Yale School of Public Health.
University of Maryland, College Park.
J Couns Psychol. 2021 Apr;68(3):299-315. doi: 10.1037/cou0000537.
Social scientists are increasingly interested in methodological advances that can illuminate the distinct experiences and health outcomes produced by various systems of inequality (e.g., race, gender, religion, sexual orientation). However, innovative methodological strategies are needed to (a) capture the breadth, complexity, and dynamic nature of moments co-constructed by multiple axes of power and oppression (i.e., intersectional experiences) and (b) keep pace with the increasing interest in testing links between such events and health among underresearched groups. Mixed methods designs may be particularly well suited for these needs, but are seldom adopted. In light of this, we describe a new mixed methods experience sampling approach that can aid researchers in detecting and understanding intersectional experiences, as well as testing their day-to-day associations with aspects of health. Drawn from two separate experience sampling studies examining day-to-day links between intersectional experiences and psychological health-one focusing on Black American LGBQ individuals and another on Muslim American LGBQ individuals-we provide quantitative and qualitative data examples to illustrate how mixed methods investigations can advance the assessment, interpretation, and analysis of everyday experiences constructed by multiple systems of power. Limitations, possible future adaptations, implications for research, and relevance to the clinical context are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
社会科学家越来越关注能够阐明各种不平等制度(如种族、性别、宗教、性取向)所产生的独特经历和健康结果的方法进展。然而,需要创新的方法策略来:(a) 捕捉由多个权力和压迫轴共同构建的时刻的广度、复杂性和动态性质(即交叉经历);(b) 跟上对测试此类事件与研究不足群体健康之间联系的日益增长的兴趣。混合方法设计可能特别适合这些需求,但很少被采用。有鉴于此,我们描述了一种新的混合方法体验抽样方法,该方法可以帮助研究人员检测和理解交叉经历,并测试它们与健康方面的日常关联。该方法借鉴了两项独立的体验抽样研究,一项研究考察了交叉经历与心理健康之间的日常联系,重点关注美国黑人 LGBT 个体;另一项研究则关注美国穆斯林 LGBT 个体。我们提供了定量和定性数据示例,说明混合方法调查如何推进对由多个权力系统构建的日常经历的评估、解释和分析。讨论了局限性、可能的未来适应性、对研究的意义以及与临床背景的相关性。