College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.
Qual Health Res. 2023 Jul;33(8-9):663-672. doi: 10.1177/10497323231169495. Epub 2023 May 22.
Qualitative health research is hampered by narrow constructs of human communication that privilege participants with access to spoken and written (normative) language. With limited awareness of such things as augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) or the rights of people with complex communication access needs, qualitative research becomes a 'picker and chooser' of whose voices are included in studies and whose are not. In order for 'voices' to be heard, adaptations are required which include the acknowledgement and support of communication assistants (informal and formal) who can help provide a communication bridge between people with complex communication access needs and researcher(s). Yet little is known of who qualifies as a communication assistant nor the scope and limitations of this role in health research. Beginning with communication diversity arguments the article compares communication assistants with language interpreters before discussing practice and implications for health research.
定性健康研究受到人类沟通狭隘结构的阻碍，这些结构偏爱能够使用口语和书面语（规范语）的参与者。由于对增材和替代沟通（AAC）或有复杂沟通需求的人的权利等方面的认识有限，定性研究成为了“挑选者”，决定了哪些人的声音被纳入研究，哪些人没有。为了让“声音”被听到，需要进行一些调整，包括承认和支持沟通助手（非正式和正式的），他们可以帮助有复杂沟通需求的人与研究人员之间建立沟通桥梁。然而，对于谁有资格成为沟通助手以及在健康研究中该角色的范围和限制，人们知之甚少。本文从沟通多样性的角度出发，将沟通助手与语言翻译员进行了比较，然后讨论了健康研究中的实践和影响。
