Psychometrically and qualitatively validating a cross-national cumulative measure of fear-based xenophobia

.40. The result, a cross-national 5-item scale measuring fear-based xenophobia, was tested by means of the Three-step Test-Interview (Hak, Van der Veer and Jansen 2008) with 10 students in The Netherlands and 10 students in Norway. The analysis of these qualitative interviews shows that individual respondents’ criteria for the ranking of the scale items strongly depend on the way immigrants are framed. Ranking according to different levels of fear turned out to be only one criterion out of several possible ones used by individual respondents. Keywords Xenophobia . Measurement . Mokken Scale Procedure . Cross-cultural . qualitative validation . Three-Step Test-Intervie

The meaning of aphasia centres from the perspectives of people with aphasia and their relatives: understanding participation in the Dutch context

Background: Aphasia can have major consequences for participation. In line with other initiatives around the world, in the Netherlands aphasia centres provide support to people with aphasia and their relatives in the chronic phase to bridge the gap between therapy, rehabilitation, and participation in daily life. Although there is greater focus on participation in health care, the concept of participation is complex and not well-defined. Aims: The purpose of this paper is to understand the value and meaning of the aphasia centres in the Dutch context. We focus on the emic perspectives of people with aphasia and their relatives: how do aphasia centres contribute to building up a meaningful life with aphasia in the chronic phase and how do the centres support them to participate? Hence, this study also contributes to the understanding of the concept of participation and its meaning. Methods and procedures: This qualitative study used a naturalistic case study design in order to get an rich and multi-layered understanding of the context of aphasia centres. Within this context we focused on the experiences and perspectives of people with aphasia and their relatives. To secure involvement of people with aphasia themselves, research methods were attuned to their abilities to participate, and included participant observations, interviews, focus group meetings, and creative methods. Outcomes and results: Aphasia centres help people with aphasia to overcome isolation. They bring new goals and perspectives and help people find new meaning in life. They are experienced as a safe place to learn, overcome shame, and build self-confidence. Working in groups is a valuable element, providing a mutual sense of belonging. Also, people experience they can have a meaningful contribution by helping others. Relatives underscore these values and also feel supported in building up their life with their partner. Conclusions: Aphasia centres are a first step to overcome isolation and bear a first step towards participation in itself. They contribute to overcome barriers to relate to others by building self-confidence and overcome shame. This is a big step stone towards participation in the context outside the centre. From the perspectives of clients and relatives, participation is linked to the concept of being and belonging. At the same time, clients feel it is hard to meet societal norms of participation, framed as paid work, independency and self-reliance. This makes it harder to overcome shame. In this societal context, aphasia centres become even more relevant

In search of epistemic justice. Dialogical reflection of researchers on situated ethics in studies with people living with language and/or cognitive impairment

Background: Academics aim to understand the experiences of people living with cognitive and/or language impairment in their search for epistemic justice. Methods that do not rely solely on verbal information (e.g., interviews, focus groups) but also employ an attunement to the non-verbal - such as participant observation and creative methods, are seen as a suitable way to do justice to people's non-verbal interactions. However, in practice, researchers still experience ethical issues in everyday encounters with participants with cognitive and/or language impairment even when trying to address epistemic issues while employing such methods. This article aims to demonstrate 1) the importance of attending to the non-verbal in order to prevent epistemic injustice in research and 2) how a case-study approach and discussing ethical dilemmas with peers may help to unpack some of the ethical tensions that the researchers experience. Aim and methods: This article focuses on ethical dilemmas the authors encountered during their research projects in the past. Three cases chosen by the authors illustrate these dilemmas. Dilemmas are presented as auto-ethnographical written accounts, which were discussed during ten retrospective dialogical sessions (60–90 min) organized by the research group consisting of six academic researchers. Results: Ethically sound research, in which older people living with cognitive and/or language impairment are engaged, entails much more than following procedures about informed consent, privacy, submitting a proposal to an ethics committee, and using suitable methods and techniques. Ethical issues in these studies relate to everyday situations in which researchers tried to do justice to the knowledge of people who have difficulties expressing themselves verbally, but were challenged by what they have initially experienced as ‘having it wrong,’ ‘not knowing,’ and ‘losing something in translation’ in their practice. Finally, we learned that the interactions the researchers encountered were complex. They had to constantly evaluate the appropriateness of their approach, balance rational and intuitive forms of interaction and interpretation, and consider ways of communicating the research findings. Discussion and conclusion: Approximating epistemic justice in research with people with cognitive and/or language impairment requires extra effort in daily research routines. Sharing everyday ethical issues via case stories and reflecting on these issues encourages moral learning and brings new knowledge about the craftsmanship of researchers. Especially the collaborative and dialogical reflection helped the researchers to dig deeper and find words for intangible processes that often remain unaddressed. However, sharing stories about ethical issues requires mutual trust and safety because sharing and reflecting may bring discomfort, messiness, and uncertainty.</p

Developing and validating a cross-national cumulative scale measuring attitudes toward illegal immigrants

 .40. This cross-national four-item scale was evaluated by means of in-depth interviewing nine participants in the Netherlands and 15 participants in New Zealand. Analysis of the interviews shows that individually ranking the items of the scale is similar to the rank order generated by MSP, but the individual evaluation of the degree of negativity of items strongly depends on the way illegal immigrants are framed by subjects. The contribution of a mixed methods approach is discussed. It is suggested that the present quantitative measuring instruments measure a general average attitude, which may be likened to a measure of the average temperature of a country at a certain moment, while qualitative evaluations vary with the way illegal immigrants are framed by individuals, like variations in local temperatur