful community change” (Gruman et al., 2017). The use of photovoice in minority communities provided empowering community engagement through a creative voice – that of photography – from an “insider perspective” to assist community leaders in developing problem-solving processes as well as “finding relevant community-based solutions” (Gruman et al., 2017). 

Here are some videos on the fascinating use of photovoice within communities, in case you’d like to learn more:

If you were involved in a photovoice project for a participatory action research project – what would you choose and what would you photograph? What would those images represent to you? Are there any emotions that photovoice would allow you to express? 

 

References

Fine, M., & Torre, M. E. (2021). Essentials of Critical Participatory Action Research (Essentials of Qualitative Methods). American Psychological Association. https://www.apa.org/pubs/books/essentials-critical-participatory-action-research-sample-chapter.pdf

Gruman, J. A., Schneider, F. W., & Coutts, L. M. (2017). Applied Social Psychology: Understanding and Addressing Social and Practical Problems (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.

WANG, C. C. (1999). Photovoice: A Participatory Action Research Strategy Applied to Women’s Health. Journal of Women’s Health, 8(2), 185–192. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.1999.8.185

Wang, C., & Burris, M. A. (1994). Empowerment through Photo Novella: Portraits of Participation. Health Education Quarterly, 21(2), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019819402100204

 

 

 

Uncategorized — 3 Comments
21
Nov 19

Fake News

For the past several months, at least one of my friends have shared a post, Women Should Go Out With Friends Twice A Week For Better Health, posted by creativehealthyfamily.com (n.d.) on their Facebook.  The article claims that according to a new study, women should go out with girlfriends twice a week to be healthier (creativehealthyfamily.com, n.d.). It further claims that “drinking beer, gossiping, and talking about their rivals (preferred topic). Doing these “things” make women socialize, drink and laugh together” (creativehealthyfamily.com, n.d.). At first, I got excited for a second, how wonderful it is to now have empirical research to backup my excuse to go out with my girlfriends. Quickly, though, I started to question the research. How did the study operationally define “healthier”? How did the study end up with twice a week, but no once or thrice for example? Dr. Robin Dunbar, who was hired to run this study, explains to The Huffington Post that “[t]he figure of twice a week comes from our findings that this is the amount of time that you typically spend with your closest friends/family” (as cited in creativehealthyfamily.com, n.d.). How did he find that findings? And with all these questions my excitement faded and the researcher-in-training in me got the best of me and I fact checked. According to editor in chief Alan Duke (2019) for Hoaxalert.com, the study was actually a social experiment conducted by Robin Dunbar, an Oxford psychology professor, who was hired by the Guinness Beer company. The social experiment involvement five men (note no women) to measure men’s happiness “doing things” with the men (Dunbar, 2019). The purpose of the social experiment was meant for the Guinness Beer company to use as a television campaign to promote men going out and drinking beer with friends (Dunbar, 2019). I’m echoing our lesson commentary that it’s not to say that the researcher, in this case Dunbar, intentionally mislead the public, but there are many aspects that could have led him in this particular direction (PSU WC, 2019, L.13). Thus, it’s important to fact check, check for the credits page, check to see who sponsored it and what was their interest, and check researchers’ affiliation (PSU WC, 2019, L.13). The fake news could end with you, if you fact check before sharing. 

 

 

References

Duke, A. (2019, July 1). Fake News: Women Do NOT Need To Go Out With Friends Twice A Week To Stay Healthy: Lead Stories. Retrieved November 21, 2019, from https://hoax-alert.leadstories.com/3470628-fake-news-women-do-not-need-to-go-out-with-friends-twice-a-week-to-stay-healthy.html?fbclid=IwAR1S9BYjvQrZlCt5WaHVYhGXpp5XVu1M5Gf-dMNBL1UNpONC9aVhtHEq_hw.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2019). PSYCH 424 :
Applied Social Psychology, Lesson 13: Social Change/Participatory Research. Retrieved on November 19, 2019 from: https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2008549/modules/items/27030759

Women Should Go Out With Girlfriends Twice A Week To Improve Their Health. (n.d.). Retrieved November 21, 2019, from https://www.creativehealthyfamily.com/women-should-go-out-with-girlfriends-twice-a-week-to-improve-their-health/.

create an entry — No Comments
20
Nov 19

Participatory Action Research: Researchers Working With Communities to Bring About Social Change

Participatory Action Research (PAR) involves researchers who apply their skills and training to a particular issue that they personally care about; they are invested in the outcome of the research and their aim is to contribute to creating social change.  PAR focuses on research that enables social action. Mary Brydon–Miller (1997) describes Participatory Action Research as a blend of basic science and applied science—she explains that psychologists can use this approach to social science to contribute to the general field of knowledge in a certain realm while also helping to support some sort of positive social change. This approach, which opponents argue is an inappropriate mix of one’s politics and psychology, is very different from the traditional scientific approach to studying issues using a more detached and objective research design (Brydon–Miller, 1997).
At the root of PAR is the goal of providing a framework where positive social change can come about through a combination of efforts; communities working in tandem with psychologists to share their knowledge, vision, and values can effectively facilitate social change in countless areas, from criminal justice to environmental sustainability to overpopulation to poverty. Knowledge is never fixed, there is always room for more knowledge to be assimilated into our existing schemas and frameworks of how the physical world and social processes within it work.
Educator and author Paulo Freire felt very strongly that community members need to be an integral part of the social change process—he felt that the “researcher and researched” should be “equal and active participants” in any process meant to result in social change that would affect that community (Brydon–Miller, 1997, p. 659). By including community members, researchers can learn more about the real issues that communities are facing, and by employing a more engaged and interpretive subjective perspective, the team members can act and reflect repeatedly until the framework for the desired future changes is laid.
The Participatory Action Research process begins with mutual trust between the researcher and the other participants in the community where change is needed. One example of how participatory action researchers can apply their knowledge and skills to helping members of the community is seen in the efforts of Darius Tandon and his colleagues in Chicago—there they work with local African–American leaders to learn more about how to strengthen leadership and bring about positive change in minority communities (Brydon–Miller, 1997, p. 663). The leaders of the communities are active participants in the process, helping to choose topics to explore, interviewing others, analyzing data, and also deciding what action needs to be taken going forward based on research findings.
Participatory Action Research requires respecting and exploring a new paradigm in the world of social science— one which embraces a collaborative approach between researchers and community members who actively work together to bring about social change. This type of social research can exist along with traditional scientific methodology and add a new dimension of depth to critical inquiry, where the ultimate goal is to create new knowledge while also helping to bring about social change.

                                                          References
Brydon-Miller, M. (1997). Participatory Action Research: Psychology and Social Change. The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, 53(4). 657-666.

Uncategorized — 1 Comment
14
Apr 19

Participatory Action Research in Children

Participatory research blends education, investigation, and action into one (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts, 2005). It seamlessly educates both the participants and the researchers on the problem they are researching (Schneider et al., 2012). For the sake of this discussion, it will go over the roles of Participatory Action Research (PAR) in children.

There has been a great push for children’s participation in research in most recent years (Shamrova & Cummings, 2017). However, there are many researchers who fail to include children in their research studies (Shamrova & Cummings, 2017). If a researcher excludes children from their data, then their research will not show insights, ideas, and interpretations than only a child can provide. These possible research findings from the child may be completely different than the adult researchers findings themselves. By letting children and young adults participate in PAR it opens the door to letting them “be a part of social change” (Shamrova & Cummings, 2017). PAR is often thought of as an integration of participation from the community starting from the beginning to the end of the research process (Bennett, 2004). 

What exactly are some perceived benefits or outcomes of using PAR with children? A child’s participation can help researchers increase their social justice awareness, their responsibility and leadership roles, self-confidence, and in gaining more research skills (Shamrova & Cummings, 2017). Children and young adults can actively participate in their communities by getting involved in different PAR projects. The active engagement, team building experiences, and guided participation can all help a child grow in ways they never have before just by being involved in PAR (Langhout & Thomas, 2010). 

PAR is very rewarding for both the researcher and the participant. Past PAR studies with children involve changes in physical harassment policies, in school reconstruction, involvement in new facilities for water filtration, in tobacco access legislation, and more (Shamrova & Cummings, 2017). There are many different fields PAR has been used for. Some to name are in farmer participatory research, in architecture, action research in community development and in organizations, land use, participatory evaluation, and in landscape design (Bennett, 2004). Although there may be challenges with ethical issues regarding the use of children in PAR, there seems to be more positives then negatives in using them in research. 

References

Bennett, M. (2004). A review of the literature on the benefits and drawbacks of participatory action research. First Peoples Child & Family Review, 14(1), 109-122.

Langhout, R. D., & Thomas, E. (2010). Imagining participatory action research in collaboration with children: An introduction. American journal of community psychology, 46(1-2), 60-66.

Schneider, F.W., Gruman, J.A., & Coutts, L.A. (2005). Applied Social Psychology: Understanding and Addressing Social and Practical Problems. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Shamrova, D. P., & Cummings, C. E. (2017). Participatory action research (PAR) with children and youth: An integrative review of methodology and PAR outcomes for participants, organizations, and communities. Children and Youth Services Review, 81, 400-412. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.08.022

Uncategorized — No Comments
23
Nov 18

People Who Care About a Topic Shouldn’t Get Involved?

“As my sufferings mounted I soon realized that there were two ways in which I could respond to my situation — either to react with bitterness or seek to transform the suffering into a creative force. I decided to follow the latter course.”
―Martin Luther King Jr., 1960, ‘Suffering and Faith’

 

People Who Care About a Topic Shouldn’t Get Involved?

It’s a little odd to me that there is a debate over whether or not participatory action research (PAR) is a valid method. Like most things that are different from the norm, the importance lies in not jumping to label them as “good” or “bad” but as what they actually are: different. And, ideally, any scientist would welcome all tools which expand the understanding and possibilities in a given situation. The argument against it seems to be based on the concern about whether or not a researcher who is also a participant can be objective in assessing the situation, deciphering the data, or implementing what is truly the most beneficial course of action. But objectivity, though vital, actually isn’t the most important element of these otherwise-ignored situations. The most important thing is that they are recognized at all.

One of the first things we are told from the first lesson in our most basic class on entering the field of psychology is that “science doesn’t answer big questions” (Psychology as a Science and Profession, n.d.). Instead, science is meant to answer the decidedly small questions unique to very specific situations so that what is learned may then be appliedto more general situations. And that works perfectly, assuming that we’re aware of what requires our focus and have the means to conduct the research. But this scientific method is a top-down approach, assuming that those who have the training, resources, and opportunity to conduct research also have an exhaustive knowledge of what needs to be researchedand will automatically carry it out. Realistically, that is not going to be the case.

In general, research is conducted in cycles of “hot topics” which faze out, giving way to other areas of focus, all of which depends on what interests or corporations provide the funding. In addition, researchers are compelled to publish, which means that they will naturally turn their focus to topics of interest (increasing the chances of publication), rather than what is necessarily most important. Much falls through the proverbial cracks. This is exactly why PAR is well-suited to groups who are ignored, oppressed, or exploited (Maguire, 1987). The group in question does not have to wait for attention or funding from the greater population that would not otherwise consider their problem worthy of attention. It is a bottom-up approach where those who intimately involved in the problem (and vested in outcomes) conduct their own research to bring about positive change. Though this method attracts criticism for not being truly scientific, it is fair to say that much of the progress that has been made with this method never would have come to pass otherwise, because the issues it addresses would not have caught the attention of the scientific community at large nor garnered its focus and funding. This is exactly the “small questions” psychology is meant to answer—specific situations with unique problems requiring specialized solutions tailored to those involved. Private therapy also incorporates this bottom-up technique into its generally top-down approach. Clinical psychology has techniques and methods which are scientifically proven to help in given situations (top-down). However, individual therapists are also given license to adapt these proven methods, depending on their educated assessment of their client and the specific situation (bottom-up)—receiving constant feedback on what is working and what isn’t and evolving the intervention plan to best bring about the desired positive change. This is the same method that PAR uses on a larger scale, with a researcher applying their knowledge to a larger group or demographic.

Rather than dismissing PAR as “unscientific,” it may simply be accepted as another tool that is useful in bringing about positive change. In any research situation, a researcher must decide what method is best for testing a hypothesis. PAR is one possible method which may or may not be suited to a certain situation. In addition, it may actually be moreuseful in situations where there is not a great deal of existing knowledge about the dynamics, traditions, or practices of the group in question—when a researcher is just beginning to gather information on a population. Last semester, I was required to take ENG 221: Writing in the Social Sciences, which requires its students to each find a culture to observe throughout the semester. I chose a group of which I am a long-time member: an online group focused on fountain pens and writing. Because I was already a member of the group, I held a greater practical knowledge than someone who would have been observing from outside the group: I already understood the (very plentiful) jargon; I understood what was taboo in the group and what was encouraged; I understood the hierarchy of the members. All of this would have been lost on an outsider or, at minimum, created a significant learning curve in order to study the group. Because I was an “insider” but also a researcher, I was able to use my knowledge of the group to better understand my observances. I think of this as a very powerful tool—much like the benefit of an interpreter when approaching new study of a culture with which the researcher is not familiar.

Returning to the private therapy parallel, any therapist would be quick to acknowledge that change in a client isn’t something the therapist does, but something the client brings about for themselves. As Yeich and Levine (1992) describe, “Empowerment seems to be a process that one must do for oneself-not something that someone can do for or to another.” This may be even truer for a group: those who are considered in-groupare not going to be as open to being told what to do from someone (or some group) considered out-group (e.g. researchers who have not experienced their situation first-hand). However, because PAR arises from within the group desiring the change, the necessary steps to bring it about would be more readily accepted and adopted. The policy that a researcher should not have a vested interest in their own research is based on the assumption that this is mutually exclusive with being objective. However, if a researcher in this situation can remain as objective as possible in assessing the best course of action, an interest in the outcome may not only bring an otherwise-ignored topic into the spotlight, but it may provide the motive needed to see the situation through to a satisfactory resolution.

 

_______________________________________

References

Psychology as a Science and Profession(n.d.) Lesson 1: Why Psych 105?[Lesson Notes]. Retrieved from Pennsylvania State University, Psychology as a Science and Profession, https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1803751/modules/items/21132916

King ML, Jr. (1960). ‘Suffering and Faith’ The Christian Century27 April.

Maguire, P. (1987). Doing participatory research: A feminist approach.Amherst, MA: Center for Inter- national Education,  University of Massachusetts.

Yeich, S., & Levine, R. (1992). Participatory research’s contribution to a conceptualization of empowerment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(24), 189&1908.

create an entry — 2 Comments
14
Apr 17

The Kinder & Braver World Project

The Kinder & Braver World Project portray participatory action research as, “a process through which people investigate meaningful social topics, participate in research to understand the root causes of problems that directly impact them, and then take action to influence policies through dissemination of their findings to policymakers and stakeholders (Powers & Allaman, 2012).”  The goal of the research is to expand their social movement into youth communities and encourage leadership.  Schneider describes social action as, “by organizing you can stimulate collective action in the community that generates power to create change (Schneider, 2012).”  Various programs have been designed to add value and promote positive change within communities.

Everyone has their own perspective on how they feel about a particular problem.  Relatively, it is necessary to customize programs that define unique qualities among young people and adults.  After engaging with individualized concerns, a plan for social change may be created.  The plan should clearly define a purpose and identify goals for addressing change.  By involving youthful communities in the developing a plan for social change, young individuals will learn how to address diverse communal issues.  They will learn how to relate to others from various backgrounds, cultures, and opinions.  Youth engagement models are effective for improving issues surrounding a common goal, as well as promoting relations that will motivate involvement.

Youth United for Change (YUC) is a veteran-based organization established in Philadelphia.  The group aims to meet the wishes and needs of young individuals within the community.  Generally, group activities and meetings take place in schools in order to reach out to the youth population.  Organizers promote relationships and address any ideas or worries that the young community may have regarding the world around them.  YUC wants to make sure that juveniles feel like their heard, and their needs are important.  Additionally, the process positively impacts leadership skills and relationships.  Conclusively, the program is an effective way for children to voice their opinion and propose any questions about social reform.

 

Powers, C.B., Allaman, E. (2012, December 17). How Participatory Action Research Can Promote Social Change and Help Youth Development – The Kinder & Braver World Project: Research Series. Retrieved April 14, 2017 from http://cyber.harvard.edu/sites/cyber.harvard.edu/files/KBWParticipatoryActionResearch2012.pdf

Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A., and Coutts, L. M. (Eds.) (2012). Applied Social Psychology: Understanding and Addressing Social and Practical Problems (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. ISBN 978-1412976381

 

Uncategorized — 1 Comment
16
Nov 16

Emotional effects of tough election among Americans in 2016

After the big political change we just experienced, the election of Donald Trump, many citizens are feeling a social burden because they believe the elected president is not fit for the job. It is very unfortunate that social changes like this happen and it does, for fact, affect each and every single one of us. No matter if we are living bad or god times, the public opinion is always an essential component of politics (Bermeo, & Bartels, 2014). Apparently, this time around the public opinion has not been taken into consideration. When social changes like this happen, the population feels insecure and threatened by different social values that do not comply with their expectancies. Thus, their behavior change because they experience cognitive dissonance (Aronson, Wilson, & Akert, 2013, p. 170). This election seemed to cause a big wave of public compliance, where many people who did not even supported the elected president voted without believing that the results would cause national frustration (Aronson, at al., 2013, p. 201).

To reduce the distress caused by the situation, social psychologists may need to intervene and develop social programs that are able to create conformity in the population. Conformity in a social scale happens when we, the population make changes on our behavior to accept and comply with others’ expectations (Aronson, at al., 2013, p. 199); which means that soon or later we may have to accept the results of the campaign and cross fingers that we do not get hit by horrible presidential choices. I know that the feeling of expectations may cause anxiety and other psychological effects, but we will have to be flexible and ready for adjustments in our social environment. This process is painful sometimes, but it happens every time a new president is elected. Thus, one way social psychologists will get ready for this dramatic change is by setting up participatory action research all around the country, as it is intended to do research and contribute to social changes (PSU, WC, Psych 424, lesson 13, 2016). Applied social psychology in the next few years will probably be a high stake for all of us because its’ fundamental idea is to develop strategies that improve individual or group social interactions, and decrease practical problems (Schneider, Grumman, & Coutts, 2012, p. 8). If the political burden increases, they definitely will be usefully doing research and developing active social programs that can change social behavior.

This is also an opportunity to community psychology to get into practice and integrate research with actions that will effectively change our views about our social situation (Schneider, Grumman, & Coutts, 2012, p. 275). Using participatory action research they will assess our political, social and economic values as part of research methods and applications (Brydon, 1997). Created in the 1970’s, this source of research was initially criticized because there has always been a belief that psychologists should never mix their personal values to their profession, as it can cause conflict of interests (PSU, WC, Psych 424, lesson 13, 2016). In certain circumstances, like the political scenario we are living now, it can be a positive research method to be used. The only way it can misused is if researchers tries to use their work to make personal implications, which is known as activist research and can be a misleading way to influence members of the social environment to follow constructs that may or may not be completely accurate (PSU, WC, Psych 424, lesson 13, 2016). We should not expect any activism to happen in this case, but since it involves politics, there is always a chance that social influence will diverge from its original intent, because this is a common characteristic of politics anyways. However, we should never give up on our social expectations, as we should defend our constructs with a sensitive and rationale manner to achieve a common goal.

Hopefully, our future is not going to be as bitter as we think it will. If we get to that point, applied social psychology will definitely stand by us to help find social solutions. Let’s be positive by now, and try our best to understand how to fit into this new social environment, it may help to control our burden. Democracy isn’t always an easy process, but we cannot lose our hope (Corazzini, Kube, Maréchal, & Nicolò, 2014).

 

References:

Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (2013). Social psychology (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

Bermeo, N., & Bartels, L. (2014). Mass politics in tough times: Opinions, votes and protest in the great recession: Opinions, votes and protest in the great recession. New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199357505.001.0001. Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/lib/pennstate/reader.action?docID=10812617

Brydon‐Miller, M. (1997). Participatory action research: Psychology and social change. Journal of Social Issues, 53(4), 657-666. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00042. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/doi/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1997.tb02454.x/epdf

Corazzini, L., Kube, S., Maréchal, M., & Nicolò, A. (2014). Elections and Deceptions: An Experimental Study on the Behavioral Effects of Democracy. American Journal of Political Science, 58(3), 579-592. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/stable/24363508

Penn State University, World Campus (Fall, 2016). Psych 424-Lesson 13 – Social Change. Retrieved at

https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1802487/discussion_topics/11378503?module_item_id=21234006

Schneider, F.W., Grumman, J.A., & Coutts, L.M. (2012) Applied social psychology: Understanding and addressing social and practical problems. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Uncategorized — No Comments
02
Dec 14

“A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words”

Social media is commonplace in today’s society and Instagram is one of the most popular applications used.  Instagram.com reports over 200 million users around the world, sharing an average of 60 million photos daily!  Although it is typical to share photos of trivial things from breakfast to landscapes, what would happen if photos were used towards the better good?

PhotoVoice  is an agency that combines the use of photography and grassroots social action for disadvantaged groups.  According to PhotoVoice.com, their work focuses on consulting and developing projects that are specialized to the needs of its community.  The methodology involves providing communities with cameras which are used to photo journal real perspectives on social change.  PhotoVoice feels that the most effective way to monitor social change is from the within the community.

photovoice_pic

Social change from within is the perspective of Participatory Action Research. Development programs are constructed by researchers based on information collected from within the affected community and analyze not just social aspects but also political and economic (Brydon-Miller, 1997).  Habermas (1971) felt that empirical inquiry does not accurately analyze every facet of knowledge, stating that “practical interests” are only obtained through interpretive means and not simply by observation.  That is, qualitative data is at times as necessary as quantitative data.  Participatory Action Research methodology embraces this idea by its influence from various scientific and social science fields. Ultimately, the goal is for the research to be applied in the real world.

Currently, PhotoVoice methodology is being used all over the world.  Some project examples including providing cameras to Los Angeles high school students to document healthy eating and physical exercise, in order to bring childhood obesity and type II Diabetes awareness to the disadvantaged neighborhoods in which the students live, and Syrian  refugees documenting their perspectives living in a host community.

Perhaps you want to gain insight on homelessness within your community.  Suggest implementing a PhotoVoice project in order to capture the real issues that the homeless community faces.  PhotoVoice can be applied to a multitude of scenarios and anyone can suggest a project, although it is probably most useful to work with researchers, agencies and groups dedicated to social betterment.

References

Brydon-Miller, M. (2010). Participatory Action Research: Psychology and Social Change. Journal of Social Issues, 53(4), 657-666. Retrieved December 1, 2014, from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/doi/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1997.tb02454.x/pdf

PhotoVoice. (n.d.). Retrieved December 1, 2014, from http://www.photovoice.org/

Skip to toolbar