Cited by 164Mental Health and Patient InvolvementCommunity Health and DevelopmentQualitative Research Methods and Ethics

Critical perspectives on ‘consumer involvement’ in health research: Epistemological dissonance and the know-do gap

Open access
Ward, Paul R., Thompson, Jill, Barber, Rosemary, Armitage, Christopher J., Boote, Jonathan D., Cooper, Cindy L., Jones, Georgina L.·2010·Journal of Sociology

Abstract

Researchers in the area of health and social care (both in Australia and internationally) are encouraged to involve consumers throughout the research process, often on ethical, political and methodological grounds, or simply as ‘good practice’. This article presents findings from a qualitative study in the UK of researchers’ experiences and views of consumer involvement in health research. Two main themes are presented. First, we explore the ‘know—do gap’ which relates to the tensions between researchers’ perceptions of the potential benefits of, and their actual practices in relation to, consumer involvement. Second, we focus on one of the reasons for this ‘know—do gap’, namely epistemological dissonance. Findings are linked to issues around consumerism in research, lay/professional knowledges, the (re)production of professional and consumer identities and the maintenance of boundaries between consumers and researchers.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1440783309351771

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Ward et al. argued that the trend towards consumerism has shaped the commodification of research.

    “The metaphor of an 'industrialised' scale of research suggested by our data echoes the similar argument of Ward et al. 39 that the trend towards consumerism has shaped the commodification of research.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Aldridge, A. (2003). Consumption. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  2. Giddens, A. (1994). Risk, Trust, Reflexivity. In U. Beck, A. Giddens & S. Lash (Eds.), Reflexive Modernization. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  3. Hill, S. (2007). Involving the Consumer in Health Research. In M. Saks & J. Allsop (Eds.), Researching Health. Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods. (pp. 351-367). London: Sage.
  4. Irwin, A., & Michael, M. (2003). Ethno-epistemic assemblages: heterogeneity and relationality in sceintific citizenship. Science, Social Theory and Public Knowledge (pp. 111-136). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
  5. Williamson, C. (1995). A manager's guide to consumers. Health Services Journal, 105, 28-29.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ward, P. R., Thompson, J., Barber, R., Armitage, C. J., Boote, J. D., Cooper, C. L., & Jones, G. L.
Affiliations
  • Flinders University (AU)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • Sheffield Health and Social Care NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Ward, Paul R.
  • Thompson, Jill
  • Barber, Rosemary
  • Armitage, Christopher J.
  • Boote, Jonathan D.
  • Cooper, Cindy L.
  • Jones, Georgina L.
Venue
Journal of Sociology
Published
2009-12-16
Volume
46
Issue
1
Pages
63-82
ISSN
  • 0004-8690 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-7833
  • 1741-2978
OpenAlex
W2147355894
Cited by
164
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 9
FWCI
10.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Sociology (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Flinders Academic Commons (Flinders University) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Hertfordshire Research Archive (University of Hertfordshire) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Keywords
consumer involvement, health research, knowledge-practice gap, lay knowledge, professional knowledge, researcher experience

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