2004
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. KWALON
  4. Volume 28, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 28, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 1385-1535
  • E-ISSN: 1875-7324

Abstract

Abstract

Participatory research methods are gaining ground in qualitative research within the social sciences and policy practice. Researchers directly involve groups that are part of a social phenomenon in the research process, by allowing them to co-determine the research question or to contribute to the collection and interpretation of data. Participatory methods are applied, for example, in action research. In action research, researchers contribute to changing the social situation they investigate from withing by involving participants in both the change and the research process. Participatory methods also are part of citizen science. In citizen science researchers involve participants to collect large amounts of data or to obtain data that is difficult to access in other ways. Assessing the quality of participatory methods requires criteria that not only do justice to the quality of knowledge, such as credibility and transferability, but also to the role of the researcher in social change, such as honesty, transparency, and the application of self-examination and self-criticism through meta-reflection.

© Inge Bleijenbergh
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/KWA2023.3.002.BLEI
2023-10-01
2024-11-13
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aguinis, H., Pierce, C.A., Bosco, F.A., & Muslin, I.S. (2009). First decade of organizational research methods. Organizational Research Methods, 12(1), 69-112. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428108322641
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Bleijenbergh, I.L., van Mierlo, J., & Bondarouk, T. (2021). Closing the gap between scholarly knowledge and practice: Guidelines for HRM action research. Human Resource Management Review, 31(2), 100764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2020.100764
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bleijenbergh, I. & van Engen, M. (2015). Participatory modeling to support gender equality: The importance of including stakeholders. Equality, Diversity & Inclusion, 34(5), 422-438. https://10.1108/EDI-06-2013-0045
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bonney, R., Cooper, C.B., Dickinson, J., Kelling, S., Phillips, T., Rosenberg, K.V., & Shirk, J., (2009). Citizen Science: A developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. BioScience, 59(11), 977–984. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.9
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Boeije, H. & Bleijenbergh, I. (2023). Analyseren in kwalitatief onderzoek. 4e druk. Boom.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Burnes, B. (2020). The origins of Lewin’s three-step model of change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 56(1), 32–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886319892685
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Brannick, T. & Coghlan, D. (2007). In defense of being ‘Native’: The case for insider academic research. Organizational Research Methods, 10(1), 59-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106289253
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Endrejat, P. & Burnes, B. (2022). Kurt Lewin’s ideas are alive! But why doesn’t anybody recognize them?Theoryand Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/09593543221118652
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Fals-Borda, Orlando. (2001). Participatory (action) research in social theory: Origins and challenges. In P.Reason & H.Bradbury (Eds), Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice (pp. 27-37). Sage Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Finchham, R. & T.Clark, (2009). Introduction: Can we bridge the rigour-relevance gap?Journal of Management Studies, 46(3), 510-515. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00834.x
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Grootjans, S.J.M., Stijnen, M.M.N., Kroese, M.E.A.L., Ruwaard, D., & Jansen, M.W.J. (2022). Citizen science in the community: Gaining insight in community and participant health in four deprived neighbourhoods in the Netherlands. Health & Place, 75(2022), 102798. https://dio.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2022.102798
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Guerrini, C.J., Trejo, M., Canfield, I., & McGuire, A.L. (2022). Core values of genomic citizen science: results from a qualitative interview study. BioSocieties, 17, 203-228. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-020-00208-2
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Irwin, A. (1995). Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34-46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Lewin, K. (1947a). Frontiers in group dynamics. Concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Human Relations, 1(1), 5-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872674700100103
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Rouwette, E., Bleijenbergh, I., Peters, V., & Mullekom, T. van (2008). Consensus bouwen in een probleemwijk. Modelbouw als interventiemethode bij het bestrijden van overlast. M&O, Tijdschrift voor Management en Organisatie, 62(6), 5-21.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Swantz, M. L. (2015). Participatory action research: Its origins and future in women’s ways. In H.Bradbury (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Action Research (pp. 489-496). Sage publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Swantz, M. L. (1996). A personal position paper on participatory research; personal quest for living knowledge. Qualitative Inquiry, 2(1), 120-136. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780049600200117.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Wang, C. & Burris, M.A. (1997). Photovoice: Concept, methodology and use for participatory needs assessment. Health Education & Behaviour, 24(3), 396-387. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019819702400309
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.5117/KWA2023.3.002.BLEI
Loading
Keyword(s): action research; citizen science; participatory methods; quality

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error