Participatory Research Practices Research Articles

Epistemic Caring: An Ethical Approach for the Co-Constitution of Knowledge in Participatory Research Practice

ABSTRACT Inspired by interviews conducted with scientists who primarily use participatory research forms, the article develops the concept of epistemic caring as a proposal for a participatory research practice that is sensitive for epistemological difference and the associated consequences. Based on the observation that participatory research has so far hardly been able to produce an equal co-constitution of knowledge, the article points out epistemological pitfalls that exist in it and analyses two specific concepts as examples of the risk of problematic epistemological and hegemonic tendencies sneaking into this kind of research practice with harmful consequences for the non-academic participants, that is: empowerment and participation/co-production. Following the recent debate on care in the Environmental Humanities and Karen Barad’s methodological thoughts on diffraction, the article reconceptualizes participatory research as a matter of care consisting of multiple care relations in order to be able to grasp the complex epistemic entaglements and intra-dependencies contained within it. Conceiving these relationships between academic and non-academic participants as an ecology of care themself helps to understand that they are fundamentally precarious and transformative and thus inherently ethical.

Expanding community-based participatory action research practices to clubhouses through sustainable research activities.

There is growing utilization and acknowledgement of the benefits of community-based participatory action research (CBPAR) in advancing health practices and equity. However, the sustainability and full impact of CBPAR in health care settings faces many obstacles and limitations. The present article examines the synergies between CBPAR and Clubhouse programs, presents the demonstration and ongoing implementation of sustainable CBPAR practices at Fountain House in New York City, and offers lessons learned for other Clubhouses and similar programs seeking to integrate CBPAR. Alignment in practice and principles between CBPAR and Clubhouse programs are presented. The innovation and ongoing sustainable CBPAR practices in the Fountain House Clubhouse program are examined with a contribution of practice guidance for other Clubhouse and similar programs in further adopting and learning CBPAR into participatory health practices. Clubhouse psychosocial rehabilitation programs present structurally conducive settings for the success and sustainability of CBPAR activities and projects. The Fountain House examination and demonstration of integrating CBPAR sustainably into core Clubhouse programming presents opportunities for further integration, research, and practice guidance in uniquely leveraging features of the Clubhouse model to advance health equity and rehabilitative outcomes through CBPAR. The opportunity for incorporating structural CBPAR activities within Clubhouse programs can be informed by the experience, processes, and lessons applied in the Fountain House example. Further research into the rehabilitation, program, and equity benefits of Clubhouse and CBPAR integration could uniquely contribute to the advancement of sustainable participatory research practices across the mental health field generally. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Reflecting on participation’s promises: Insights from collaborative research about unaccompanied child migrants, care, and the UK’s hostile immigration regime

Engaging with critiques of participatory research’s transformative claims, in this article, co-researchers from the Children Caring on the Move project critically reflect on experiences of doing research together. Our dialogue considers how the project’s motivating ethos of ‘nothing about us, without us’ permeated the research, to offer insights about the value, challenges, and practice of participatory research. Relations of care and building collective outlooks have helped to generate knowledge aimed at challenging hostile border regimes within and beyond spaces of research.

Chasing balloons as scientific practice: On transformative cocreation and epistemic ethics of care in the emerging field of youth citizen social science

How does including youth in research within a citizen social science framework challenge and transform our participatory action research practices and approaches? Through a storying journey we unravel how the training and subsequent conducting of a co-creative research process with young citizen social scientists are evolving from a cacophony of traditions, approaches and disciplines, among them youth participatory action research, action research in organizations, citizen science and social anthropology. The article is based on empirical research with a group of young people in Oslo, Norway, involved in a large collaborative citizen social science project on social inclusion of youth in Europe. We have witnessed closely how an epistemic ethics of care is integral to securing the epistemic justice of youth and argue that citizen social science can promote both epistemic justice and epistemic abundance by including youth in all parts of a rigorous research process that produces new scientific knowledge. Yet, we found that performing an ethics of care is (close to) impossible within the current conditions and structures of social sciences, as our ideals and views on what science is, delimit the practices of relational care necessary for inclusive processes. The implications of our findings call for an ethics of care framework for both citizen social science and action research practices.

Fuzzy cognitive mapping in participatory research and decision making: a practice review

BackgroundFuzzy cognitive mapping (FCM) is a graphic technique to describe causal understanding in a wide range of applications. This practice review summarises the experience of a group of participatory research specialists and trainees who used FCM to include stakeholder views in addressing health challenges. From a meeting of the research group, this practice review reports 25 experiences with FCM in nine countries between 2016 and 2023.ResultsThe methods, challenges and adjustments focus on participatory research practice. FCM portrayed multiple sources of knowledge: stakeholder knowledge, systematic reviews of literature, and survey data. Methodological advances included techniques to contrast and combine maps from different sources using Bayesian procedures, protocols to enhance the quality of data collection, and tools to facilitate analysis. Summary graphs communicating FCM findings sacrificed detail but facilitated stakeholder discussion of the most important relationships. We used maps not as predictive models but to surface and share perspectives of how change could happen and to inform dialogue. Analysis included simple manual techniques and sophisticated computer-based solutions. A wide range of experience in initiating, drawing, analysing, and communicating the maps illustrates FCM flexibility for different contexts and skill bases.ConclusionsA strong core procedure can contribute to more robust applications of the technique while adapting FCM for different research settings. Decision-making often involves choices between plausible interventions in a context of uncertainty and multiple possible answers to the same question. FCM offers systematic and traceable ways to document, contrast and sometimes to combine perspectives, incorporating stakeholder experience and causal models to inform decision-making. Different depths of FCM analysis open opportunities for applying the technique in skill-limited settings.

“A problem shared is a problem solved:” integrating human-centered design and implementation science to optimize lay counselor supervision in Western Kenya

Implementation science and human-centered design (HCD) offer useful frameworks and methods for considering and designing for individuals' needs and preferences when implementing new interventions or technologies in global health. When used in tandem, the two approaches may blend creative and partnered research methods with a focus on the factors necessary to design, implement, and sustain interventions. However, research is needed that describes the process of blending these two approaches and explores the experiences of community partners. This study builds from a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial in Western Kenya, wherein teachers and community health volunteers have been trained to provide trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT). Mobile phones emerged as a tool to supervise lay counselors from afar; however, their use was characterized by unique challenges. Informed by human-centered design and implementation science, we first engaged lay counselors (n = 24) and supervisors (n = 3) in individual semi-structured interviews then hosted an in-person participatory workshop to “co-design” solutions to optimize the use of mobile phone supervision. Lay counselors participated in focus group discussions regarding their experiences in the workshop. Focus group transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. We describe our approach as well as focus group discussion results. Counselors felt the workshop was a valuable experience to learn new strategies from their colleagues, and they enjoyed the “collaborative spirit” that emerged as they worked together. Counselors felt that varying small and large group discussions fostered participation by creating opportunities for more people to engage and share their thoughts. Counselors suggested the approach be improved by providing more tangible materials (e.g., hand-outs) and more closely following a schedule of activities. It is important to also center stakeholders’ experiences as partners in the research process. Though counselors largely expressed positive sentiments, they also shared valuable suggestions for how to improve participatory research practices in the future.

Participatory and Place-Based Socioeconomic Knowledge Generation: An Experience in Community-Based Research Pedagogy

This article uses fieldnotes along with student and practitioner feedback to recount the challenges, benefits, and broader learnings of engaging master’s students in a participatory research seminar. The students developed research proposals about a real-world socioeconomic challenge with and for local practitioners. Proposals were consistent with the principles and practices of participatory action research (PAR). The planning, implementation, and assessment of this course was informed by feminist scientific philosophies of collaboration, situatedness, partiality, accountability, and a sensitivity to power dynamics. In line with both PAR and SoTL principles, there was an explicit emphasis on partnership, reflexivity, and broad forms of learning in both the classroom and practitioner meetings. The students were challenged by the unfamiliarity of the research approach, the need to navigate a new way of working directly with stakeholders, as well as the responsibility to the community that participatory approaches espouse. Despite the challenges, the students were eager to soak up local knowledges, reflect on their role as researchers, and contribute constructively if they could.

Enhanced or hindered research benefits? A realist review of community engagement and participatory research practices for non-communicable disease prevention in low- and middle-income countries

IntroductionCommunity engagement and participatory research are widely used and considered important for ethical health research and interventions. Based on calls to unpack their complexity and observed biases in their favour,...

Lived Experience as the Basis of Collaborative Knowing. Inclusivity and Resistance to Stigma in Co-Research

Social scientific research has become increasingly aware of power asymmetries and the elitist and exclusive nature of scientific knowledge production. These debates have resulted in more inclusive and participatory research practices. In this article, we focus on co-research, which is a participatory and multi-perspective research strategy that invites the people whom the research concerns to participate as active and influential agents throughout the research process as experts on ‘the studied world.’ Co-research is increasingly being adopted in research involving people who belong to marginalised groups or who face the threat of stigmatisation. Despite its increasing applications, engaging in co-research requires reflection on several methodological and ethical questions that so far have been underexplored in the methodological literature. In this article, we address challenges in practicing inclusion and overcoming power asymmetries in co-research, particularly when it is conducted with people who inhabit societal positions with institutionalised stigma and whose participation in research is usually highly limited. In this article, building on our own experiences from different co-research projects—with care leavers, experts-by-experience with a history of crime and mental health recoverers—we aim to contribute to this literature by specifically focusing on issues of inclusion of co-researchers who face the need to negotiate with institutionally stigmatised positions. We suggest that reflexivity on positionalities and attending to plurality in identity work could provide a fruitful tool for increasing inclusivity in co- (and peer) research. We claim that such reflexivity is crucial from the very beginning of a co-research process (including ways of inviting and recruiting co-researchers) because this stage is crucial, as it forms the basis for the following stages and for the possibility of practising inclusion—even if imperfect—throughout the process.

The power of representation: Statistical analysis of diversity in US Alzheimer's disease genetics data.

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a complex disease influenced by genetics and environment. More than 75 susceptibility loci have been linked to late-onset AD, but most of these loci were discovered in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) exclusive to non-Hispanic White individuals. There are wide disparities in AD risk across racially stratified groups, and while these disparities are not due to genetic differences, underrepresentation in genetic research can further exacerbate and contribute to their persistence. We investigated the racial/ethnic representation of participants in United States (US)-based AD genetics and the statistical implications of current representation. We compared racial/ethnic data of participants from array and sequencing studies in US AD genetics databases, including National Institute on Aging Genetics of Alzheimer's Disease Data Storage Site (NIAGADS) and NIAGADS Data Sharing Service (dssNIAGADS), to AD and related dementia (ADRD) prevalence and mortality. We then simulated the statistical power of these datasets to identify risk variants from non-White populations. There is insufficient statistical power (probability <80%) to detect single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with low to moderate effect sizes (odds ratio [OR]<1.5) using array data from Black and Hispanic participants; studies of Asian participants are not powered to detect variants OR <= 2. Using available and projected sequencing data from Black and Hispanic participants, risk variants with OR = 1.2 are detectable at high allele frequencies. Sample sizes remain insufficiently powered to detect these variants in Asian populations. AD genetics datasets are largely representative of USADRDburden. However,there is a wide discrepancy between proportional representation and statistically meaningful representation.Most variation identified in GWAS of non-Hispanic White individuals have low to moderate effects. Comparable risk variants in non-White populations are not detectable given current sample sizes, which could lead to disparities in future studies and drug development. We urge AD genetics researchers and institutions to continue investing in recruiting diverse participants and use community-based participatory research practices.

RHYTHM AND NATURE: APPLYING TRAUMA-INFORMED APPROACHES TO RESEARCH TO PRIORITIZE CHOICE, EXPRESSION, AND JUSTICE

Abstract Trauma-informed approaches are widespread in direct clinical and particularly in social work practice, and have gained momentum in other areas such as research, organizational culture, supervision, and leadership. Given the recent collective global trauma of the pandemic and the cumulative effects of historic and ongoing racial injustice, a trauma-informed approach to research with older adults, especially with those who have disabilities, such as relating to dementia, can contribute to the movement for access, justice, equity, and inclusion for all. Closely aligned with practices of community-based participatory action research, trauma-informed research pays particular attention to the consideration of the design of studies, the analytical and theoretical frameworks, collaboration among researchers and participants, data collection methods, research questions that capture the knowledge and experiences of participants’ resiliency, strengths, and challenges, and the processes of reflexivity. Rhythm &amp; Nature was a 10-week pilot study designed to incorporate trauma-informed research approaches to promote principles of safety, trustworthiness, collaboration, choice, self-expression, and justice. We created a modifiable drumming and nature-based intervention to promote opportunities for self-expression and confidence. Before and after each drumming and nature-based session, we collected data using emojis (e.g., to increase access for people with limited language or literacy) to indicate how participants felt in the moment and used their ongoing feedback to continuously tailor the program to their unique abilities and needs. Both quantitative and qualitative results of this pilot study and implications for future research, policy, practice and education with older adults, particularly with disabilities, will be discussed.

How participatory are we really? The pitfalls and potentials of participatory research practices

Abstract The development of participatory research practices has been linked to high hopes of creating more relevant, socially robust, and democratic forms of academic knowledge. Researchers have, however, also pointed to a discrepancy between the ideals and realities of participation, in research and elsewhere. This paper uses these critiques of participation to unfold the dilemmas of two participatory projects: RECcORD: Rethinking European Cultural Centers in a European Dimension (2015-17) and Participate: Citizen Participation in Danish Cultural Centers (2019-23). Both projects approached participation as a method that involved co-researching participants from cultural centers, and as a practice to be explored while unfolding in the centers. This paper critically discusses the methodologies of the projects by developing an evaluative framework that highlights both the participatory potentials and pitfalls of the two processes. This transferable framework is based on the concepts of ‘unpredictability’, ‘friction’, ‘autonomy’, ‘inequality’, ‘failure’, and ‘scale’.

Doing youth participatory action research (YPAR) with Bourdieu: An invitation to reflexive (participatory) sociology

Recent years have seen an increased epistemological and methodological interest within sociology in participatory research. Seen as one mode by which to upturn the apparent antagonism between ‘town’ and ‘gown’, and as a pragmatic way to render sociology more ‘public’, participatory research seems to offer resolutions to some of the field’s more pressing recent concerns. It also appears to provide redress to continuing institutional pressure to establish ‘impact’ for our research. This article offers a close and theoretically informed examination of the assumptions and practices of youth participatory action research, or YPAR, in order to contribute to deepened disciplinary understandings of the possibilities and limits of participatory approaches. Framed by the reflexive sociology of Pierre Bourdieu, we draw upon cross-national conversations through which we have intentionally reflected on moments of ambivalence or discomfort in our own participatory research practice(s). We utilise these to engage critically with some recurring problems in YPAR, suggesting these also have relevance to sociological enquiry more broadly. Our collaborative process of mutual reflexivity, developed through walking and talking together, writing individually and then providing feedback and clarifications, has allowed us to deepen our understanding of the power dynamics at play in participatory sociological enquiry.

Designing an infrastructural service to bridging the open science ecosystem and society

Watch VIDEO. The presentation will be centred around lessons learned and experiences from the European project COESO, a double-layer research project providing a framework in support of collaborative engagement on societal issues. COESO supports ten citizen science pilots implementing a participatory approach in several European countries: small scale and high intensity collaborations, starting with the problem formulation and extending through the common analysis. The pilots include contributions from different disciplines of the social sciences and the humanities (history, philosophy, political science, sociology and anthropology) and involve artists, journalists, associative members, local authorities. The support provided to the pilots includes mutual learning sessions and accompaniment in the use of a research blogging platform: not only to share the projects’ results, but also to enhance the teams’ co-research activity. Furthermore, the COESO project develops a Virtual Ecosystem for Research Activation (the VERA platform), conceived as a "collaboratory", a common digital framework supporting the projects’ teams in finding partners, managing their project and finding funding. VERA is included among the "Research for Society" services of the OPERAS research infrastructure, whose mission is to support scholarly communication in the social sciences and the humanities (SSH) across Europe. In the effort to build a sustainable framework to support participatory research in the SSH through a digital platform, the COESO project journey provided insights on the challenges and opportunities of participatory research with and within the SSH, including how a research infrastructure can effectively design a service to foster community engagement, bridging different research practices and systems of knowledge (ensemble of practices, methodologies, vocabularies, concepts, outputs), supporting innovation in output formats and setting the premise of an enhanced network of research data linking. Participatory research and citizen science practices are research approaches that challenge the prevailing research processes, and potentially lead to innovative practices that allow for new bridges between knowledge systems and infrastructures. The presentation will highlight two innovative digital formats explored by two COESO pilots to render their research: (1) a multimodal website proposing an interactive map that guides visitors from the broader public to explore the research findings, which were accomplished through a plurality of participatory research approaches. It also includes the "data" behind: the website spatializes a set of materials: interviews, archives, focus groups, and portraits are displayed in a geographical space, and (2) the digital tool, Memorekall, which starts from a video recording to develop a multi-document (including notes, documents, audio, or web links) to record and document the creative process.

Enriching a randomized controlled treatment trial for anorexia nervosa by lived experience-Chances and effects of a lived experience council in the SUSTAIN study.

The development and advancement of treatment and care options is one priority in the field of eating disorders. The inclusion of persons with lived experience with eating disorders into clinical research could enrich and accelerate this endeavor, as they can add different perspectives on the disease and its treatment. Although lived experience perspectives are increasingly part of eating disorder research, they have not been widely or structurally implemented into clinical trials and there is limited information on the practice of participatory research, its framework and consequences. The present work outlines the participatory collaboration with a lived experience council in the randomized controlled treatment trial SUSTAIN. The manuscript is a participatory publication co-written by individuals with lived experience with anorexia nervosa and eating disorder researchers. We report on motivations for this approach, our collaboration principles, structures and shared experience of working together in the trial, the potential burdens and benefits related to participation for people with lived experience. We outline future directions and perspectives to integrate a participatory framework into clinical eating disorder research. The involvement of people with experiential knowledge is complex, but possible in clinical research on ED and bears huge potential for the development of more effective care. Incorporating perspectives of people with lived experience into a participatory framework of mental health research bears huge potential on a societal level. This includes more relevant research topics and designs, more tailored and effective interventions, and facilitated implementation, as well as dissemination, higher credibility, destigmatization of mental illness, and patient empowerment. Participatory clinical research, however, needs structural anchorage within science and society.

Combating stigma in autism research through centering autistic voices: a co-interview guide for qualitative research.

As autism has gained increased attention in the past few decades, autistic advocates have adopted the phrase "Nothing about us without us," illustrating the idea that autistic people should be centered in all conversations regarding autism. However, in a large portion of autism research, autistic people are still not meaningfully engaged throughout the research process, leading to continued stigma in research through biased methods. Thus, stigma about autism influences not only the content of autism research, but the ways in which neurotypical people conduct research alongside (or without) autistic people, ultimately resulting in less valid conclusions or research that actively harms the autistic community. One way to address this stigma is through involving autistic individuals as equal partners in the research process, such as by including autistic co-interviewers in qualitative studies of autistic people. In this perspectives piece, we will highlight the benefits of participatory research practices within qualitative research. Furthermore, we will outline methods for conducting co-interviews with autistic research partners and share insights from our experiences implementing this practice. We hope this piece provides researchers the practical resources and inspiration to continue working toward decreasing the stigma surrounding autism in research spaces.

Practices of Care in Participatory Design With Older Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Digitally Mediated Study.

Participatory Design (PD), albeit an established approach in User-Centered Design, comes with specific challenges when working with older adults as research participants. Addressing these challenges relates to the reflection and negotiation of the positionalities of the researchers and research participants and includes various acts of giving and receiving help. During the COVID-19 pandemic, facets of positionalities and (mutual) care became particularly evident in qualitative and participatory research settings. The aim of this paper was to systematically analyze care practices of participatory (design) research, which are to different extents practices of the latter. Using a multiyear PD project with older people that had to take place remotely over many months, we specify different practices of care; how they relate to collaborative work in the design project; and represent foundational practices for sustainable, long-term co-design. Our research questions were "How can digitally-mediated PD work during COVID-19 and can we understand such digital PD as 'care'?" Our data comes from the Joint Programming Initiative "More Years, Better Lives" (JPI MYBL), a European Union project that aims to promote digital literacy and technology appropriation among older adults in domestic settings. It targeted the cocreation, by older adults and university researchers, of a mobile demo kit website with cocreated resources, aimed at improving the understanding of use options of digital tools. Through a series of workshops, a range of current IT products was explored by a group of 21 older adults, which served as the basis for joint cocreative work on generating design ideas and prototypes. We reflect on the PD process and examine how the actors enact and manifest care. The use of digital technology allowed the participatory project to continue during the COVID-19 pandemic and accentuated the digital skills of older adults and the improvement of digital literacy as part of "care." We provide empirically based evidence of PD with older adults developing digital literacy and sensitizing concepts, based on the notion of care by Tronto for differentiating aspects and processes of care. The data suggest that it is not enough to focus solely on the technologies and how they are used; it is also necessary to focus on the social structures in which help is available and in which technologies offer opportunities to do care work. We document that the cocreation of different digital media tools can be used to provide a community with mutual care. Our study demonstrates how research participants effectively enact different forms of care and how such "care" is a necessary basis for a genuinely participatory approach, which became especially meaningful as a form of support during COVID-19. We reflect on how notions of "care" and "caring" that were central to the pandemic response are also central to PD.

Lessons learned in the practice of community-based participatory research with community partner collaboration in study design and implementation: the community scientist model.

Engagement of community participation is an innovative driver of modern research. However, to benefit the communities being studied, it is imperative to continuously evaluate ethical considerations, the relationship dynamic between researchers and community members, and the responsiveness of research teams to the needs and preferences of communities. Northwestern University's Center for Health Equity Transformation founded a community scientist program in 2018 that implemented a study using the Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) model. This project is an ongoing study of heavy metal exposure by geographic location in Chicago. Community scientists from various backgrounds, communities, and organizations formed an advisory panel, partnering with the cancer research team. This commentary describes lessons learned in structuring meaningful community involvement and benefit in CBPR, with a focus on three lessons learned that relate to ethics, relationships, and responsiveness. Our findings lay new groundwork for iteratively shaping best practices in CBPR.

168 Community Engagement, One Mile High: Developing a pipeline for training in community-based participatory research for investigators in Colorado

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Describe the pipeline of training, coaching, and council opportunities through the Partnerships of Academicians and Communities for Translation (PACT) and how it enhances Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) practices and increases community participation and capacity. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We conceptualized a pipeline for building capacity for community-based participatory research (CBPR). Key components include Colorado Immersion Training in Community Engagement which introduces academic investigators to specific geographic and demographic communities in Colorado, Partnership Development grants that fund time to building relationships between research and community, Joint Pilot Grants to provide subsequent funding for collaborative research, and the PACT, consisting of Community Research Liaisons (CRLs) and Community and Academic Council Members. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The pilot grants program was created in 2008; to date has awarded 138 partnerships. In response to academic and community needs, our core developed CIT in 2010. 16 CIT Participants received Partnership Development pilot grant funding, six of whom went on to receive Joint Pilot funding, and an additional 8 who started with a Joint Pilot award. There have been 24 Partnership Development awardees who received subsequent Joint Pilot funding. Ten CIT participants have either become a PACT council member, pilot grants reviewer, or PACT trainer or coach. There has been one person to complete the entire pipeline from CIT, pilot grant awardee, to PACT council member. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The pipeline is a strong foundation for engaging with academic and community researchers who aim to improve CBPR in Colorado. Our signature programs, CIT and Pilot Grants, are unique opportunities to increase community engagement across sectors and improve research practices.

More than participatory? From ‘compensatory’ towards ‘expressive’ remote practices using digital technologies

Based on the shift from face-to-face participatory action research (PAR) with groups in situations of vulnerability to digital methods during COVID-19, we reflect on how we can go beyond compensating for the physical absence of the researcher from the field. We argue that instead of simply aiming to replace face-to-face research with a digital equivalent for maintaining ‘participatory’ and ‘inclusive’ research practices, remote practices have the potential of being more-than compensatory. We suggest that when producing multi-method digital approaches, we need to go beyond a concern with participant access to remote practices. By rethinking remote PAR in the light of expressive rather than participatory research practices, we critically reflect on the (sometimes experimental) process of trying out different digital research method(s) with Brazilian youth in situations of digital marginalisation, including the initial ‘failures’ and lessons learned in encouraging diverse forms of participant expression, and ownership using WhatsApp.