37
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Participatory action research: Developing a collaborative approach to modern slavery research with survivors of exploitation

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This paper offers best practice guidance on participatory action research (PAR) methods in modern slavery studies, through sharing the experiences of survivors of modern slavery as active project consultants. By using participatory approaches and engaging in an action learning set model, this paper aims to understand how to meaningfully engage survivors of modern slavery as co-researchers. Inclusion was at the heart of this research study, and thus, this paper was co-produced by survivors of modern slavery. Through their voices, and by engaging in reflexivity, we share the challenges of engaging in meaningful peer research methods, lessons learned as well as the benefits of adopting this approach to provide creative, engaging and empowering opportunities for participation in research and skill development. We share some examples of challenges and successes in our approach to understand what meaningful peer research methods look like, addressing conservative and more liberal views including academic expertise, safeguarding and empowerment. In concluding this paper, we provide some recommendations for best practice, recognising a continual need to reflect and adapt peer research approaches that suits the needs of the peer researchers as well as the subject to be studied. The overwhelming sentiment, is that social science research must look to engage in peer research methods, recognising the expertise of lived experience, and the potential for research to empower others while also creating meaningful change.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A systematic review of the impact of patient and public involvement on service users, researchers and communities.

            Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research has expanded nationally and internationally over the last decade, and recently there has been significant attention given to understanding its impact on research. Less attention has been given to the impact of PPI on the people involved, yet it has been shown that the success of PPI in research can be reliant on the processes of engagement between these individuals and communities. This paper therefore critically explores the impact of PPI on service users, researchers and communities involved in health and social care research.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Best practice framework for Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in collaborative data analysis of qualitative mental health research: methodology development and refinement

              Background Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in mental health research is increasing, especially in early (pre-funding) stages. PPI is less consistent in later stages, including in analysing qualitative data. The aims of this study were to develop a methodology for involving PPI co-researchers in collaboratively analysing qualitative mental health research data with academic researchers, to pilot and refine this methodology, and to create a best practice framework for collaborative data analysis (CDA) of qualitative mental health research. Methods In the context of the RECOLLECT Study of Recovery Colleges, a critical literature review of collaborative data analysis studies was conducted, to identify approaches and recommendations for successful CDA. A CDA methodology was developed and then piloted in RECOLLECT, followed by refinement and development of a best practice framework. Results From 10 included publications, four CDA approaches were identified: (1) consultation, (2) development, (3) application and (4) development and application of coding framework. Four characteristics of successful CDA were found: CDA process is co-produced; CDA process is realistic regarding time and resources; demands of the CDA process are manageable for PPI co-researchers; and group expectations and dynamics are effectively managed. A four-meeting CDA process was piloted to co-produce a coding framework based on qualitative data collected in RECOLLECT and to create a mental health service user-defined change model relevant to Recovery Colleges. Formal and informal feedback demonstrated active involvement. The CDA process involved an extra 80 person-days of time (40 from PPI co-researchers, 40 from academic researchers). The process was refined into a best practice framework comprising Preparation, CDA and Application phases. Conclusions This study has developed a typology of approaches to collaborative analysis of qualitative data in mental health research, identified from available evidence the characteristics of successful involvement, and developed, piloted and refined the first best practice framework for collaborative analysis of qualitative data. This framework has the potential to support meaningful PPI in data analysis in the context of qualitative mental health research studies, a previously neglected yet central part of the research cycle.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Methodological Innovations
                Methodological Innovations
                SAGE Publications
                2059-7991
                2059-7991
                October 31 2023
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Criminology, University of Leicester, Leicester, Leicestershire, UK
                [2 ]Unseen, Bristol, UK
                Article
                10.1177/20597991231208441
                7686fe17-78a9-4a7f-b651-f628c6fa4157
                © 2023

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content304

                Most referenced authors243