The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Inclusive peer review: reflections on an adapted citizens’ jury with people with learning disabilities

Inclusive peer review: reflections on an adapted citizens’ jury with people with learning disabilities
Inclusive peer review: reflections on an adapted citizens’ jury with people with learning disabilities

Background: Inclusive research is widely accepted as an essential part of the process to democratise knowledge creation and dissemination. However, while peer review is an important part of academic publishing, the potential to include people with learning disabilities in this element of the research process has not previously been explored using a deliberative approach. Methods: Accessibility adaptations were made to the citizens' jury approach enabling people with learning disabilities to participate. Sixteen adults with mild to moderate learning disabilities were recruited to participate in the adapted citizens' jury. Jury members took part in capacity-building workshops to develop their knowledge of research and research processes. Six expert witnesses presented evidence to the citizens' jury and were questioned on aspects of inclusive research, representation, peer review and academic publishing processes. Facilitators supported citizens' jury members to reflect on the evidence presented and to develop recommendations for inclusive peer review. Findings: The citizens' jury was an effective inclusive research approach in this case. Jurors made recommendations related to the question of inclusive peer review: inclusive reviews should be done by groups rather than individuals; the research under review must be in accessible formats and on relevant topics; reviewers need sufficient time to conduct reviews; and diverse groups of people with learning disabilities should be involved. Conclusions: People with learning disabilities appreciate the importance of peer review but do not necessarily want to participate in it. This jury suggested creative approaches to disseminating, reviewing and engaging with research, including building more opportunities for dialogue between researchers and self-advocates. The adapted citizens' jury was a novel and effective method of supporting deliberation on this topic but other approaches to including the views and experiences of those with more severe learning disabilities should be explored.

citizens' jury, deliberative democracy, inclusive research, intellectual disabilities, learning disabilities, peer review
1354-4187
Henderson, Angela
8a094c47-1592-4fc8-9809-5fceefa1eac2
Cassidy, John
c7271f9f-daa5-4403-974b-9db4880dc429
Croydon, Abigail Elizabeth
afcce3d6-59f1-4563-a399-45811847a513
Nind, Melanie
b1e294c7-0014-483e-9320-e2a0346dffef
Henderson, Angela
8a094c47-1592-4fc8-9809-5fceefa1eac2
Cassidy, John
c7271f9f-daa5-4403-974b-9db4880dc429
Croydon, Abigail Elizabeth
afcce3d6-59f1-4563-a399-45811847a513
Nind, Melanie
b1e294c7-0014-483e-9320-e2a0346dffef

Henderson, Angela, Cassidy, John, Croydon, Abigail Elizabeth and Nind, Melanie (2024) Inclusive peer review: reflections on an adapted citizens’ jury with people with learning disabilities. British Journal of Learning Disabilities. (doi:10.1111/bld.12603).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background: Inclusive research is widely accepted as an essential part of the process to democratise knowledge creation and dissemination. However, while peer review is an important part of academic publishing, the potential to include people with learning disabilities in this element of the research process has not previously been explored using a deliberative approach. Methods: Accessibility adaptations were made to the citizens' jury approach enabling people with learning disabilities to participate. Sixteen adults with mild to moderate learning disabilities were recruited to participate in the adapted citizens' jury. Jury members took part in capacity-building workshops to develop their knowledge of research and research processes. Six expert witnesses presented evidence to the citizens' jury and were questioned on aspects of inclusive research, representation, peer review and academic publishing processes. Facilitators supported citizens' jury members to reflect on the evidence presented and to develop recommendations for inclusive peer review. Findings: The citizens' jury was an effective inclusive research approach in this case. Jurors made recommendations related to the question of inclusive peer review: inclusive reviews should be done by groups rather than individuals; the research under review must be in accessible formats and on relevant topics; reviewers need sufficient time to conduct reviews; and diverse groups of people with learning disabilities should be involved. Conclusions: People with learning disabilities appreciate the importance of peer review but do not necessarily want to participate in it. This jury suggested creative approaches to disseminating, reviewing and engaging with research, including building more opportunities for dialogue between researchers and self-advocates. The adapted citizens' jury was a novel and effective method of supporting deliberation on this topic but other approaches to including the views and experiences of those with more severe learning disabilities should be explored.

Text
Inclusive_peer_review_manuscript_final_accepted_version - Accepted Manuscript
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (68kB)
Text
Brit J Learn Disabil - 2024 - Henderson - Inclusive peer review Reflections on an adapted citizens jury with people with - Version of Record
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (1MB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 30 April 2024
Published date: 10 May 2024
Additional Information: Publisher Copyright: © 2024 The Authors. British Journal of Learning Disabilities published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Keywords: citizens' jury, deliberative democracy, inclusive research, intellectual disabilities, learning disabilities, peer review

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 490050
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/490050
ISSN: 1354-4187
PURE UUID: 82a4cb23-f95e-4623-b4bb-516e33459624
ORCID for Melanie Nind: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-4070-7513

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 14 May 2024 16:33
Last modified: 08 Jun 2024 01:39

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Angela Henderson
Author: John Cassidy
Author: Abigail Elizabeth Croydon
Author: Melanie Nind ORCID iD

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×