Doing Critical Health Communication: Negotiating the Terrain of Transdisciplinary Collaboration

Abstract

In this reflective article, drawing on our personal and productive experiences with transdisciplinary research, we think about how critical health communication scholars can speak to audiences outside the discipline of communication in order to make an impact on public health and policy, health promotion, and health care delivery. We first take into consideration how we are situated in our relationship with transdisciplinary research, as well as the challenges and opportunities involved in collaborating with transdisciplinary teams. We then discuss ways we can navigate the inherent method/ological tensions in such collaborations. We argue that while the multidimensional nature of health and illness-especially in the face of skyrocketing healthcare costs and disparities-mandates transdisciplinary research and action, navigating the epistemic and methodological boundaries is nevertheless not easy. Here, we focus on how the methodological considerations of "critical" health scholarship are situated vis-à-vis the epistemic commitments in the disciplines of our potential allies and whether it is possible to collaborate in ways that can enhance the goal of social justice, equity and human rights within public health and communication.Keywords: critical health communication, paradigms, research methods, transdisciplinary teams, rigor and bias in research Critical approaches to health communication are concerned with how power influences society's "cultural constructions of health and responses to illness" (Zoller, 2014, p. 270). Critical scholars are motivated by an explicitly political and ethically grounded goal of fostering social justice, equity and human rights, achieved by unmasking the sociopolitical forces that regulate and constrain the health and illness experiences of various disadvantaged, marginalized, and/or oppressed groups of people. As Zoller and Kline (2008) explain, "Critical theorizing involves deconstructing dominant, taken-for-granted assumptions about health, often with the hope of introducing possibilities for alternative, more inclusive meaning systems" (p. 271). One might say critical approaches are inherently-indeed, overtly-"biased." That is, critical health communication scholars enter into the fray with a clear personal commitment to promote progressive social change as a lever for health and development.Critical approaches presume hegemonic structures and, importantly, the need to rectify concomitant social inequities and injustices that impact an individual's lived experiences of health and well-being. For instance, Dutta's (2008) influential culture-centered approach to health communication recognizes that certain sectors of the population have been marginalized by "institutional practices of policymakers, interventionists, and program evaluators" and the goal of

Power and Privilege

“…This stance is intentional and explicit, and it is through this active process of deconstruction and offering alternative perspectives that we seek social change and innovation. 22 Prominent theoretical schools of thought that guided this critical analysis include feminist theory, critical race theory, and emancipatory inquiry, which seek ways to challenge inequities and provide new ways from which to examine the intersection of race, ethnic background, gender, and social class. [18][19][20][21][22] Through the incorporation of the voices of commonly underrepresented groups, such as women and people of color, the goal is to produce a more meaningful and relevant conceptualization of interpersonal communication to ultimately guide the ever-expanding role of oncology patient navigators.…”

“…22 Prominent theoretical schools of thought that guided this critical analysis include feminist theory, critical race theory, and emancipatory inquiry, which seek ways to challenge inequities and provide new ways from which to examine the intersection of race, ethnic background, gender, and social class. [18][19][20][21][22] Through the incorporation of the voices of commonly underrepresented groups, such as women and people of color, the goal is to produce a more meaningful and relevant conceptualization of interpersonal communication to ultimately guide the ever-expanding role of oncology patient navigators. We recognize that sexual minorities represent a growing and medically underserved group in the United States; however, for the purposes of this analysis, we are focusing primarily on cisgender women (those whose gender identity aligns with their sex assigned at birth).…”

“…The stance of critical scholarship is to give voice to and empower those who are marginalized. This stance is intentional and explicit, and it is through this active process of deconstruction and offering alternative perspectives that we seek social change and innovation 22. Prominent theoretical schools of thought that guided this critical analysis include feminist theory, critical race theory, and emancipatory inquiry, which seek ways to challenge inequities and provide new ways from which to examine the intersection of race, ethnic background, gender, and social class 18–22.…”

Representing cervical cancer in a government social media health campaign in China: moralizing and abstracting women’s sexual health

“…As scholarship in critical health communications shows, medical knowledge is never neutral but is infused with all kinds of cultural, institutional and ideological notions and interests (Gwyn, 2002;Kline and Khan, 2019;Lupton, 1995;Zoller, 2014). Here, this conservative discourse not only silences women's sexual desires, but conflates them with other forms of 'weakness' such as drug abuse.…”

The “Survival Pending Revolution” COVID-19 vaccination campaign: an example of critical communication theory in action

“…The so-called critical approaches to health communication are concerned with how power influences society's cultural constructions of health and responses to illness ( 3 ). As Kline and Khan stated, “Critical communicators are motivated by an explicitly political and ethically grounded goal of fostering social justice, equity and human rights, achieved by unmasking the sociopolitical forces that regulate and constrain the health and illness experiences of various disadvantaged, marginalized, and/or oppressed groups of people”.…”