Involving young people as researchers: uncovering multiple power relations among youths
Open accessAbstract
In this paper, we address the issue of giving young people a voice by involving them as interviewers in the research process. While highlighting the beneficial outcomes and the empowering potential of this method, we critically discuss the assumption that peer-led interviews create less hierarchical power relations as no adult is involved. We thus caution against seeing this method as the ultimate solution to young people's marginalisation. Considering that participation is a form of power, we argue that it is essential to acknowledge and work with the power relations that characterise young people's everyday lives and that thus also affect the creation of a participatory arena with them. Power relations among young people, however, have been mainly neglected in previous research. The paper draws on a participatory research project conduced with young people (14–16 years old) in rural east-Germany that focuses on the complexity of young people's daily life experiences and perceptions of their future prospects.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Another potential for research with children to be experienced as disempowering lies in the multiple-power relations among young people themselves which affect the research process, including peer group cultures and classroom dynamics that work against fairness and collegiality.
“Another potential for research with children to be experienced as disempowering, and which has been given limited attention, lies in the multiple-power relations among young people themselves which affect the research process (Schäfer and Yarwood, 2008) including peer group cultures and classroom dynamics that work against fairness and collegiality (Todd, 2012).”
From Child participatory research methods: Attempts to go ‘deeper’ (2017) · cites this paper as Schäfer and Yarwood, 2008
Cites
Spatialising Participatory Approaches: The Contribution of Geography to a Mature Debate
Kesby, M. (2007) · Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space · doi:10.1068/a38326 · Cited by 182 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Child participatory research methods: Attempts to go ‘deeper’
Horgan, D. (2017) · Childhood · doi:10.1177/0907568216647787 · Cited by 204 · see citing works
- Authors
- Schäfer, N., & Yarwood, R.
- Affiliations
- University of Exeter (GB)
- University of Plymouth (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Schäfer, Nadine
- ORCID
- Yarwood, Richard
- Venue
- Children's Geographies
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2008-05
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 121-135
- ISSN
- 1473-3277 (ISSN-L)
- 1473-3285
- OpenAlex
- W2005877878
- Cited by
- 84
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 9.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Locations
- Children s Geographies (publishedVersion)
- PEARL (University of Plymouth) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion)
- Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Children's Rights and Participation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Participatory Visual Research Methods
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Youth Education and Societal Dynamics
- Keywords
- youth participation, youth marginalization, participatory research, youth voice, youth empowerment, everyday experience, perceptions of the future, rural youth, East Germany
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review