Dignity-Affirming Care in Collaborative Research: A Qualitative-Comparative Analysis (Poster 2)

• In Event: Rising Education Scholars Interrogating Research-Practice Partnerships in Pursuit of Truth and Justice

Abstract

Dignity is an important consideration in collaborative research projects. Dignity matters in collaborative research because it is a human right that has historically been neglected, and it continues to be undervalued in university-based research (Diamond, 2021). I argue that dignity can be affirmed through caring interactions; however, dignity in this type of research is contingent—that is, it is not automatically affirmed (Espinoza et al., 2020). Collaboration, such as in research-practice partnerships (RPPs), alone is not a panacea that prevents or mollifies dignity-denying interactions. Therefore, I developed a conceptual framework to understand the mediating processes related to caring interactions in these settings (Riedy, 2021). The four dimensions of dignity-affirming care are kind treatment that fosters belonging, being seen and heard, having opportunities to experience growth, and experiencing participation as meaningful.
I then used the dignity-affirming care framework to analyze interactions within the TasteGenetics lab, a museum-based lab run with the help of volunteers called community scientists. Dignity is a neglected construct within this type of collaborative research. Much of the current research on community science centers on the possibilities and perils of using community members to conduct rigorous research (Bonney, 2021; Bonney 2009 et al.; Cohn 2008; Dickinson et al., 2021; Conrad & Hilchey, 2011), increasing the diversity of participants and activities in the field (Chesser et al., 2019; Schäfer & Kieslinger; Davis et al., 2020; Hinojosa et al., 2021), understanding motivations to support recruitment and retainment in community science (Parrish et al., 2019; Richter et al., 2018; Curtis, 2015; Alender 2016), and the utility of community science in supporting science knowledge, literacy, and policy (Brukermann et al., 2021; Bonney et al., 2014, Dickinson et al., 2021, Conrad & Hilchey, 2011; Silvertown 2009). Dignity-affirming care is a helpful shift away from focusing purely on the instrumental utility of this form of collaborative research. This phenomenological perspective is important because a narrow focus on instrumental outcomes can obscure research’s tendency to deny dignity (Taylor, 2006; Gutierrez, 2008). Without careful attention, research, such as community science, can contribute to a status quo lacking in care. For instance, in community science, a dignity-denying experience can involve people being viewed only instrumentally; seen by professional scientists simply as a “free source of labour, skills, computational power and even finance” (Silvertown, 2009, pg. 467).
Through my analysis of the TasteGenetics lab I found that science volunteers felt seen and heard and experienced meaningful participation through their engagement, or non-engagement, with museum guests by enrolling them in a research study. I also found that volunteers’ opportunities for growth were especially important for affirming dignity through care. This was primarily achieved through one aspect of this laboratory-based program’s design: access to DNA processing. Although processing DNA is a routine activity for many scientists, for volunteers in this lab it was a unique experience that helped them develop technical skills while contributing to the generation of new science knowledge.

Author

• Robbin Riedy, University of Colorado - Boulder
  Presenting Author