Beeker Timo, Glück Rosa Kato, Ziegenhagen Jenny, Göppert Lena, Jänchen Patrick, Krispin Helene, Schwarz Julian, von Peter Sebastian
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Immanuel Klinik Rüdersdorf, Rüdersdorf, Germany.
ExPEERienced - Experience With Mental Health Crises - Registered Non-profit Organization, Berlin, Germany.
Front Psychiatry. 2021 Jul 7;12:701312. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.701312. eCollection 2021.
In the field of mental health research, collaborative and participatory approaches in which mental health service users actively contribute to academic knowledge production are gaining momentum. However, concrete examples in scientific literature that would detail how collaborative research projects are actually organized, and how they deal with the inherent challenges are rare. This paper provides an in-depth description of a three-year collaborative project that took place in the wider context of a mixed-method process evaluation of innovative models of psychiatric care in Germany. The in-depth description we provide here draws on a vast body of notes and records that originated from numerous meetings and sessions. The research group continuously and systematically reflected on their collaboration itself using the interpretative method of "interactive interviewing," which included that also the personal memories of the researchers were collectively re-discussed before and during the process of writing. Our concrete experiences as a group were then contextualized with and analyzed in the light of more general challenges that are central to collaborative research in general. Performing collaborative research requires unconventional thinking and improvisation in order to find creative solutions for practical problems and to overcome the structural obstacles inherent to the process of academic knowledge production. An atmosphere of mutual trust and respect within the group is crucial, and continuous self-reflection or supervision can be largely beneficial. Challenges mainly originate from the vast heterogeneity that characterizes the researchers, usually including large differences in economic, cultural, and social capital. Collaborative research in the field of psychiatry is designed to bring together researchers with widely diverse backgrounds. Emerging conflicts are important parts of knowledge production but also exceptional opportunities to negotiate research ethics, and potential vehicles for personal growth and transformation. Success or failure of collaborative research largely depends on how divergences and conflicts are articulated, mediated, and reflected. This also holds true in the light of the power asymmetries within the research team and the structural power inherent to the engines of academic knowledge production.
在心理健康研究领域，心理健康服务使用者积极参与学术知识生产的合作性和参与性方法正在兴起。然而，科学文献中详细说明合作研究项目实际如何组织以及如何应对内在挑战的具体例子却很少见。本文深入描述了一个为期三年的合作项目，该项目是在德国精神病护理创新模式的混合方法过程评估的更广泛背景下进行的。我们在此提供的深入描述借鉴了大量源自众多会议和活动的笔记和记录。研究小组使用“互动访谈”的解释性方法持续且系统地反思他们自身的合作，这包括在写作过程之前和期间，研究人员的个人记忆也会被集体重新讨论。然后，我们作为一个团队的具体经历会结合一般合作研究核心的更普遍挑战进行背景化和分析。进行合作研究需要非常规思维和即兴发挥，以便为实际问题找到创造性解决方案，并克服学术知识生产过程中固有的结构性障碍。团队内部相互信任和尊重的氛围至关重要，持续的自我反思或监督会大有裨益。挑战主要源于研究人员的巨大异质性，通常包括经济、文化和社会资本方面的巨大差异。精神病学领域的合作研究旨在将背景广泛不同的研究人员聚集在一起。新出现的冲突是知识生产的重要组成部分，但也是协商研究伦理的特殊机会，以及个人成长和转变的潜在途径。合作研究的成败很大程度上取决于分歧和冲突如何被表达、调解和反思。鉴于研究团队内部的权力不对称以及学术知识生产引擎所固有的结构性权力，情况也是如此。
