Interrogation, Negotiation, and Subversion of Power Differentials in Community-Based Participatory Research: A Scoping Review

To review empirical and peer-reviewed scholarly articles incorporating community-based participatory research approaches and examining discourses of how power differentials are interrogated, negotiated, and redressed within the partnerships using scoping review methodology following The Joanna Brigg...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Progress in community health partnerships 2024, Vol.18 (2), p.295-305
Main Authors: Yan, Catalina Tang, Jin, Yichen, Chalfin, Emily, Martinez, Linda Sprague
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Collaboration
Community
Community involvement
Community power
Community research
Community-Based Participatory Research - organization & administration
Dialectics
Ethics
Grey literature
Health education
Health promotion
Humans
Knowledge
Marginalized groups
Negotiating
Neoliberalism
Oppression
Participatory action research
Participatory research
Peers
Power structure
Power, Psychological
Public health
Qualitative research
Racism
Researchers
Scholarly publishing
Search strategies
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To review empirical and peer-reviewed scholarly articles incorporating community-based participatory research approaches and examining discourses of how power differentials are interrogated, negotiated, and redressed within the partnerships using scoping review methodology following The Joanna Briggs Institute framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Articles were identified across five online databases: Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science. Keywords used in the search strategy were ("Community-Based Participatory Research" OR "Participa-tory Action Research"). Peer-reviewed scholarly articles discussing in-depth power differentials within the partnership published in English between 2010 and 2020 were included. Findings indicate scholars use critical reflexive qualitative methodologies to recognize and raise relevant questions of power issues between researchers and community stakeholders. Examination of individual biases, assumptions, and exertion of hierarchical top-down power is identified extensively. There is limited analysis on institutional and interdependent power. As a result of raising questions regarding power issues, individual actions to address emerging tensions and conflicts were reported. However, discussions on researchers' efforts to effect institutional and structural changes to redress power imbalances were limited. Building strong and equitable participatory action research collaborations between researchers and community stakeholders remains an arena of continuous struggle. This review offers some insights and relevant implications to better address power issues within participatory action research partnerships and inform the work of professionals engaged in the development, implementation, and evaluation of health promotion initiatives and policies.
ISSN:1557-0541
1557-055X
1557-055X
DOI:10.1353/cpr.2024.a930725