Dataset Information

Emotion as reflexive practice: A new discourse for feedback practice and research.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Like medicine and health care, feedback is a practice imbued with emotions: saturated with feelings relevant to one's identity and status within a given context. Often this emotional dimension of feedback is cast as an impediment to be ignored or managed. Such a perspective can be detrimental to feedback practices as emotions are fundamentally entwined with learning. In this critical review, we ask: What are the discourses of emotion in the feedback literature and what 'work' do they do?

Methods

We conducted a critical literature review of emotion and feedback in the three top journals of the field: Academic Medicine, Medical Education and Advances in Health Sciences Education. Analysis was informed by a Foucauldian critical discourse approach and involved identifying discourses of emotion and interpreting how they shape feedback practices.

Findings

Of 32 papers, four overlapping discourses of emotion were identified. Emotion as physiological casts emotion as internal, biological, ever-present, immutable and often problematic. Emotion as skill positions emotion as internal, mainly cognitive and amenable to regulation. A discourse of emotion as reflexive practice infers a social and interpersonal understanding of emotions, whereas emotion as socio-cultural discourse extends the reflexive practice discourse seeing emotion as circulating within learning environments as a political force.

Discussion

Drawing on scholarship within the sociology of emotions, we suggest the merits of studying emotion as inevitable (not pathological), as potentially paralysing and motivating and as situated within (and often reinforcing) a hierarchical social health care landscape. For future feedback research, we suggest shifting towards recognising the discourse-theory-practice connection with emotion in health professional education drawing from reflexive and socio-cultural discourses of emotion.

SUBMITTER: Ajjawi R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9299671 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Participatory research has gained traction as an approach to unlock perspectives when creating scientific knowledge and to facilitate societal changes. By conducting research with people, participatory research strives to engage individuals' perspectives in designing, conducting, and disseminating the research. Nevertheless, few studies have unpacked how understandings of the studied phenomenon are shaped among diverse research partners and, concurrently, how different perspectives are combined. Nested within an overall participatory mixed methods study on aging with multiple sclerosis (MS), this qualitative study explores how understandings of aging with MS are shaped in encounters between university researchers, older adults with MS, and employees in a patient association. The study was collaboratively conducted in Denmark by three research partners: a group of older adults with MS, employees in a patient association, and university researchers. Data on how different understandings of aging with MS were represented and shaped during the three-year research process was generated through field notes, meeting minutes, focus group interviews, and individual interviews. The collected data was analyzed through a thematic network analysis. The study demonstrates how different understandings of aging with MS were represented among the research partners when the research was initiated. These understandings were shaped prior to -and, therefore, outside-the research setting, drawing from the research participants' lived experiences, professional backgrounds, and organizational cultures or situated in larger societal narratives. Through a process centered on reflexivity among the engaged research partners, the understandings of what it means to age with MS was shaped and re-shaped and eventually merged into a more dynamic understanding of later life with MS where different perspectives could co-exist. The findings demonstrate that research partners, including older adults with MS and employees from a patient association, brought diverse understandings to the study. Reflexive practices enabled these perspectives to co-exist, enhancing engagement and transparency, and fostering a dynamic understanding of later life with MS. This highlights the value of reflexivity in evolving complex understandings within participatory research.

Project description:IntroductionSupporting medical students' and junior doctors' development in busy clinical settings is challenging. As opportunities for developing trainees, for example, traditional bedside teaching, are decreasing, teaching outside of clinical practice is increasing. However, evidence suggests that effective learning through practice arises via an interplay between, first, what experiences are afforded by clinical settings and, second, how trainees engage with these affordances. Many studies investigating clinician learning through practice focus on only one of these two factors. Yet, a well-recognised methodological challenge of enabling learners to articulate how and what they are learning through practice exists. We need, therefore, to understand how this relationship plays out in practice in ways that enrich learning.Methods and analysisThis protocol describes a video reflexive ethnographic approach to illuminate how learning through practice in hospital settings occurs and can be enriched. The study will be conducted in two phases. In phase I, senior clinicians from emergency medicine, medicine and surgical specialties will be interviewed about how they guide trainees' learning through practice. These forms of guidance, analysed using the framework method, will inform phase II comprising observations of practice in: (1) emergency, (2) medical and (3) surgical departments. Video recorded episodes of clinicians' guiding learning through practice will be shared and appraised in reflexive sessions with each clinical team. Relational interdependent learning theory informs the design and data analyses to elicit and evaluate strategies for guiding learning through practice.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been received from both healthcare and university settings. The findings should provide important insights for clinicians about workplace learning practices. Findings will be disseminated across the project phases and to diverse audiences-locally, nationally and internationally. The dissemination strategy will use seminars, grand rounds, conference presentations and academic papers to articulate practical, theoretical and methodological findings.

Project description:BackgroundResearch codesign is generally defined as end-users' involvement in planning, implementation, and evaluation of projects. Recently, there has been a growing interest in codesign to maximise research acceptability, applicability, and impact and to address longstanding issues around power and depth of involvement. Frameworks have been developed to assist in understanding research codesign processes at a project level. However, little is known about how university based researchers construct or adopt a coherent approach to sustain research codesign in governance, methodological approaches, and practice. This study investigated the perspectives of researchers within a newly formed research institute about principles and practices of research codesign in the context of their previous and current projects. We also investigated their perceptions of institution-level enablers and barriers to codesign. University based researchers are our primary focus here and we intend to consult other stakeholders in future work.MethodsUsing an interview guide informed by exploratory work and a scoping review of the literature, we conducted 15 individual interviews with Caring Futures Institute (CFI) leaders and researchers at different career stages working across multiple areas of health, care, and social research. Qualitative thematic analysis was conducted.ResultsThe researchers we interviewed were involved in projects ranging from large nationally funded projects to small studies funded by the university or PhD projects. Research codesign activities were generally part of larger researcher-led projects but there were a few examples of community-led projects. There was agreement amongst participants on the principles and perceived benefits of research codesign such as partnership, co-learning, and power sharing. Less agreement was found regarding the definition of research codesign and best terminology to be used. Themes reflecting the success of research codesign included pre-existing community relationships, communication skills, knowledge, and training on codesign, balancing power relationships, use of external facilitators, and adequacy of funding, time, and resources.ConclusionsThe study reaffirmed the complexity of research codesign from researchers' perspectives and identified areas of potential action that may be beneficial for university based research institutions in building codesign skills, capacity and culture for example training, peer learning and funding support. Implications for practice improvement centre on a dual strategy of building practical capacity in researchers and integrating institutional dimensions (such as governance and leadership) into codesign frameworks. This can help to ensure research codesign is integrated into organisational culture and through the work of individual researchers.