truths.
In order for research to make a difference, researchers need to ask
‘What are the governing contexts that have given rise to such a problem?’
‘How are imbalances of power maintaining this problem?’
‘How can this research disrupt the power relations that prevent social-justice-driven change?’
‘Which voices need to be heard and how can we extend what we can hear and see?’
‘Who is best placed to represent issues and how and with what support?’
Social constructionist research needs to draw on systemic and posthuman understandings of context and power to explain
1 Why change is difficult to effect;
2 Why challenging the social construction of language is in itself not going to result in systemic change, desirable, sustainable change over tokenistic gestures;
3 How to create change and why it might be difficult.
Using questions such as these, transmaterial worlding offers a form of inquiry which integrates a concern for the ecology of the planet into the concept of social.
Examples of Transmaterial Worlding as Inquiry
What then can research look like in a material world in which the matter of materiality of people's lives and the environments in which we/they live can be storied or researched but not always heard and acted on? Here are a few examples of transmaterial worlding which use a range of systemic questions to bring forth both human and beyond human knowledges, to explore narratives and act as transformational practice by inviting new and empathic ways of knowing.
Research driven by concern for young people at risk in their neighbourhoods could extend the framework of contextual safeguarding (Firmin and Hancock, 2018) to include human and non-human voices and understand research as transformative of people, places, discourses and power structures:
If the voices of stairwells in housing estates were included as research participants, what would they say works well about them as spaces to allow effective intimidation of young people by people who lead them into trouble?
How can research support young people to re-design the stairwells in their block of flats and empower them to make their views heard by those in power to make changes?
How can research map where local people, landlords and local organisations say the threshold is between personal monetary gain and social gain? And how can research bring forth their ideas for what can be done where doing nothing is not an option?
Research into the impact of mountain climbing on Everest could ask climbers, guides and travel agents questions designed to disrupt common tourism practice by enhancing transmaterial empathy and imagining more eco-sensitive positioning:
How could the snow at the bottom of Everest make its experience of being transformed by climbers heard in ways that climbers changed their practices?
How might human and non-human stakeholders in Everest map the tipping point between profit or gain of the individual, and the well-being of the mountain and its indigenous communities?
What kind of pre-booking preparation could there be for climbers to empathise with the mountain and its surrounding ecology before making a decision to book their trip?
If climbing Everest was no longer an option for more than a few people each month, what would others do who did not win a ticket in this lottery?
An inquiry into how current residents are affected by illness and lost relatives through radioactive toxicity brought into their worlds by local factories or nuclear plants (see the moving ethnographic research by Cathy Richardson/Kinewesquao (2018)) could ask:
Do the spirits of your ancestors speak to you about their experience or yours? How do they communicate? What do they advise you to do?
What are the languages that you feel local government officials are most likely to listen to when local people express worry about their sickness?
How can research support local people to teach government officials local knowledge and practices of knowing?
If local government officials understood your experiences and could listen to what the land has to say and took advice from your ancestors, what would persuade them to act on this understanding and knowledge? What would they see that convinced them that this had been a good thing to do?
How have you managed to keep alive practices that give life and hope?
These systemic questions invite relational reflexivity from the people being asked the question. The questions are based on an idea that questions are never neutral and are a contextual intervention for the person being asked a question (Selvini Palazzoli et al., 1980; Tomm, 1988). Some questions invite an ‘ethic of care’ in ‘imagining the other’ (McCarthy and Byrne, 2007). Others are hypothetical questions (Tomm, 1988), context-setting questions, appreciative inquiry, hope-oriented, narrative questions. Systemic therapy has a rich array of types of questions, a theory of transformation through dialogue and relational response-ability theories (for example, Burnham, 1992; Fredman, 2004; Hedges, 2005; McCarthy and Byrne, 2007; Tomm, 1988; Waldegrave et al., 2003).
Signposting for Transmaterial Worlding
Underpinning this signposting is the notion that social constructionist research is inevitably and intentionally perturbing, disruptive, creative, generative, transformative and unexpected – not homeostatic, representational or eliciting of a single truth (Simon and Salter, 2019). These signposts can support the development of new research practice and new professional practice.
The signposts are a fusion of:
1 Criteria for what counts as quality in qualitative research (for example, Bochner, 2000; Cho and Trent, 2009; Denzin, 2000, 2003; Ellis, 2000; Etherington, 2004; Richardson, 2000; Simon, 2018; Spencer et al., 2003; Tracy, 2010);
2 Social constructionist and systemic principles, values and theory (for example, Burnham, 1992; Markovic, 1993; McCarthy and Byrne, 2007; McCarthy and Simon, 2016 McNamee, 2004; Selvini Palazzoli et al., 1980);
3 New materialist theory (for example, Barad, 2007; Braidotti, 2011, 2013; Haraway, 2015, 2016).
Research material…
1 shows critical consideration of where and how voices of transmaterial participants are included in the research;
2 extends communication to include multilingual transmaterial narrative;
3 understands research as an intervention that moves the reader to learn or do something differently;
4 employs creative strategies to tell authentic stories well;
5 clearly states a social responsibility objective which addresses real concerns for people, organisations and the communities in which they live, showing how the practice in
