|
Psychopolitical validity was coined by Isaac Prilleltensky in 2003 as a way to evaluate Community Psychology research and interventions and the extent to which they engage with power dynamics, structural levels of analysis, and promotion of social justice.〔Prilleltensky,2003〕 The evaluative series of criteria developed by Prilleltensky may be used within any critical social science research and practice model, but can specifically be defined within Community Psychology research as advocating for a focus on well-being, oppression, and liberation across collective, relational, and personal domains in both research and practice. An example of research that maintains psychopolitical validity is Bennett's study of Old Order Amish in Canada and their relationship with the state via cultural differences and industrial agriculture policies. Bennett's research investigates power dynamics between the state, mainstream culture, society, and the Amish community. This research looks at oppression and liberation at individual and community levels, and leads to local change as well as change in public policy.〔Bennett, 2003〕 This evaluative construct runs in opposition to "mainstream psychology's traditions () reinforce oppressive institutions even when individual psychologists have no such goal in mind,".〔Fisher & Sonn, 262〕 In addition this evaluation technique questions mainstream positivism. Psychopolitical validity asks the researcher and activist to think about power and how it affects fundamental epistemological and transformational values. What are the political and psychological implications for the researcher and the researched? What is the value of a given research question? What are the implications of a community intervention developed from said research question? How and why is research put into practice? Furthermore, this form of validity advocates for an interdisciplinary discussion of power in research and action. Prilleltensky describes one component of psychopolitical validity as, "the degree to which research and action take into account power dynamics operating in psychological and political domains and in the interaction between them,".〔Prilleltensky, 136〕 This inclusion of power and political dynamics is hypothesized to have the ability to move clinical and community psychology beyond helping the afflicted to helping change the systemic, structural sources of inequality that affect the population.〔Prilleltensky, 2003〕 Investigation and discussion of psychological and political dynamics may have the "power to promote wellness, resist oppression, and foster liberation,".〔Prilleltensky, 116〕 The interdisciplinary nature of psychopolitical validity lends itself to empowerment studies and social change 〔Speer, 2008〕 and could potentially be a useful construct in other critical disciplines within the academy. Prilleltensky and Fox suggest that psychopolitical validity should be institutionalized as a method of preventing wellness and justice from being discussed in isolation. This type of validity brings the two concepts together and politicizes the concept of wellness promotion.〔Prilleltensky and Fox,2007〕 :''Definition'' "Psychopolitical validity refers to the extent to which studies and interventions in the community integrate (a) knowledge with respect to multidisciplinary and multilevel sources, experiences, and consequences of oppression, and (b) effective strategies for promoting psychological and political liberation in the personal, relational, and collective domains,".〔Prilleltensky, 199〕 == Epistemic and Transformative Components of Psychopolitical Validity == Psychopolitical validity is divided into two components, epistemic validity and transformational validity. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Psychopolitical validity」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|