User Skills for Qualitative Analysis: Perspective, Interpretation and the Delivery of Impact

Centring the voices of survivors of child sexual abuse in research: an act of hermeneutic justice

Survivors of child sexual abuse (CSA) are known to hold silence and create distance between themselves and service providers for self-protection, as groomed behaviour or to protect the listener from vicarious trauma. Silence for many survivors has also been reinforced as a beneficial action by previous experiences of disclosing and being rejected, challenged, or disbelieved. How can researchers be sure the same dynamic is not playing out in research interviews? Generating reliable research data is an imperative and an act of epistemic justice that enables CSA survivors to testify to the suffering caused by abuse and subsequent trauma distress and to contribute to social discourse for change. Fricker, however, notes that the precursor to testimonial justice is hermeneutic justice. Hermeneutic justice pivots on the dual action of accurate understanding and interpretation, but CSA experiences may be beyond the comprehension of untraumatised listeners because their own frame of reference renders them unable or unwilling (even if unconsciously) to entertain the truth of such human depravity and cruelty. If survivors are not understood, their testimonies can be misconstrued or oftentimes excluded from the generation of epistemic knowledge, leaving the survivors unable to make sense of, and process, their experiences. These are crucial issues for researchers in the field of CSA and other crimes of sexual and gendered abuse. This study considers the operationalisation of a participatory research approach held within a lived experience research paradigm. Such methodologies advocate for peer involvement, which is becoming more widely recognised as supporting testimonial justice and the accurate understanding and interpretation of survivors' testimonies. The issue of validating the methodology and methods is considered, exploring a rigorous data audit and researcher reflexivity as contributors to trustworthy data. Peer and participant safety when researching through lived experience is addressed. Data from a doctoral research study are used to illustrate this article.

Ideological Dilemmas Actualised by the Idea of Living Environmentally Childfree

Over the past decade, the choice of living childfree has increasingly been viewed as a pro-environmental behaviour. Recent research has investigated statistical relations between environmental concern and reproductive attitudes, as well as exploring the processes around actually deciding to live environmentally childfree. Based on increased public attention about the phenomenon, this article employs Michael Billig’s notion of ideological dilemmas to analyse the media coverage of choosing to live environmentally childfree, attempting to answer how these dilemmas influence whether living childfree is perceived as a relevant pro-environmental behaviour. Thirty-one news items were analysed using a synthesis of critical discursive psychology and thematic analysis. The analysis identified five ideological concepts: liberalism, sustainable development, globalism, biologism and humanism. Each of these concepts contains positions supporting and opposing the idea of living environmentally childfree in Norway. These ideological dilemmas seem to weaken the perceived relevance of living environmentally childfree, as the topic is easily dismissed or framed as irrelevant. I therefore conclude that the discourse of living environmentally childfree is analogous to how society generally relates to solutions to the environmental crises.

Mutual (Mis)understanding: Reframing Autistic Pragmatic "Impairments" Using Relevance Theory

A central diagnostic and anecdotal feature of autism is difficulty with social communication. We take the position that communication is a two-way, intersubjective phenomenon-as described by the double empathy problem-and offer up relevance theory (a cognitive account of utterance interpretation) as a means of explaining such communication difficulties. Based on a set of proposed heuristics for successful and rapid interpretation of intended meaning, relevance theory positions communication as contingent on shared-and, importantly, mutually recognized-"relevance." Given that autistic and non-autistic people may have sometimes markedly different embodied experiences of the world, we argue that what is most salient to each interlocutor may be mismatched. Relevance theory would predict that where this salient information is not (mutually) recognized or adjusted for, mutual understanding may be more effortful to achieve. This paper presents the findings from a small-scale, linguistic ethnographic study of autistic communication featuring eight core autistic participants. Each core autistic participant engaged in three naturalistic conversations around the topic of loneliness with: (1) a familiar, chosen conversation partner; (2) a non-autistic stranger and (3) an autistic stranger. Relevance theory is utilized as a frame for the linguistic analysis of the interactions. Mutual understanding was unexpectedly high across all types of conversation pairings. In conversations involving two autistic participants, flow, rapport and intersubjective attunement were significantly increased and in three instances, autistic interlocutors appeared to experience improvements in their individual communicative competence contrasted with their other conversations. The findings have the potential to guide future thinking about how, in practical terms, communication between autistic and non-autistic people in both personal and public settings might be improved.