Art and design can meaningfully contribute to social change. It can shift debates, change perspectives, raise awareness, and act upon visible and invisible mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion of different agents occupying the public sphere. In this thematic issue we invited authors to relate to this claim as they preferred: by bringing evidence to support it, refute it, or simply to discuss the potential benefits and harms of artistically inspired and design related interventions in citizens living environment. We challenged authors to rethink agency and engage theoretically or empirically with how art and design installations act upon us, citizens, and vice‐versa. The result is a compilation of different storylines, coming from different geographical parts of the world and written from a variety of cultural perspectives. What binds these contributions is a true commitment to open up a space for those experiencing challenging life circumstances to access, occupy, or transform the public sphere. Our collective engagement with concepts such as power, prejudice, harassment or discrimination was not focused on erasing differences. Instead, we engaged with the idea that certain differences should matter less than they currently do in creating a safe and accessible public space for all.
Book review Book review In this contribution the author reviews Wat is onderzoek? Praktijkboek methoden en technieken voor het hoger onderwijs by N. Verhoeven.
Het systematisch literatuuroverzicht (systematic review) heeft de laatste jaren enorm aan impact gewonnen in het evidence-based discours en wordt beschouwd als een belangrijke informatiebron ter ondersteuning van besliskunde op praktijk en politiek niveau. Een systematisch literatuuroverzicht brengt resultaten van diverse individuele studies samen om betrouwbare antwoorden te genereren op welbepaalde vragen en wordt gepromoot door internationale non-profitorganisaties, zoals de Cochrane Collaboration en de Campbell Collaboration. Auteurs van systematische literatuuroverzichten (reviewers) streven een systematische identificatie, evaluatie en synthese na van alle relevante studies rond een bepaald onderwerp, gebaseerd op een expliciete en voorgedefinieerde methodologie. Hierbij wordt uitgegaan van een te beantwoorden vraag, een welgedefinieerde zoekstrategie, in- en exclusiecriteria voor studies, een kwaliteitsbeoordeling van de geselecteerde studies, en de extractie van resultaten uit die individuele studies, wat resulteert in een synthese. Momenteel is de vraag naar de evaluatie van de effectiviteit van medische, therapeutische, educatieve, sociale of criminologische interventies dominant in deze literatuuroverzichten. Hiervoor worden de resultaten uit studies – bij voorkeur gerandomiseerde, gecontroleerde experimenten – samengebracht door middel van een meta-analyse, een statistische techniek waarmee een gepoold resultaat verkregen wordt dat zich uitspreekt in het voor- of nadeel van een bepaalde interventie. Er is echter een groeiende belangstelling voor en erkenning van de waarde van inzichten uit kwalitatief onderzoek. Die inzichten kunnen immers helpen om de resultaten uit syntheses van kwantitatief onderzoek beter te situeren, om de vraagstelling mee te informeren en om een aantal vragen te beantwoorden die moeilijk door kwantitatief onderzoek kunnen worden beantwoord. Voorbeelden van dergelijke vragen zijn: Hoe moeten we interventies implementeren in een bepaalde context? Hoe kan een interventie verbeterd worden? Sluit de interventie aan bij de subjectieve noden van de doelgroep? Hoe wordt de interventie ervaren door diegenen die ze moeten uitvoeren of ondergaan? Die interesse heeft ertoe geleid dat meerdere onderzoekers zich zijn gaan buigen over de vraag hoe die kwalitatief georiënteerde inzichten op een methodologisch verantwoorde manier kunnen worden samengevat. Uiteraard hoeven syntheses van kwalitatief onderzoek niet aan te sluiten bij een systematisch literatuuroverzicht. Er zijn ook voorbeelden van syntheses die op zichzelf staan, zonder enige link met een bestaand literatuuroverzicht. De laatste jaren werd er enorm geïnvesteerd in het ontwikkelen van methoden voor het uitvoeren van syntheses van kwalitatief onderzoek (Dixon-Woods, Agarwal, Jones, Young & Sutton, 2005; Barnett-Page & Thomas, 2009). Twee van die methoden brachten een ondersteunend softwarepakket op de markt, EPPI-reviewer en QARI. EPPI-reviewer (Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating Centre review software) werd ontwikkeld ter ondersteuning van thematische syntheses (Thomas & Harden, 2008), QARI (Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument) werd ontwikkeld in de context van meta-aggregatie (Joanna Briggs Institute, 2007). Meta-aggregatie werd reeds toegepast in talloze literatuuroverzichten geproduceerd door het Joanna Briggs Institute, meestal als onderdeel van een mixed-methods-review. QARI is een onderdeel van het Joanna Briggs SUMARI softwarepakket (System for the unified management, assessment and review of information). SUMARI biedt software aan voor het uitwerken van literatuuroverzichten met betrekking tot vraagstellingen naar de effectiviteit, kosten en baten van interventies (syntheses van kwantitatief onderzoek) alsook naar de haalbaarheid, gepastheid en betekenis van interventies of fenomenen (syntheses van kwalitatief onderzoek). QARI kan enkel gebruikt worden voor het beantwoorden van kwalitatieve onderzoeksvragen. Ik illustreer het softwarepakket QARI aan de hand van een meta-aggregatie rond barrières ten aanzien van de implementatie van evidence-based praktijkvoering in België (Hannes, 2008).
We live in a societal realm where robotics, artificial intelligence, and digitalization are strongly reshaping our futures. Technological progress has created multiple possibilities. However, the unequally divided impact of technological progress reminds us of the danger of an uncontrolled detonation of technological smartness in society. Some of its experienced and anticipated effects are most likely undesirable. In this thematic issue, we present a compilation of small‐scale experiments that help us think through the multiple challenges of a fast‐evolving techno‐mediated society. It sits on the cross‐road between resisting technology or insisting on it in order to create a more socially inclusive sustainable society. The technological "smartification" of our society reshapes our notion of what it means to be human in the complex assemblage with non‐human and other‐than‐human agents we are currently involved in. But it is also a catalyst for intelligent acts of human creativity that will strongly shape our collective future.
Participant created visual data are increasingly being used in social-behavioral sciences projects. They have become a popular medium in community-based research adopting an arts-informed approach to study challenging life circumstances of community members. We argue that visual data can do more than just illustrate ideas or concepts, particularly in the process of research where participants contribute to the data collection phase. Visual images record the tacit meanings of the person who makes them, and they can—with the help of a researcher skilled in qualitative reasoning—form another stream of textual analysis. The authors developed an Analytical Apparatus for Visual Imagery (AAVI), constructed from the elements of art and the principles of design and other arts-based sources, and applied it to two different arts-based research projects where participants created visual images or artworks for analysis. Through a combination of storylines and the AAVI analysis, a deeper level of analytical interpretation and a better understanding of the complexity of human experience were reached, particularly in trying to understand the emotional layers linked to experiences.
In 2007, the journal Qualitative Research published a review on qualitative evidence syntheses conducted between 1988 and 2004. It reported on the lack of explicit detail regarding methods for searching, appraisal and synthesis, and a lack of emerging consensus on these issues. We present an update of this review for the period 2005–8. Not only has the amount of published qualitative evidence syntheses doubled, but authors have also become more transparent about their searching and critical appraisal procedures. Nevertheless, for the synthesis component of the qualitative reviews, a black box remains between what people claim to use as a synthesis approach and what is actually done in practice. A detailed evaluation of how well authors master their chosen approach could provide important information for developers of particular methods, who seem to succeed in playing the game according to the rules. Clear methodological instructions need to be developed to assist others in applying these synthesis methods.
Along with the increasing awareness about the destructive force of humankind on nature, existential questions about how to create a more sustainable relationship with the natural world have emerged. To acquire a more eco‐friendly attitude, we need to go beyond the well‐established knowledge cultures that highlight a nature versus culture dichotomy. This study focuses on bio art as an epistemic vehicle to re‐imagine our understanding of and connection to the natural world. Drawing on the theoretical stance of philosophical posthumanism, we discuss how artistic co‐creation processes involving humans and other‐than‐humans hold the potential to introduce a shift in our worldview from anthropocentric to ecocentric. We further question what this shift might imply for how we approach the complex relationship between humans and other‐than‐humans in our own research. We conducted a within‐case and cross‐case analysis of five bio art projects that previously won the Bio Art & Design Award (2018-2020). To analyze the data, we used a combined approach of visual and context analysis and material semiotics. Qualitative interviews were used as a data collection technique to investigate the lived experiences of both artists and scientists involved in the projects. Our findings suggest that bio art's epistemic significance can primarily be found in its multispecies perspective: By following the wills and ways of bio‐organisms, bio art makes the invisible connection between nature and culture visible. Bio art can provoke our thinking about how to include and approach other‐than‐human agency in the context of socially engaged research practices.
Today's qualitative research may take place in complicated ethnographic fields, which situate researchers near difficult experiences at an individual, community, environmental or political level. The current academic climate frequently ignores the emotional impact of doing research under challenging circumstances. The overarching culture in higher education is one that carries taboos around 'what is' and 'what is not' expected from the researcher. The general expectation is for researchers to 'neutralize' themselves from the research topic rather than personally relate to it. Under the cultural belief of sustaining 'scholarly composure' the affective and emotional impact of fieldwork is often left on the margins of recognition. This paper explores the value of autoethnography as a creative-relational approach to promote spaces in which researchers feel safe enough to process fieldwork experiences through debriefing sessions. This is a courageous effort that calls for a transformative ethico-onto-epistemological shift in the academy. One that opens-up ways of 'knowing and being' that are not entirely about an outcome-based pursuit but about growth and change that materializes through relationality.
Practitioners working in social welfare, education, judicial circuits, psychology, and many other domains of human sciences daily decide on best treatments for their clients. The authors expect those practitioners to base their decisions on evidence from scientific research. The Campbell collaboration is an international nonprofit organization that supports a systematic evaluation of the effects of existing and new arising interventions in social sciences. In November 2005, 20 local volunteers launched the Belgian Campbell group. The most important tasks of this group are (a) to organize course programs on systematic reviews and (b) to assist Belgian authors willing to contribute to the Campbell collaboration in the writing of their protocol and systematic review. In this article, the authors introduce the concept of a systematic review and present the first achievements of the Belgian Campbell group, its current strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.
The built and living environment in the Flemish region in Belgium is evolving noticeably. It is densifying at an ever‐faster pace and, along the way, becoming increasingly unfamiliar to its inhabitants. Many people face profound difficulties in autonomously and positively dealing with such drastic changes, causing their feeling of home to waver. Triggered by these challenges and supported by the local authority of a Flemish town, the experimental and co‐creative art project Mount Murals set out to stimulate new embodied interactions between and among local residents of various ages and backgrounds and with their built environment. These include remembering place‐related sentiments, being aware of body language that plays between participants while co‐creating and sensing an invigorating stimulus when seeing results. Awakening intrinsic appreciation in people for their own environment and associated social relationships stimulates an inclusive dealing with estranged relationships in space. Referring to the relational neuroscience principles attachment, co‐creating and co‐regulating as a modus of relational resonating, we explore how and under which conditions Mount Murals' co‐creative art trajectory supports an evolving embodied place attachment, an essential element of the sense of belonging, in participants. By embedding assets inherent to art creation in action research and starting with meaningful everyday objects, Mount Murals carries forward an art expression that considers the co‐creation process and its co‐creative products as equally important.
In the last decades, we have witnessed a growing interest for the use of photovoice, also referred to as participatory photography, as a visual research method, particularly in social sciences. In this systematic review of the literature, we seek to explore how the methodology has been applied in studies that focus on research with, on and about women. We critically evaluate the potential of photovoice to 'give' voice to and empower female participants. Nineteen relevant articles were identified and analyzed using a descriptive within- and cross-case analysis. Several authors claimed their study was inspired by feminist theory; however, few were convincing in the way this was implemented in practice. Empowerment claims were made by many, however, seldom evaluated at the end of the studies. We outline how female voices can manifest themselves in different phases of a research process and present types of empowerment that can potentially be reached through photovoice.
