The Oral History Reader. 3rd Edition. Robert Perks and Alistair Thomson

Participatory action research and oral history as natural allies in mental health research

“…The validity of the knowledge produced in PAR mainly rests on the level of authenticity achieved in research relationships (Lincoln, 2001), whereas oral history demands a critical engagement with the nature of storytelling, which is viewed as rhetorical constructs rather than transparent windows onto past worlds. Since the cultural turn, oral historians have been acutely aware of the peculiarities of oral history, bound up with the nature of memory (Portelli, 2015). For instance, omissions and conflations can reveal not only the effects of oppression and control but can also be expressions of agency that can transpire through the multiple negotiations between the narrator and the researcher, before, during and after the interview (Freund, 2013).…”

“…Oral historians have warned against uncritically embracing forms of storytelling (Freund, 2019). The specificity of oral history demanded a critical engagement with the nature of memory and subjectivity (Portelli, 2015). Calabria identified instances of silences and misremembering across the oral histories, including an overwhelming sense of nostalgia for the old asylums.…”

Oral History in Evaluation: A New Partnership to Expand and Enhance Both Fields

“…This means that the “facts” of the stories are true in the sense that they are the individual’s recollection and interpretation of their own experience but cannot always be objectively validated. 6 This does not mean they are useless to an evaluator, but rather that they must be put into context and used alongside other, more objective, measures to paint a richer, fuller picture of stakeholders’ experiences.…”