OCD, metaphor, and me: the horse that can’t eat apples

Barnsley, Sarah

doi:10.1016/s2215-0366(23)00040-8

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a source of direct expertise, people with lived experience may lead and publish their own academic scholarship (e.g., Milton, 2012), may provide insightful personal reflections (e.g., Barnsley, 2023), or may work as part of a collaborative research team (e.g., see Bond et al, 2022). They may be the source of insights driving an experience-based co-design process (EBCD) (e.g., Springham & Robert, 2015), or inform the general direction and ethos of a large project, through their contributions to an advisory group (e.g., Weich et al 2020).…”

Section: Expertise By Experience In Mental Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expertise as Perspectives in Dialogue

Larkin,

Bortolotti,

Lim

2024

Expertise

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this chapter we examine the notion of expertise by experience, with reference to mental health research, discussing some of the objections commonly raised against its legitimacy. Expertise is built upon knowledge or experience, but it arises from extensive efforts in seeking to understand something. We start by observing how the capacity for providing expert insight can be facilitated, by choosing to create environments and relationships in which different perspectives are heard and understood. We argue that the best way to characterise the integration of different forms of expertise is to describe the process as a case of perspectives in dialogue. Co-design and co-production approaches encourage perspective taking and use group processes and facilitation to support community consensus building. It is through such collaborative and relational processes that common objections against the legitimacy of expertise by experience can be addressed.

show abstract