Are you really using Yarning research? Mapping Social and Family Yarning to strengthen Yarning research quality

Abstract

Yarning as a research method has its grounding as an Aboriginal culturally specified process. Significant to the Research Yarn is relationality, however; this is a missing feature of published research findings. This article aims to address this. The research question was, what can an analysis of Social and Family Yarning tell us about relationality that underpins a Research Yarn. Participant recruitment occurred using convenience sampling, and data collection involved Yarning method. Five steps of data analysis occurred featuring Collaborative Yarning and Mapping. Commonality existed between researcher and participants through predominantly experiences of being a part of Aboriginal community, via Aboriginal organisations and Country. This suggests shared explicit and tacit knowledge and generation of thick data. Researchers should report on their experience with Yarning, the types of Yarning they are using, and the relationality generated from the Social, Family and Research Yarn.

Decolonising qualitative research with respectful, reciprocal, and responsible research practice: a narrative review of the application of Yarning method in qualitative Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health research

“…Decolonising research practice must privilege Indigenous knowledges and uphold self-determination and sovereignty which is not excluded from the analysis and reporting process. In line with recent research into Yarning application, [19] we recognise the need for refinement in the analysis process, and the importance of producing details of method and methodologies used.…”

“…As stated by Atkinson et al [ 19 ] “the more relational the Yarn, the greater the thickness of data, and an Indigenous Standpoint is likely to generate more relationality through shared implicit and explicit understanding for the Yarn”. Our research demonstrates that the relationality of Yarns is not consistently carried beyond the stages of data collection and into analysis, or at least, is not reported on.…”

“…1 [ 17 ]. Relationality of the Yarn is paramount to producing rich data [ 19 ]. It is reasonable to expect that Indigenous Standpoint generates deeper relationality, through shared experience and understandings of the Yarn [ 19 ].…”

‘Even though you hate everything that's going on, you know they are safer at home’: The role of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families in methamphetamine use harm reduction and their own support needs

“…Yarning as a mechanism was used by community researchers in the focus groups and interviews. This approach enabled the discussion and questions to remain fluid, with an intent to create a collaborative space, equally valuing the voices, interests and experiences of the study participants and researchers [24]. Focus groups and interviews were broadly organised in three parts, directed by the particular interests of each focus group or interview: (i) risk and protective factors of methamphetamine use—thinking about circumstances at community and individual levels that may increase or decrease the vulnerability of young people to engage in harmful methamphetamine use; (ii) problems associated with methamphetamine use for families, communities and the person using; and (iii) strategies to address and prevent methamphetamine use and related harms.…”

Applying an authentic partnership approach to facilitate optimal health of Aboriginal children

“…The concept and practice which involves a oneness with body, spirit and the earth has become known as Dadirri which is from the languages of Aboriginal people of the Daly River region in the Northern Territory. The Dadirri approach allows for deeper discussion of sensitive issues in a way that is respectful and reduces feelings of shame, anxiety and other similar emotions that can be triggered in unsafe environments, particularly where there is trauma (Craven et al, 2016;Atkinson et al, 2021). However, CHN are not accustomed or trained to facilitate indirect gentle inquiry approaches (Durey et al, 2016a).…”