Connecting Participatory Methods in a Study of Older Lesbian and Gay Citizens in Rural Areas

Abstract

The aim in this paper is to present a discussion of the participatory research methods employed to explore intersectionality between sexuality, rurality and age through consideration of a research project investigating how older lesbian and gay citizens in rural southwest England and Wales interact with their local community. The aim of the project is to explore how older lesbian and gay citizens adjust to and connect with their rural environment, exploring the notion of a "rural idyll" for groups who may be seen as different. Discussion of the different methods used to explore themes surrounding connectivity, place, space and identity will be offered. These include a core biographic narrative interpretive method (BNIM), a visual ethnographic method, and an overarching participatory methodology. This methodological approach is reviewed using the six principles for working with disempowered groups identified by Whitmore and McGee (2001).

Co-research with older people: a systematic literature review

“…These projects often included creative data collection methods and interactive outputs for dissemination. For instance, in Fenge et al (2010), co-researchers were involved in biographical narrative interpretive interviews, visual ethnography, focus groups and theatrical improvisation workshops, which led to the creation of a film reflecting the findings of the research.…”

Meaningful dissemination produces the “long tail” that engenders community impact

“…The project explored the biographies of older gay and lesbian adults with experience of living in rural Britain. Building on the themes of identity and “coming out” identified in the earlier Gay and Grey Project, the project aimed to empower older LGBT people through a collaborative multi-method participatory action research design which embraced the principles of a Performative Social Science (Jones, 2016; Fenge et al , 2010; Fenge and Jones, 2012) in its dissemination plan. The emerging recollections, perceptions and storied biographies of older lesbians and gay men and their rural experiences formed the bulk of the data studied and the basis for story and characterisation in the short professionally made film, Rufus Stone.…”

“…The aim of this report is to explore the ways in which a body of participatory research concerning the needs and experiences of older LGBT people was used to create innovatory tools to engage communities in learning about the needs and experiences of older LGBT citizens (Fenge et al , 2010; Fenge and Jones, 2012; Jones et al , 2013). This body of research and dissemination activities has spanned a period of over 14 years, and has at its heart a commitment to inclusive co-production and public engagement.…”

“…Our community co-researchers were highly motivated to change the status quo regarding recognition of the needs of older LGBT people, and this included a desire to challenge discrimination and prejudice from health and social care providers (Fannin et al , 2008; Fenge et al , 2009). We, therefore, felt that the research outputs should include innovatory tools which could be used “to change minds, change attitudes, and help to build communities where tolerance and understanding are keys to connectivity in the future” (Fenge et al , 2010, p. 329).…”

Exploring Ethical Dimensions Associated with ‘Pushing for PINs’ and Probing: A Critical Commentary on Key Features of the Biographical Narrative Interpretive Method (BNIM) with ‘Vulnerable’ and Other Populations

“…BNIM draws on predominant themes in biographical research: temporality, memory, agency and explores participants’ unique subjectivities, capturing how interviewees experienced events in the moment, ‘future blind’, and therefore unaware of later consequences (Rustin, 2000; Froggett & Wengraf, 2004). BNIM can yield narratives of exceptional depth, highlighting the complexity of everyday life experiences and routines that may seem mundane, but which are linked to past, present and future subjectivities (Fenge et al, 2010).…”