Abstract:Drawing on a study of the War on Terror in Swat Valley, Pakistan, the article explores what it means to conduct research in a politically charged conflict situation when the researcher is aligned against the dictates of imperialism. How can the impact of research—in terms of its efficaciousness in serving communities as well as in supporting a larger understanding that can bring in peace—be evaluated? The article grapples with the effects of the study at two levels: the community or local level in Swat; and, a… Show more
“…Finally, Chaudhry (), in her contribution “Researching the War on Terror in Swat Valley, Pakistan: Grappling with the impact of communities and the transnational knowledge industry,” warns that the successful dissemination of research can be a challenge when the alternative meanings uncovered by research are continually obscured by powerful institutions with a stake in limiting the transfer of knowledge and the dissemination of those meanings. She suggests that one measure of impact validity is the ability of research to collect and disseminate alternative meanings in a context of war and violence where misrepresentation and manufactured realities collude.…”
Section: Underlying Premisesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Together these projects will help clarify the construct impact validity . Although most of the articles included in this issue focus on the United States (with the exception of Chaudhry, ; Hagger‐Johnson, Hegarty, Barker, & Richards, ; Proto, Lyon, Castillo, & Battistella, ), the framework presented should concern scholars and those involved in social change worldwide.…”
This article introduces and explores the concept impact validity, which is conceptualized as the extent to which research has the potential to play a role in social and political change or is useful as a tool for advocacy or activism. Including impact validity in the design of a research project means that, in addition to considering traditional criteria for determining the methodological rigor of research, it is also critical to consider the many related decisions that researchers make when working toward social change. In this article, the theory and methodology of impact validity and the assumptions that position impact validity as both a valid scientific approach, and a useful tool for promoting a more engaged social science, are considered. A "how to" guide is also provided that offers three guiding principles for enhancing impact validity: the strategic choice of research question, having explicit and realistic strategies for using research, and the strategic framing, communicating, and disseminating of findings.As many who engage political change through research would agree, the misuse, marginalization, and politicization of research is the norm rather than the exception. For example, numerous public policies in the United States, such as those related to: criminal justice (e.g., zero tolerance policing over treatment and prevention for drug-related crimes); educational reform (with the focus on testing and performance measures); abstinence-only sex education (an education policy which limits discussion of sexual health and birth control in school sex education classes); and welfare reform (a change in U.S. assistance to the economically disadvantaged, enacted in 1996), to name only a few, stand in dramatic contradiction to the bodies of empirical data built over decades of research.
“…Finally, Chaudhry (), in her contribution “Researching the War on Terror in Swat Valley, Pakistan: Grappling with the impact of communities and the transnational knowledge industry,” warns that the successful dissemination of research can be a challenge when the alternative meanings uncovered by research are continually obscured by powerful institutions with a stake in limiting the transfer of knowledge and the dissemination of those meanings. She suggests that one measure of impact validity is the ability of research to collect and disseminate alternative meanings in a context of war and violence where misrepresentation and manufactured realities collude.…”
Section: Underlying Premisesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Together these projects will help clarify the construct impact validity . Although most of the articles included in this issue focus on the United States (with the exception of Chaudhry, ; Hagger‐Johnson, Hegarty, Barker, & Richards, ; Proto, Lyon, Castillo, & Battistella, ), the framework presented should concern scholars and those involved in social change worldwide.…”
This article introduces and explores the concept impact validity, which is conceptualized as the extent to which research has the potential to play a role in social and political change or is useful as a tool for advocacy or activism. Including impact validity in the design of a research project means that, in addition to considering traditional criteria for determining the methodological rigor of research, it is also critical to consider the many related decisions that researchers make when working toward social change. In this article, the theory and methodology of impact validity and the assumptions that position impact validity as both a valid scientific approach, and a useful tool for promoting a more engaged social science, are considered. A "how to" guide is also provided that offers three guiding principles for enhancing impact validity: the strategic choice of research question, having explicit and realistic strategies for using research, and the strategic framing, communicating, and disseminating of findings.As many who engage political change through research would agree, the misuse, marginalization, and politicization of research is the norm rather than the exception. For example, numerous public policies in the United States, such as those related to: criminal justice (e.g., zero tolerance policing over treatment and prevention for drug-related crimes); educational reform (with the focus on testing and performance measures); abstinence-only sex education (an education policy which limits discussion of sexual health and birth control in school sex education classes); and welfare reform (a change in U.S. assistance to the economically disadvantaged, enacted in 1996), to name only a few, stand in dramatic contradiction to the bodies of empirical data built over decades of research.
“…One answer to this question of what influences those in positions of power is provided in many papers in this special issue, perhaps most clearly in the papers by Barreras and Torruella (), Chaudhry (), and also in the paper by Marquez‐Lewis et al (). These papers especially highlight the emotional aspect of impact validity, where readers may be influenced not simply by the rigor of the methodology or the clarity of the findings, but also by how the findings evoke emotions for the reader.…”
Section: The Politics Of Impact Validitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Chaudhry's () excellent paper on experiences and representations of the “war on terror” as it played out in the Swat Valley in Northern Pakistan highlights precisely how a social constructionist approach can be deployed not only to ensure impact validity, but also to navigate the needs of different audiences. As Chaudhry notes: For Pakistani audiences I have continued to emphasize the complicitnous of the Pakistani state and its repressive apparatus as well as the average Pakistani in perpetuating violence at discursive and material levels for those in the North Western region of the country including Swat.…”
This commentary reflects upon the possibilities opened up by the concept of 'impact validity'. Particular attention is paid to three key issues that appear across the entire issue, namely: 1) the role of understandings of politics in research that aims to achieve impact validity, 2) the intersections of career and real world impact, and 3) how researchers who aim for impact validity manage the needs of the differing audiences of their work. Overall, the commentary suggests that the concept of impact validity holds great potential to contribute to how we think about the ways we do research, and the role that researchers can play in the public sphere in terms of creating the space for news ways of knowing about the world, in addition to encouraging those in positions of power to think about how they may usefully be influenced by academic knowledge.
“…Initial versions of the protocol involved in‐depth, audiotaped interviews. But, as Drucker (), Barreras (), and Chaudhry () describe, data do not necessarily translate into impact validity. Discussions with March organizers and participants made it clear that the kind of discursive labor taking place through the March went beyond text and narrative, requiring us document the experience, memories, and imagination of our participants through video.…”
Section: Design Implementation and Impact Validitymentioning
As a project, Memoscopio sits at the intersection of activismAs a project, Memoscopio sits at the intersection of activism, social research, and advocacy. Rooted in the tradition of participatory action research (PAR) and
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
