SPRINGER BRIEFS IN RIGHTSBASED

APPROACHES TO SOCIAL WORK

Tina Maschi

Applying a Human
Rights Approach
to Social Work
Research and
Evaluation
A Rights Research
Manifesto
123
SpringerBriefs in Rights-Based Approaches
to Social Work

Series editor
Shirley Gatenio Gabel, Fordham University, New York, NY, USA
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/11694
Tina Maschi

Applying a Human Rights

Approach to Social Work
Research and Evaluation
A Rights Research Manifesto

123
Tina Maschi
Graduate School of Social Service
Fordham University
New York, NY
USA

ISSN 2195-9749 ISSN 2195-9757 (electronic)

SpringerBriefs in Rights-Based Approaches to Social Work
ISBN 978-3-319-26034-1 ISBN 978-3-319-26036-5 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-26036-5

Library of Congress Control Number: 2015954992

Springer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London

© The Author(s) 2016
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or
for any errors or omissions that may have been made.

Printed on acid-free paper

Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland is part of Springer Science+Business Media

(www.springer.com)
This book is dedicated to my Micah, my
precious boy and Sasha, my precious dog.
You both have shown me that unconditional
love, Frisbee, and surprise eggs are the
findings to the research question that lies
within.
Foreword

Even though you and I are in different boats, you in your boat and we in our canoe, we
share the same River of Life.

—Chief Oren Lyons, Onandaga Nation, USA

The rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened.

—John F. Kennedy, Civil Rights Announcement, June 11, 1963

For over a century, social workers have worked to improve the lives and situations
of individuals, families, and communities. Social workers, often acting on behalf
of the state’s interests, typically intervened according to what they themselves
perceived to be deficits in the lives and behaviors of persons in need. This approach
to working with people patronizes, stigmatizes, and too often revictimizes those we
seek to assist. It is long past time to revitalize and reframe our approach to working
with those we seek to serve. The books in this series reframe deficit models used by
social work practitioners and instead propose a human rights perspective.
Rights-based social work shifts the focus from human needs to human rights and
calls on social workers and the populations they work with to actively participate in
decision-making processes of the state so that the state can better serve the interests
of the population. The authors in the series share their strategies for empowering the
populations and individuals we, as social workers, engage with as clinicians,
community workers, researchers, and policy analysts.
The roots of social work in the United States can be traced to the pioneering
efforts of upperclass men and women who established church-based and secular
charitable organizations that sought to address the consequences of poverty,
urbanization, and immigration. These were issues that were ignored by the public
sphere at the time. Little in the way of training or methods was offered to those who
volunteered their resources, efforts, and time in these charitable organizations until
later in the nineteenth century when concepts derived from business and industry
were applied to distribution of relief efforts in what became known as “scientific
charity.” This scientific approach led to the use of investigation, registration, and

vii
viii Foreword

supervision of applicants for charity, and in 1877, the first American Charity
Organization Society (COS) was founded in Buffalo, New York. The popularity
of the approach grew quickly across the country. COS leaders wanted to reform
charity by including an agent’s investigation of the case’s “worthiness” before
distributing aid because they believed that unregulated and unsupervised relief led
to more calls for relief.
Around the same time, an alternative response to the impact of industrialization
and immigration was introduced and tested by the settlement house movement. The
first US settlement, the Neighborhood Guild in New York City, was established in
1886, and less than three years later, Jane Addams and Ellen Gates Starr founded
Hull House in Chicago, which came to symbolize the settlement house movement
in the United States. Unlike the individually oriented COS, the settlement house
movement focused on the environmental causes of poverty, seeking economic and
social reforms for the poor and providing largely immigrant and migrant popula-
tions with the skills needed to stake their claims in American society.
The settlement house movement spread rapidly in the United States and by 1910,
there were more than 400 settlements (Trolander, 1987; Friedman & Friedman,
2006). Advocacy for rights and social justice became an important component
of the settlement activities and led to the creation of national organizations like the
National Consumers’ League, Urban League, Women’s Trade Union League, and
the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). The
leaders of the movement led major social movements of the period, including
women’s suffrage, peace, labor, civil rights, and temperance, and were instrumental
in establishing a federal-level children’s bureau in 1912, headed by Julia Lathrop
from Hull House.
During this same period, the charity organization societies set to standardize the
casework skills for their work with individuals. Their methods became a distinct
area of practice and were formalized as a social work training program in 1898
known as the New York School of Philanthropy and eventually, the Columbia
University School of Social Work. In 1908, the Chicago Commons offered a full
curriculum through the Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy (now the
University of Chicago’s School of Social Service Administration) based on the
practices and principles of the settlement movement. By 1919, there were 17
schools of social work.
Efforts already underway to secure and strengthen pragmatically derived case-
work knowledge into a standardized format were accelerated following Abraham
Flexner’s provocative lecture in 1915 questioning whether social work was a
profession because he believed it lacked specificity, technical skills, or specialized
knowledge (Morris, 2008). By the 1920s, casework emerged as the dominant form
of professional social work in the United States and remained primarily focused on
aiding impoverished children and families but was rapidly expanding to work with
veterans and middle-class individuals in child guidance clinics.
As social work branched out to other populations, it increasingly focused on
refining clinical treatment modalities and over time clinical work too often stood
apart from community work, advocacy, and social policy. Although social work
Foreword ix

education standards today require all students to be exposed to clinical and case-
work, community practice, advocacy, research and policy, most schools do not
prioritize the integrated practice of these areas in the advanced year of social work
education (Austin & Ezell, 2004; Knee & Folsom, 2012).
Despite the development of sophisticated methods for helping others, social
work practice overly relies on charity and needs-based approaches. These
approaches are built on the deficit model of practice in which professionals or
individuals with greater means diagnose what is “needed” in a situation and the
“treatment” or services required to yield the desired outcome that has been set by
the profession or other persons of advantage. Judgments of need are based on
professional research, practice wisdom, and theory steeped in values (Ife, 2012).
These values, research, theories, and practices typically reflect the beliefs of the
persons pronouncing judgment, not necessarily the values and theories of the
person who is being judged. This has the effect of disempowering and diminishing
control of one’s own life while privileging professionals (Ife, 2012). In turn, this
risks reinforcing passiveness and perpetuating the violation of rights among the
marginalized populations we seek to empower and at best maintains the status quo
in society.
Needs-based approaches typically arise from charitable intentions. In social
welfare, charity-based efforts have led to the labeling of persons worthy and
unworthy of assistance, attributing personal behaviors as the cause of marginal-
ization, poverty, disease, and disenfranchisement, and restricted the types of aid
available accordingly. Judgments are cast by elites regarding who is deserving and
who is not based on criteria that serve to perpetuate existing social, economic, and
political relationships in charity-based approaches. Needs-based approaches attempt
to introduce greater objectivity into the process of selecting who is helped and how
by using evidence to demonstrate need and introducing effective and efficient
interventions to improve the lot of the needy and society as a whole. Yet the
solutions of needs-based efforts like charity-based ones are laden with the values of
professionals and the politically elite and do not necessarily reflect the values and
choices of the persons who are the object of assistance. Needs-based approaches
prioritize the achievement of professionally established goals over the process of
developing the goals, and, too often, the failure of outcomes is attributed to personal
attributes or behaviors of individuals or groups who receive assistance. For
example, the type of services a person diagnosed with a mental disorder receives in
a needs-based approach will be often decided by authorities or experts according to
their determination of what is best for the person and is likely to assume that a
person with a mental disorder is incapable of making choices or at least not “good”
choices. Programmatic success would then be evaluated according to adherence to
the treatment plan prescribed by the persons with authority in the situation and may
omit consumers’ objections or own assessments of well-being.
Unlike needs-based and charity-based approaches, a rights-based approach
places equal value on process and outcome. In rights-based work, goals are tem-
porary markers that are adjusted as people perpetually re-evaluate and understand
rights in new ways calling for new approaches to social issues. For example, having
x Foreword

nearly achieved universal access to primary education, a re-evaluation of the right

to education might lead to a new goal to raise the quality of education or promote
universal enrollment in secondary education among girls. Rights-based approaches
are anchored in a normative framework that are based in a set of internationally
agreed upon legal covenants and conventions, which in and of themselves can
provide a different and potentially more powerful approach. A key aspect of this
approach posits the right of all persons to participate in societal decision-making,
especially those persons or groups whom are affected by the decisions. For
example, Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child
(UNCRC) asserts that states “shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his
or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the
child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and
maturity of the child” (UNCRC, 1989). Likewise, the preamble to the United
Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) holds
states responsible for “redressing the profound social disadvantage of persons with
disabilities and (to) promote their participation in the civil, political, economic,
social, and cultural spheres with equal opportunities” (UNCRPD, 2006).
A rights-based approach requires consideration of the universally recognized
principles of human rights: the equality of each individual as a human being, the
inherent dignity of each person and the rights to self-determination, peace, and
security. Respect for all human rights sets the foundation for all civil, political,
social, and economic goals that seek to establish certain standards of well-being for
all persons. Rights-based efforts remove the charity dimension by recognizing
people not only as beneficiaries, but as active rights holders.
One of the areas of value added by the human rights approach is the emphasis it
places on the accountability of policy makers and other actors whose actions have
an impact on the rights of people. Unlike needs, rights imply duties, and duties
demand accountability (UN OHCHR 2002: paragraph 23). Whereas needs may be
met or satisfied, rights are realized and as such must be respected, protected,
facilitated, and fulfilled. Human rights are indivisible and interdependent and unlike
needs that can be ranked, all human rights are of equal importance. A central
dynamic of a rights-based approach is thus about identifying root causes of social
issues and empowering rights holders to understand and if possible claim their
rights while duty bearers are enabled to meet their obligations. Under international
law, the state is the principal duty bearer with respect to the human rights of the
people living within its jurisdiction. However, the international community at large
also has a responsibility to help realize universal human rights. Thus, monitoring
and accountability procedures extend beyond states to global actors—such as the
donor community, intergovernmental organizations, international
non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and transnational corporations—whose
actions bear upon the enjoyment of human rights in any country (UN OHCHR,
2002: paragraph 230).
Table 1 summarizes the differences between charity-, needs-, and rights-based
approaches.
Foreword xi

Table 1 Comparison of charity-, needs-, and rights-based approaches to social issues

Charity-based Needs-based Rights-based
Goals Assistance to Fulfilling an Realization of human
deserving and identified deficit in rights that will lead to
disadvantaged individuals or the equitable
individuals or community through allocation of resources
populations to relieve additional resources and power
immediate suffering for marginalized and
disadvantaged groups
Motivation Religious or moral To help those deemed Legal obligation to
imperative of rich or in need of help so as entitlements
endowed to help the to promote well-being
less fortunate who are of societal members
deserving of assistance
Accountability May be accountable to Generally Governments and
private organization accountable to those global bodies such as
who identified the the donor community,
need and developed intergovernmental
the intervention organizations,
international NGOs,
and transnational
corporations
Process Philanthropic with Expert identification Political with a focus
emphasis on donor of need, its on participatory
dimensions, and process in which
strategy for meeting individuals and groups
need within political are empowered to
negotiation. Affected claim their rights
population is the
object of
interventions
Power Preserves status quo Largely maintain Must change
relationships existing structure,
change might be
incremental
Target Individuals and Disadvantaged All members of
population of populations worthy of individuals or society with an
efforts assistance populations emphasis on
marginalized
populations
Emphasis On donor’s benevolent On meeting needs On the realization of
actions human rights
Interventions Immediate Symptomatic deficits Fundamental structural
respond to manifestation of and may address causes while providing
problems structural causes alleviation from
symptomatic
manifestations
xii Foreword

It can be argued that rights-based practice is not strikingly different from the way
many social workers practice. For example, the strengths perspective that has
become a popular approach in social work practice since the 1990s focuses on
strengths, abilities, and potential rather than problems, deficits, and pathologies
(Chapin, 1995; Early & GlenMaye, 2000; Saleebey, 1992a) and “interventions are
directed to the uniqueness, skills, interests, hopes, and desires of each consumer,
rather than a categorical litany of deficits” (Kisthardt, 1992: 60–61). In the
strengths-based approach, clients are usually seen as the experts on their own
situation and professionals are understood as not necessarily having the “best
vantage point from which to appreciate client strengths” (Saleebey, 1992b, p. 7).
The focus is on “collaboration and partnership between social workers and clients”
(Early & GlenMaye, 2000: 120).
The strengths perspective has provided a way for many social workers to engage
themselves and the populations they work with in advocacy and empowerment that
builds upon capabilities and more active processes of social change. Indeed,
strengths-based and rights-based approaches build upon the strengths of individuals
and communities and both involve a shift from a deficit approach to one that
reinforces the potential of individuals and communities. Both approaches
acknowledge the unique sets of strengths and challenges of individuals and com-
munities and engage them as partners in developing and implementing interven-
tions to improve well-being giving consideration to the complexities of
environments. However, the strengths-based perspective falls short of empowering
individuals to claim their rights within a universal, normative framework that goes
beyond social work to cut across every professional discipline and applies to all
human beings. Rights-based approaches tie social work practice into a global
strategy that asserts universal entitlements as well as the accountability of gov-
ernments and other actors who bear responsibility for furthering the realization of
human rights.
The link between social work and human rights normative standards is an
important one as history has repeatedly demonstrated. In many ways, social work
has been moving toward these standards (Healy, 2008) but has yet to fully embrace
it. Social work has been a contradictory and perplexing profession functioning both
to help and also to control the disadvantaged. At times social workers have engaged
in roles that have furthered oppression (Ife, 2012) and served as a “handmaiden” to
those who seek to preserve the status quo (Abramovitz, 1998, p. 512). Social
benefits can be used to integrate marginalized populations but also be used to
privilege and exclude, particularly when a charity-based approach is utilized. When
conditional, benefits can also be used as a way to modify behaviors and as a means
of collecting information on private individual and family matters.
This contradictory and perplexing role of social work is shown albeit, in an
extreme case, by social work involvement in the social eugenics movement
specifically promulgated by National Socialists leaders in the 1930s and 1940s
(Johnson & Moorehead, 2011). Leading up to and during World War II, social
workers were used as instruments to implement Nazi policies in Europe. Though
the history of social work and social work education is different in each European
Foreword xiii

country, in at least Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary,

authorities used social workers to exclude what the state considered at the time to be
undesirable populations from assistance, to reward those who demonstrated loyalty
and pledged to carry forth the ideology of the state, and to collect information on
personal and family affairs for the state (Hauss & Schulte, 2009). University-based
and other forms of social work training were closed down in Germany in 1933
when the National Socialists assumed control because welfare was regarded as
superfluous and a “waste for persons useless to the national community”
(Volksgemeinschaft as quoted in Hauss & Schulte, 2009, p. 9). “Inferiors” were
denied support and social workers were re-educated in Nazi ideology to train
mothers on how to raise children who were loyal and useful to the ambitions of the
National Socialists (Kruse, 2009). Similarly in Hungary, where social workers were
referred to as “social sisters,” social workers were re-educated to train mothers
about the value of their contributions to the state (mainly their reproductive capacity
and rearing of strong children for the state) and were instrumental in the imple-
mentation of Hungary’s major welfare program that rewarded “worthy” clients with
the redistribution of assets from Jewish estates (Szikra, 2009). As Szrika notes, “In
the 1930s social policy and social work constituted a central part of social and
economic policy-making that was fueled by nationalist and anti-Semitic ideology,
influenced by similar practices in Germany, Italy and Czechoslavakia” (p. 116).
Following Nazi ideological inoculation based on eugenics and race hate, social
workers in Austria were charged with the responsibility of collecting incriminating
information regarding mental illness, venereal disease, prostitution, alcoholism,
hereditary diseases, and disabilities that would then be used to deny social benefits,
prohibit marriages, and even select children for Austria’s euthanasia program
(Melinz, 2009).
Using social workers to realize state ideology was also employed to advance the
Soviet agenda beginning in 1918 (Iarskaia-Smirnova & Romanov, 2009). The
provision of social services was distributed across multiple disciplines among the
helping professions and the term social work was not used because of its association
to Western social welfare (Iarskaia-Smirnova & Romanov, 2009). These profes-
sionals, often referred to as social agents (workers in nurseries and youth centers,
activists in women’s organizations and trade unions, nurses, educators and domestic
affairs officials), were charged with the double task of social care and control. Early
on social agents contributed to the establishment of standards designating worthy
and unworthy behavior and activities and practices such as censure and social
exclusion designed to alienate those who did not comply with state goals
(Iarskaia-Smirnova & Romanov, 2009).
The use of social workers to carry out goals seemingly in contradiction of social
work’s ethics can be found in many examples in the United States as well
(Abramovitz, 1998). In his book, The Child Savers: The Invention of Delinquency
(1965), Anthony Platt demonstrates that despite well-intentioned efforts to protect
youth, the establishment of the juvenile justice system in the United States removed
youth from the adult justice systems and in doing so created a class of delinquents
who were judged without due process. Platt argues that “child savers should in no
xiv Foreword

sense be considered libertarians or humanists” (Platt, 1965, p. 176). The juvenile

justice system that these reformers—many of who were social work pioneers—
created in the United States purposefully blurred the distinction between delinquent
and dependent young people. Labeling dependent children as delinquents, most of
whom had committed no crime, robbed them of their opportunity to due process.
The state and various religious organizations were given open reign to define
delinquency as they saw fit and children who were perceived to be out of order or
young women who were viewed as immoral were committed to institutions or other
forms of state supervision with no means of redress.
More recently, Bumiller’s analysis of domestic violence in the United States
rouses our consciousness of the ways in which social workers engaged with persons
involved in domestic violence and/or rape may inadvertently squash rather than
empower individuals and families (Bumiller, 2008). Bumiller (2008) uses sexual
violence to demonstrate how lawyers, medical professionals, and social workers
may be contributing to passivity of social service beneficiaries and in doing so,
enlarge the state’s ability to control the behaviors of its members. As Bumiller
explains, our public branding of perpetrators of sexual violence as deserving of
severe punishment and isolation allow us then to deem them incapable of reha-
bilitation, and so we offer few opportunities for perpetrators to rejoin society as
functioning members. In contrast, we expend resources toward “treating” victims to
turn them into successful survivors and in the process of doing so instill their
dependency on the state. We do this by requiring victims who seek support and
protection from the state to comply with authorities, which in many cases are social
workers, and acquiesce to the invasion of state control into their lives. In return for
protection and assistance, needy women and children often relinquish control
of their own lives and are forced to become individuals who need constant over-
sight and regulation. “As women have become the subjects of a more expansive
welfare state, social service agencies have viewed women and their needs in ways
that have often discouraged them from resisting regulations and from being active
participants in their own decisions” (Bumiller, 2008). Some social workers use
professional authority to support a deficit approach that allows social workers to
scrutinize the parenting skills, education, housing, relationships, and psychological
coping skills of those who have experienced sexual violence and then prescribe
behaviors necessary to access to benefits. Those who voice complaints and resist
scrutiny may be denied benefits such as disqualifying women from TANF benefits
who fail to comply with work requirements or cutting off assistance to women who
return to violent relationships. As key actors in this process, social workers have the
opportunity to legitimize women’s voice both within social welfare institutions and
within the confines of relationships rather than reinforcing dependency and in some
circumstances, revictimizing the individuals by making compliance a prerequisite
for assistance.
The commonality of these examples lies in the omission of a normative frame
that transcends national borders. The foundation of a rights-based approach is
nested in universal legal guarantees to protect individuals and groups against the
actions and omissions that interfere with fundamental freedoms, entitlements, and
Foreword xv

human dignity as first presented in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

(United Nations, 1948). International human rights law is based on a series of
international conventions, covenants, and treaties ratified by states as well as other
non-binding instruments such as declarations, guidelines, and principles. Taken
together these inalienable, interdependent, interrelated, and indivisible human rights
are owned by people everywhere and responsibility to respect, protect, and fulfill
these rights is primarily the obligation of the state.
Bonding social work practice to these international legal instruments obligates
social workers to look beyond their own government’s responses to social issues, to
empower the populations they work with to have their voice heard, and to recast the
neglected sovereignty of marginalized individuals and communities. It moves social
workers away from being agents of the state to being change agents in keeping with
the founding vision of social work. It reunites the different methods of social work
practice by obligating all social workers to reflect on how public policies affect the
rights of individuals and communities as well as how individual actions affect the
rights of others (see Table 2). A rights-based approach compels social workers to
look beyond existing methods of helping that too often exist to justify state inter-
vention without addressing the root causes of the situation. It calls upon social
workers who often act as agents of the state to acknowledge and act on their
responsibility as moral duty bearers who have the obligation to respect, protect, and
fulfill the rights of rights holders.
Rights-based approaches in social work have gained international acceptance in
the past two decades more so outside of the United States than within. Social

Table 2 Rights-based approaches to social work practice at different levels of intervention

Individuals seeking assistance are not judged to be worthy or unworthy of assistance but rather
are viewed as rights holders. Social workers assist others in claiming their rights and helping
others understand how individual rights have been violated. Interventions offered are not
patronizing or stigmatizing, rather methods provide assistance based on the dignity of and respect
for all individuals.
Example of individual-centered change: Sexually trafficked persons are viewed as rights holders
whose rights were violated rather than as criminals and are offered healing services and other
benefits to restore their wholeness.
Community/group/organization efforts are redirected away from proving that they deserve or
need a resource toward learning about how they can claim their entitlements to resources. Social
workers facilitate human rights education among group members including knowledge of human
rights instruments, principles, and methods for accessing rights.
Example of group-centered change: Groups are offered opportunities to learn about their
housing rights, the change process in their community and learn skills so that they can claim
their right to participation in community decisionmaking.
Society redirects its social policies and goals to facilitate the realization of human rights
including addressing human needs. Macropracticing social workers affect the policy process and
goals by expanding means for all members of a society to have their voices heard in the
decision-making process.
Example of society-centered change: Persons with disabilities are able to participate in the
policy-making process through the use of technology that allows them to participate in meetings
from their homes.
xvi Foreword

workers in the United States are relatively new to human rights practice, in part
because of longstanding resistance known as “American exceptionalism” which
allows the United States to initiate and even demand compliance of human rights
abroad while repeatedly rejecting the application of international standards for
human rights in the United States (Hertel & Libal, 2011). Most Americans are
knowledgeable about civil and political rights, yet far fewer are as familiar with
economic, social, and cultural rights. Relatively limited engagement in this area by
social workers also stems from the perception that human rights activism is best led
and achieved by lawyers or elite policy advocates. The books in this series are
written to facilitate rights-based approaches to social work practice both in the
United States and around the world and recognize that exposure to human rights
multilateral treaties and applications may vary depending on where the reader was
educated or trained.
A rights-based approach brings a holistic perspective with regards to civil,
political, social, economic, and cultural roles we hold as human beings and a more
holistic understanding of well-being that goes beyond the meeting of material
needs. Our understanding of human rights is always evolving, and our methods,
practices, research, interventions, and processes should evolve as our understanding
deepens. The purpose of this series is to assist social work practitioners, educators,
and students toward operationalizing a new approach to social work practice that is
grounded in human rights. It is hoped that the books will stimulate discussion and
the introduction of new methods of practice around maximizing the potential of
individuals, communities, and societies. The books, like social work, reflect the
wide range of practice methods, social issues, and populations while specifically
addressing an essential area of social work practice. By using current issues as
examples of rights-based approaches, the books facilitate the ability of social
workers familiar with human rights to apply rights-based approaches in their
practice. Each book in the series calls on social work practitioners in clinical,
community, research, or policy-making settings to be knowledgeable about the laws
in their jurisdiction but to also look beyond and hold states accountable to the
international human rights laws and framework.

Fordham University, New York, NY Shirley Gatenio Gabel

References

Abramovitz, M. (1998). Social work and social reform: An arena of struggle. Social Work, 43(6),
512–526.
Austin, M. J., & Ezell, M. (2004). Educating future social work administrators. Administration in
Social Work, 28(1), 1–3.
Bumiller, K. (2008). In an abusive state: How neoliberalism appropriated the feminist movement
against sexual violence. Durham: Duke University Press.
Foreword xvii

Chapin, R. (1995). Social policy development: The strengths perspective. Social Work, 40(4),
506–514.
Early, T., & GlenMaye, L. (2000). Valuing families: Social work practice with families from a
strengths perspective. Social Work, 45(2), 118–130.
Friedman, M., & Friedman, B. (2006). Settlement houses: Improving the welfare of America’s
immigrants. New York: Rosen Publishing.
Hauss, G., & Schulte, D. (Eds.). (2009). Amid social contradictions: Towards a history of social
work in Europe. Opladen, Farmington Hills, MI: Barbara Budrich Publishers.
Healy, L. M. (2008). Exploring the history of social work as a human rights profession.
International Social Work, 51(6), 735–746.
Hertel, S. & Libal, K. (2011). Human Rights in the United States: Beyond Exceptionalism.
Cambridge.
Iarskaia-Smirnova, E., & Romanov, P. (2009). Rhetoric and practice of modernisation: Soviet
social policy (1917–1930). In G. Hauss & D. Schulte (Eds.), Amid social contradictions:
Towards a history of social work in Europe. MI: Barbara Budrich Publishers.
Ife, J. (2012). Human rights and social work: Towards rights-based practice. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Johnson, S., & Moorhead, B. (2011). Social eugenics practices with children in Hitler’s Nazi
Germany and the role of social work: Lessons for current practice. Journal of Social Work
Values and Ethics, 8(1). http://www.jswve.org.
Kisthardt, W. (1992). A strengths model of case management: The principles and functions of a
helping partnership with persons with persistent mental illness. In D. Saleebey (Ed.), The
strengths perspective in social work practice. New York: Longman.
Knee, R. T., & Folsom, J. (2012). Bridging the crevasse between direct practice social work and
management by increasing the transferability of core skills. Administration in Social Work, 36,
390–408.
Kruse, E. (2009). Toward a history of social work training Germany—discourses and struggle for
power at the turning points. In G. Hauss & D. Schulte (Eds.), Amid social contradictions:
Towards a history of social work in Europe. MI: Barbara Budrich Publishers.
Melinz, G. (2009). In the interest of children: Modes of intervention in family privacy in Austria
(1914–1945). In G. Hauss & D. Schulte (Eds.), Amid social contradictions: Towards a history
of social work in Europe. MI: Barbara Budrich Publishers.
Morris, P. M. (2008). Reinterpreting Abraham Flexner’s speech, ‘Is social work a profession?’ Its
meaning and influence on the field’s early professional development. Social Service Review, 82
(1), 29–60.
Platt, A. M. (1965). The child savers: The invention of delinquency. Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press.
Saleebey, D. (1992a). Introduction: Beginnings of a strengths approach to practice. In D. Saleebey
(Ed.), The strengths perspective in social work practice. New York: Longman.
Saleebey, D. (Ed.). (1992b). The strengths perspective in social work practice. New York:
Longman.
Szikra, D. (2009). Social policy and anti-semitic exclusion before and during WW II in Hungary:
The case of productive social policy. In G. Hauss & D. Schulte (Eds.), Amid social contra-
dictions: Towards a history of social work in Europe. MI: Barbara Budrich Publishers.
Trolander, J. A. (1987). Professionalism and social change: from the settlement house movement
to neighborhood centers, 1886 to the present. New York: Columbia University Press.
United Nations. (1948, December 9). Convention on the prevention and punishment of genocide.
Retrieved from http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CrimeOfGenocide.aspx.
United Nations. (1989, November 20). Convention on the rights of the child. New York: United
Nations. Retrieved from http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/crc.pdf.
xviii Foreword

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UN OHCHR). (2002). Draft
Guidelines for a Human Rights Approach to Poverty Reduction Strategies 2002.
United Nations. (2006, December 13). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities.
NewYork: United Nations. Retrieved from http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/
disabilitiesconvention.pdf.
Acknowledgments

I want to extend my sincere thanks to Dr. Shirley Gatenio Gabel for her guidance
and mentoring while preparing this manifesto. She has made this part of the journey
toward personal and mass liberation quite a memorable one. I am especially
appreciative of Jennifer Hadley of Springer for the support on this leg of the
journey, especially during the last green mile. And last but not least, many ‘warm
wishes’ and ‘blessings’ to Jade de Saussure and Mary Ryan Garcia, who were by
my side during the writing of this book. It almost seemed as if you both were my
right and left arm. To all of you, I am forever grateful.

xix
Contents

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ....... ....... 1

The Research Question Lies Within . . . . . . . . .. ....... ....... 3
What Is a Rights Research Approach? . . . . . . .. ....... ....... 4
Introduction to the Six Theme-Based Strategies of a Rights
Research Approach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ....... ....... 5
Exercises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ....... ....... 8
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ....... ....... 9

2 Understanding and Applying a Human Rights Lens . .......... 11

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... 11
The Lens of a Human Rights Framework . . . . . . . . . . .......... 11
The Human Rights Trilogy: Human Rights Instruments
and Implementation Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Vulnerable or Special Needs Populations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Central Constructs of a Rights Research Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Exercises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3 Research and Evaluation that Make a Difference . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Historical Evidence of Making a Difference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Advanced Generalist/Public Health Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Exercises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

4 Informed Decision-Making, Multiple Perspectives,

Approaches, and Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Process and Informed Decision-Making. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

xxi
xxii Contents

Quantitative and Qualitative Methods . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . 34

Highlight on Photovoice: A Critical Qualitative Method . . . . . . . . 38
Theories and a Rights Research Approach . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . 39
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . 40
Exercises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . 40
Vignettes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . 41
Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . 43
Part A: Inductive and Deductive Assessment . . ...... . . . . . . . . 43
Part B: Background Information. . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . 45
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . 47

5 Social Contexts, Meaningful Participation,

and Relational Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Social Worker Know Thyself. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Social Contexts and Research Decision-Making . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Social Contexts and Fieldwork. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Sampling Strategies Influence of Social Context,
Participation, and Relational Communication . . . . . . . . . . ...... 55
Data Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... 56
Recommended Interviewing Strategies for a Rights
Research Approach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Data Collection Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Focus Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Archival Records, Documents, and Other Artifacts Review . . . . . . 61
Observation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Exercises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

6 Holistic Analysis, Discerning Meaning from Narrative

and Numeric Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 69
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 69
Discerning Meaning from Data: Contrasting a Traditional
from a Human Rights Approach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Rights Research Qualitative Data Analysis Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Content Analysis for a Rights Research Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Exercises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Contents xxiii

7 Thoughtful Sharing and Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 83

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 83
Inspiring Others for Action: Persuasive Communication Skills . ..... 85
Recommendations for Earning a Social Worker’s
Badge of Courage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Sharing Research and Practice Findings for Advocacy . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Policy Advocacy: Brief Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Full Participation in the Arts and Scientific Advancement . . . . . . . . . 91
Research as a Human Right. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Closing Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Exercises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Chapter 1
Introduction

Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery.

None but ourselves can free our minds.
—Bob Marley (1979)

“Applying a Human Rights Approach to Social Work Research and Evaluation:

A ‘Rights’ Research Manifesto” is not a book but rather a manifesto. This written
declaration encourages social workers to emancipate themselves from mental
slavery and “manifest” instead their own free minds. Using a rights research
approach, personal freedom and empowerment is a prerequisite to work most
effectively to guide others through a similar process. It is also is a first step in one’s
ability to integrate the thinking, feeling, and doing of human rights research for the
purposes of individual, group, and societal transformation. A rights research
approach differs from a traditional research approach. A traditional research
approach, which has historically been practiced by elite professions, such as
medicine, often is conducted with “human subjects” for the purposes of knowledge
generation with a tenuous commitment to applying these findings to identify,
understand, and combat social injustices (Kirk and Reid 2002). In a traditional
research approach, such as used in the Tuskegee Syphilis study (Jones 1993), there
were tragic intended or unintended consequences that resulted in the early deaths of
poverty-stricken black male research participants with untreated syphilis. In con-
trast, a rights research approach ideally incorporates the voice of all key stake-
holders, and partners with research participants to identify and transform adverse
social conditions for the betterment of others (Maschi and Youdin 2010). This
beckons social workers to claim research as a human right that can be applied for
the “mass liberation” of our profession and the populations we serve.
In theory, social work education and training has been the designated breeding
ground to mass hatch social workers to advance the profession’s human rights and
social justice vision. In formal education and in the field, social workers have done so
in interactions with others (e.g., informal interactions or everyday practices) and more
formal prevention, assessment, and intervention activities with the goal of promoting
human rights and individual, family, and community well-being (CSWE 2015). These
activities can include but are not limited to counseling, policy advocacy, community
organizing, and research and practice evaluation (NASW 1999). Social workers who

© The Author(s) 2016 1

T. Maschi, Applying a Human Rights Approach to Social Work Research
and Evaluation, SpringerBriefs in Rights-Based Approaches to Social Work,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-26036-5_1
2 1 Introduction

actively incorporate research and evaluation strategies in their practice are at an

advantage to monitor their practice to see if their intention to “do good” or “do no
harm” actually did just that (Richmond 1917).
This concept of a rights research approach is not new to our profession. This
manifesto just proudly claims it, names it, and does not shame it. Our social work
ancestors historically have used research and evaluation strategies for social work
research in order to increase public awareness of socially unjust conditions and to
develop and evaluate practices and programs, such as casework and settlement
houses, to help address them (Addams 1910; Agnew 2004). Guided by human
rights and social justice, social workers had the unique capacity for double vision in
which one eye could imagine the possibilities of an ideal world while the other
more sober eye recognizes the stark reality of oppressive conditions of marginalized
individuals, groups, and communities (Ehrenreich 1985; Zimbalist 1977). Although
the social work profession has made some headway toward improving human and
social conditions through research, practice, and advocacy, we have much more
work to be done. Particularly in promoting our role as agents of change as opposed
to obedient agents of control (Gatenio Gabel 2015; see series preface).
In the twenty-first century, there is no better time than now to recharge our
purpose and passion for charity, justice, and evidence (Agnew 2004; Kirk and Reid
2002). A human rights perspective is a guided visualization that can help the design
and implementation of research for action. Detailed in chapter one, a human rights
perspective incorporates the values and principles of dignity and respect for all
persons, nondiscrimination, the universality, and interrelatedness of rights (political,
civil, social, economic, and cultural), participation, accountability, and transparency
(Ife 2012). To advance human rights, a rights research approach can use mixed
methods (quantitative and/or qualitative methods), especially participatory research
and evaluation (Wronka 2007). These method choices are described in the chapters
that follow.
This rights research manifesto arrives during a perfect storm. The Council on
Social Work Education’s (CSWE 2015) updated Educational Policy and
Accreditation Standards (EPAS) mandates that social workers should be competent
in engaging in human rights and social justice and to use “research to inform practice”
and “practice to inform research”. This manifesto demystifies the research and
evaluation process and empowers social workers with a structural vehicle to design
research for human rights action. Currently, there is no known social work research
book (certainly not a manifesto) that provides a step-by-step process on how social
workers can integrate human rights in research in order to walk the talk of social work.
The chapters that follow draw on my work on historically and emerging
underrepresented and marginalized populations, especially recent work on aging
people in prison with multiple intersectional social locations, such as being LGBT
from a racial/ethnic minority with a physical and mental disability. Included are
descriptions of research methods and findings and action products, such as film and
documentary shorts that includes formerly incarcerated LGBT elders with multiple
intersectional identifies. These encompass serious mental and physical disabilities
(e.g., HIV, schizophrenia), trauma and immigration histories, low income,
1 Introduction 3

racial/ethnic minorities, and war veterans. A rights-based approach is applied to the

research decision-making process from problem and research question formulation,
and includes examples and exercise that incorporate participatory research and
evaluation designs, research methods, and action steps. At each phase of research,
the six theme-based strategies of a rights research approach guide the reader on how
to design, implement, and evaluate research using a human rights framework.

The Research Question Lies Within

Individual social workers have the power to be an instrument of personal change,

which in turn, contributes to our collective work toward a long-term goal of
large-scale social transformation. Gandhi (n.d.) said, “Be the change you want to
see in the world.” He reminds us that the process of change begins inside and then
“manifests” on the outside. A rights research approach advances this notion one
step further by suggesting, “be the evidence you want to see in the world.” In
essence, you are your own research project evaluating your thought, feelings, and
actions and the extent to which they achieve personal and social changes in the
direction it was intended. In fact, the research question lies within for which only
you can search and find the answer.
As noted throughout the manifesto, being prepared for action entails thoughtful
reflection. This thoughtful reflection includes examining one’s attitudes toward
persons different than oneself, or one’s positionality based on race/ethnicity, gen-
der, social class, religion, dis/ability, and legal status. Those aspects of your person
that impede your realization of your own dignity and worth must be identified and
transformed in order to work most effectively with others through their similar yet
unique process.
In a rights research approach, the gang wars are over between social work
factions that have divided research versus practice and micro versus macro versus
research practice. Contemporary social workers can reject this intergenerational
conflict for integration of the practice trinity of research, practice, and advocacy as
tools they can draw upon to advance human rights. In a rights research approach,
science is in alignment with the practice of care and justice and represents the three
equal sides of the practice triangle. Using an archetypal metaphor, in a rights
research approach social workers are continually engaged in an internal process of
integrating the passionate advocate with the empathic counselor and rational sci-
entist to reach the goal of personal and social transformation. The science in social
work can be embraced as a liberating strategy and the means to engage in critical
self-reflection and evaluate the process and outcomes of our supportive and social
change efforts (Maschi and Youdin 2010).
As a social work professional, it also is important to examine one’s attitudes
toward the differing aspects of your professional identity that guide your micro-,
macro-, and research roles and functions. Achieving rights research enlightenment
involves the internal integration of our professional archetypes of the compassionate
4 1 Introduction

counselor (feeling), rationale scientist (thoughts), and passionate advocate (action;

Maschi and Youdin 2010). If you are unsure how to own these three aspects of your
professional identity, supplement your book, and practice knowledge with wisdom
inside of yourself. Yes, it is a simple spin on the old adage that says: the research
question lies within for which only you can search for and find the answer. If you are
not accepting of one or more of these identities, roles, or functions, I encourage you
to dig deeper to explore why that is and then how you might go about embracing this
unclaimed aspect or aspects of your professional identity.
Part of every social worker’s journey ideally involves cultivating critical con-
sciousness as the mental picture of the connection between the personal and
political. For example, a clinical social work must be able to recognize the psy-
chological and emotional impacts of antigay legislation when working with a
LGBT person and/or their family members. Social workers also refine their sixth
sense to recognize power dynamics at all levels. As Reeser (2009) refers to the
sociopolitical level: social workers should be aware of strategies used by the status
quo (e.g., those that hold power) to maintain power and control, and strategies that
advance equity and fairness. Social workers also should be aware of how grass
roots or the rank and file have the power to change unjust structures. And just as
importantly, their social work literature on human rights and social justice under-
score that social workers should engage in thoughtful reflection to guide their
actions. This involves engaging in critical self-reflection and assessment of one’s
position (e.g., race, class, sex, and class) and how it is linked to the larger envi-
ronmental context (Reeser 2009). A social worker who has inner awareness of the
self in context of the sociopolitical environment can apply this understanding to a
rights-based approach to research.

What Is a Rights Research Approach?

A rights research approach is defined as an evidence-informed research-practice

paradigm with a philosophical base grounded in human rights that uses a rigorous
yet flexible scientific method to achieve the diversity needed for differing research,
practice, and advocacy efforts. The rights research approach incorporates philo-
sophical underpinnings of the social work profession core values and ethical
principles as outlined by the International Federation of Social Work (IFSW 2004),
national codes of ethics (e.g., NASW 1999) and the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and other existing and emerging human rights standards, covenants,
and conventions (UN 1948; see Chap. 2). The goal of a human rights approach to
research or rights-based research is twofold: to guide the research process and to
generate findings that further human rights. For examples, human rights instru-
ments, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN 1948), can be used
to inform research goals, shape research questions, and to develop and evaluate
policies and programs.
What Is a Rights Research Approach? 5

Table 1.1 Six theme-based
strategies for a rights research
approach
1. Understanding and applying a human rights framework
2. Research and evaluation that makes a difference
3. Informed decision-making, multiple perspectives,
approaches, and methods
4. Social contexts, meaningful participation, relational
communication
5. Holistic analysis, discerning meaning from narrative and
numeric data
6. Thoughtful sharing (dissemination) and action

As shown in Table 1.1, a rights research approach has six theme-based strategies
that guide the research process: (1) understanding and applying a human rights lens,
(2) research that makes a difference, (3) informed decision-making, multiple per-
spectives, approaches, and methods, (4) social contexts, participation, and relational
communication, (5) holistic data analysis, discerning meaning from narrative and
numeric data, and (6) thoughtful sharing of findings (dissemination) and action.
These six theme-based strategies can be applied to design and implement partici-
patory social work research that involves critical thinking and the meaningful
participation of key stakeholders for the purposes of psychological and sociocul-
tural transformation.
Social workers and other allies who live this manifesto have the opportunity to
increase their competency to apply a rights research approach as a response to
contemporary social issues. It guides readers through the nuances of how a rights
research approach influences the formulation of research questions, research and
practice design, holistic analysis, and participatory action strategies that advance
human rights for the betterment of individual, family, and community well-being
for everyone and everywhere.

Introduction to the Six Theme-Based Strategies of a Rights

Research Approach

In order to develop a philosophy that incorporates diverse roles and perspectives,

settings, and practice expertise, this manifesto proposes a rights research approach
for social work. Social workers grapple with a host of social problems and issues
with diverse populations, interdisciplinary professionals, and other key stakeholders
in diverse research and practice settings and geographic regions. A rights research
approach is a research-practice paradigm with a philosophical base grounded in
social work as well as a flexible scientific method to achieve the diversity needed in
social work’s goal of individual and systemic transformation.
The practical purpose of this manifesto is to demonstrate how a rights research
approach can be used that can incorporate scientific rigor with action-oriented
results. A brief overview of the six theme-based strategies is as follows and are
6 1 Introduction

further explored throughout this manifesto. The following chapters illustrate each of
the six theme-based strategies as follows:
1. Understanding and Applying a Human Rights Lens
Understanding and applying a human rights lens, refers to just that. Social
workers who want to apply a human rights lens to their work design research and
evaluation studies that infuse a human right framework values and principles,
consult human rights instruments, and consider culture and cultural relativism and
the root causes (e.g., poverty and oppression) and consequences (e.g., well-being)
of human rights issues. It also incorporates the six major principles of a human
rights framework: (1) universality, (2) nondiscrimination, (3) the indivisibility and
interdependence of rights (i.e., political, civil, social, economic, and cultural),
(4) participation, (5) accountability, and (6) transparency. Key human rights
instruments, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and covenants and
conventions also are a source to identify human rights and human rights issues.
2. Research and Evaluation that Makes a Difference
Research and evaluation that make a difference is when a social worker uses
quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods to research and for evaluation in prac-
tice, policy, and programming. The use and/or evaluation of EBP and EIP can be
incorporated in evaluating work at the case or program level, or, in some cases,
international comparative studies. As noted earlier, qualitative methods are partic-
ularly useful for examining the process of practice evaluations or program or policy
design and implementation using either EBPs or EIPs. Outcomes can be used to
understand the deeper meaning of quantitative results. This information can be used
to improve programs or policies, or to determine if a change in an intervention is
warranted.
Also incorporated in the model are theories, perspectives, and frameworks that
incorporate a theory of change, i.e., an attempt to make a difference in how we view
a problem or issue, design and implement a study, and interpret the results. It is a
foundation category in which social work-friendly perspectives, such as the
person-in-environment and strengths perspectives; ecological systems theory; or
practice, organizational, and policy theories that may integrate interdisciplinary
perspectives from the biological and social sciences. These theories may be used to
inform the conceptual framework of the study design.
3. Informed Decision-Making, Multiple Perspectives, Approaches, and
Methods
In a rights research approach, informed decision-making ideally involves all
sources of evidence. Multiple perspectives ideally refer to approaching a research
problem from one or more angles. Multiple approaches and methods refer to the
openness of the social worker conducting research and evaluation to be open to the
variety of research methods, such as the use of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed
methods to gather data that has some relevance to the phenomenon under inves-
tigation. Research designs can incorporate eclectic or theoretically driven sampling
Introduction to the Six Theme-Based Strategies … 7

strategies, multiple data sources and data collection methods, quantitative and
qualitative analysis that result in a creative synthesis of findings, or an
action-oriented application of the findings.
4. Social Contexts, Meaningful Participation, and Relational Communication
Social contexts are an important factor in a rights research approach whether it
be quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods used. Social contexts can be dynamic
and ever changing and influence a research project with different populations and in
different settings. Participation is critical because it often ideally involves the
diversity of voices impacted by a particular problem or issue and in designing the
solution to prevent or remediate a problem. Relational communication is the central
mechanism by which the social worker connects with other participants using
verbal and nonverbal methods. This requires social workers to use their generalist
training in communication skills for engagement, rapport building, and data gath-
ering. Informed decision-making underscores the collaborative process that exists
between the social workers and other key stakeholders. This takes place at every
stage of the research and evaluation process from problem formulation, research
design, data collection, to dissemination and action. In an active participatory action
research projects, participants are involved in each stage of the research or practice
design.
5. Holistic Analysis Plan, Discerning Meaning from Narrative and Numeric
Data
Once the qualitative or quantitative data is collected, it needs to be analyzed
prior to using the findings for action. In a rights research approach, the use of
deductive and statistical analysis is part of the social work toolkit. When advocating
for human rights and social justice, even quantitative descriptive statistics can be a
powerful tool in describing the frequency and occurrences of human and civil rights
violations. For example, in my study of 677 adults aged 50 and older in prison, it
was found that 70 % or seven out of ten participants had been a victim or witness to
violence at some time in their lives. About two-third of participants or 60 %
reported experience abuse, stress, or mistreatment while in prison (See Maschi et al.
2015). Quantitative research establishes some level of causality or correlation, such
as research that documents the adverse health impacts of life course or cumulative
trauma. For example, my colleagues and I used path analysis to examine the
relationship of cumulative trauma and later life mental well-being of older adults in
prison. We found that these life course experiences of trauma influenced incar-
cerated older adults perceptions of their current mental well-being (See Maschi
et al. 2014). These quantitative findings can be used to advocate for elder justice
and prison reform because of the adverse effect on incarcerated people with
implications for the health and well-being of professional staff who work in these
settings.
A social worker also may use a qualitative or inductive process of sifting and
sorting the narrative or textual data to discern meaning. It is a creative process of,
first, examining each individual holistically, and then often making cross-case
8 1 Introduction

comparisons to identify common themes, psychological and social processes, and

possible theory building. However, deductive analysis techniques can be used, such
as content analysis in which preexisting codes or categories are used. For example,
in a qualitative study of trauma, stress, and coping in prison, my colleagues and I
identified the sources of prison trauma and oppression experienced by older adults
with being a victim or witness to interpersonal violence, social, structural, and
cultural trauma and oppression, especially as it related to separation from family
and lack of access to health and social services and legal representation.
As illustrated by the examples above, a holistic analysis assists in discerning
meaning from narrative and numeric data. Discerning meaning from narrative and
numeric data involves uncovering the depth—as wells as the breadth—of a problem
or issue under investigation, such as aging people in prison. It attempts to determine
the “why” behind the quantitative analysis by calling in the power of narrative to
understand the participants’ subjective experiences, that is, what the results mean to
them and how they want to act upon them or have others act on their own behalf.
6. Thoughtful Sharing (Dissemination) and Action
Sharing research findings and taking action upon them is both a reflective and
task-oriented activity. Social workers may share their findings via public awareness
campaigns, advocacy, and intervention development or refinement. For example,
Be the Evidence (my 501c3 grassroots organization), has a research and advocacy
arm for the work we are doing related to advocating with and on behalf of aging
people involved in the criminal justice system. Examples of photos and docu-
mentary shorts about incarcerated and formerly incarcerated elders can be found
here: www.betheevidence.org.
These theme-based strategies can be found throughout the history of social work
research and practice and program evaluation. In their most ideal form, they are
consistent with practicing from a human rights perspective. Contemporary social
workers can use these six theme-based strategies as they pursue their passion for
freedom, equality, and justice for all individuals and societies.
Social workers who are committed to practicing social work on the “rights” side
of history are encouraged to read and reflect upon the pages that follow. Consider
this manifesto as a road map to engage in a research process that leads to social
innovation and advocacy that promotes human rights and a more socially just
world.

Exercises

The following individual or group experiential exercises can be used as an indi-

vidual writing assignment or small group or online discussion thread.
1. Preparation for thoughtful reflection and action. Write a one–two page reflection
paper that examines your attitude toward yourself based on your positionality,
Exercises 9

based on your race/ethnicity, gender, social class, religion, dis/ability and legal
status, and any other aspects you deem important. Identify someone else with
two or more differing aspects from yourself. Identify those aspects of yourself
that impede your realization of your own dignity and worth. Identify aspects of
another person that may impede your ability to treat them with dignity and
worth. What are three to four strategies you can use to enhance your own dignity
and worth as well as the other person. How, if at all, do your thoughts, feelings,
and action change when dignity (of self or another) is a felt presence. In a small
group discussion, share what you feel comfortable sharing with others about
your experience and respectfully respond to their experiences. In a large group,
share highlights of the group discussion.
2. Professional identity: As noted in this chapter: As a social work professional, it
also is important to examine one’s attitude toward the differing aspects of your
professional identity that guide your micro-, macro-, and research roles and
functions. Achieving rights research enlightenment involves the internal inte-
gration of our professional archetypes of the compassionate counselor (feeling),
rationale scientist (thoughts), and passionate advocate (action; Maschi and
Youdin 2010). Write a one–two page reflection paper about the extent to which
you are accepting each of these identities, roles, or functions. Next, dig deeper to
explore why that is and then how you might go about embracing the unclaimed
aspect or aspects of your professional identity. In a small group discussion,
share what you feel comfortable sharing with others about your experience and
respectfully respond to their experiences. In a large group, share highlights of
the group discussion.

References

Addams, J. (1910). Twenty years at Hull house. New York: The Macmillan Company.
Agnew, E. N. (2004). From charity to social work: Mary E. Richmond and the creation of an
American profession. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Council on Social Work Education [CSWE]. (2015). 2015 Educational policy standards.
Retrieved September 1, 2015, from http://www.cswe.org/File.aspx?id=69943
Ehrenreich, J. H. (1985). The altruistic imagination: A history of social work and social policy in
the United States. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Gandhi, M. (n.d.). Gandhi quotes. Retrieved from: http://equotes.wetpaint.com/page/Mahatma
+Gandhi+Quotes
Gatenio Gabel, S. (2015). Preface to a rights research approach to social work. New York:
Springer Publishing.
Ife, J. (2012). Human rights and social work towards rights-based practice (3rd ed.). London:
Cambridge University Press.
International Federation of Social Workers [IFSW] and International Association of Schools of
Social Work. (2004). Ethics in social work, statement of principles. Retrieved February 11,
2010 from http://www.ifsw.org/p38000324.html
Jones, J. H. (1993). Bad blood: The Tuskegee experiment. New York: The Free Press.
10 1 Introduction

Kirk, S. A., & Reid, W. J. (2002). Science and social work: A critical appraisal. New York:
Columbia University Press.
Marley, B. (1979). Redemption Song Lyrics. Retrieved May 9, 2013 from http://www.lyricsfreak.
com/b/bob+marley/redemption+song_20021829.html
Maschi, T., Viola, D., & Koskinen, L. (2015). Trauma, stress, and coping among older adults in
prison: Towards a human rights and intergenerational family justice action agenda.
Maschi, T., Viola, D., Morgen, K., Harrison, M.T., Harrison, W., & Koskinen, L. (2014). Bridging
community and prison for older adults and their families: Invoking human rights and
intergenerational family justice. International Journal of Prisoner Health, 19(1), 1–19.
Maschi, T., & Youdin, R. (2010). Social workers as researcher: Integrating research with
advocacy. Boston: Pearson Publishers.
National Association of Social Workers. (1999). Code of ethics of the National Association of
Social Workers. Washington, DC: NASW Press. Retrieved from http://www.naswdc.org/pubs/
code/code.asp
Reeser, L. C. (2009). Educating for social change in the human service profession. In E. Aldarando
(Ed.), Advancing social justice through clinical practice (pp. 459–476). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Richmond, M. (1917). Social diagnosis. Philadelphia: Russell Sage Foundation.
United Nations [UN] (1948). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved May 9, 2012
from http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
Wronka, J. (2007). Human rights and social justice: Social action and service for the helping and
health professions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Zimbalist, S. E. (1977). Historic themes and landmarks in social welfare research. New York:
Harper & Row Publishers.
Chapter 2
Understanding and Applying a Human
Rights Lens

Introduction

The first theme-based strategy of a rights research approach is understanding and

applying a human rights lens for conceptualizing and implementing a research and
evaluation project. This theme involves understanding and applying: (1) the values
and principles of a human right framework (UN 2015), (2) relevant human rights
instruments, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN 1948),
(3) familiarity with human rights implementation mechanisms, and (4) knowledge
and application of the central constructs for research that advances human rights and
the mission of social work. They are reviewed in that order, respectively. For social
workers passionate about justice, the rights research approach in theory and practice
can help assist with the goals and objectives to conduct research that contributes to
advancing human rights, social justice, and the well-being of individuals, families,
and communities from diverse cultural backgrounds and locations (CSWE 2015).

The Lens of a Human Rights Framework

The first aspect and organizing lens for a rights research approach is the human rights
framework and its underlying values and principles (UN 2015). Fundamental to
human rights values, dignity, worth, and respect for all persons, the intrinsic value of
each person, and the duty of governments (i.e., duty bearers) to their citizens (rights
holders) and duty-bearing citizens to rights holding citizens (UN 1948). The six major
principles of a human rights framework that form the basis for the six theme-based
strategies of a rights research approach are: (1) universality, (2) nondiscrimination,
(3) the indivisibility and interdependence of rights (political, civil, social, economic,
and cultural), (4) participation, (5) accountability, and (6) transparency, and are
described below (Ife 2012; IJRC 2014; NESRI 2014; UN 2015). Table 2.1 then
applies these values and principles for a rights research approach.

© The Author(s) 2016 11

T. Maschi, Applying a Human Rights Approach to Social Work Research
and Evaluation, SpringerBriefs in Rights-Based Approaches to Social Work,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-26036-5_2
12 2 Understanding and Applying a Human Rights Lens

Table 2.1 Examples of applying a human rights framework to research

Values Rights research approach
Dignity, Worth, Respect, • Participant treated as experts of their own experience
Intrinsic of the Person • Participants are viewed as having equal value to the research
team
• Respectful and “humanizing” language is used to interact with
and describe participants (e.g., incarcerated person versus
“prisoner”) and describe rights as opposed to needs
Responsibility of Duty • All precautions are used to protect participant’s safety and
Bearers to Rights Holders rights
• Research reports clearly document the protections (research
ethics) followed to conduct their study
• Research team has a responsibility to design and disseminate
their findings to improve individual, family, and/or community
well-being
• Research team shares their findings for the purposes of public
awareness and advocacy
Principles
Universality & • The research team includes members who represent those
Nondiscrimination individuals most affected by a “problem” or population under
investigation
• Groups that are commonly marginalized (e.g., women,
racial/ethnic minorities) are included in research studies
• Available published works include a description of the efforts
used to include commonly marginalized groups
Indivisibility and • Efforts are made to include one more domains of rights:
Interdependence of political, civil, social, economic rights, and/or cultural rights
Human Rights and their relationship to individual, family, and community
well-being
• Published research includes a description and analysis of how
the presence or absence of one domain of human rights may
impact other domains (e.g., This information may included as
part of a problem statement or discussion or recommendations
section)
Participation • Efforts to ideally include all key stakeholders in all aspects of
the research design (e.g., design of study, implementation,
dissemination, and action steps)
Accountability • The research team views themselves as the duty bearers and
study participants are rights holders
• Publications include a description of how human rights
informed their study and apply their research findings to the
implications and applications for advancing human rights
Transparency • Human rights instruments (e.g., UDHR) and reports are
consulted in research design and referred to the sharing of
findings and designing recommendations for an action plan
• The research team designs and describes in publications all
aspects of the research design, especially the involvement of
research participants, for public knowledge and scrutiny.
• Avenues for dissemination include access to the information for
the general public, practitioners, and policy makers
©2015 Tina Maschi
The Lens of a Human Rights Framework 13

(1) The principle of universality states that human rights belong to everyone and
there are NO exceptions for any individual. Just by the mere fact that of being
human, everyone human is entitled to the collection of political, civil, social,
economic, and cultural rights.
(2) The principle, nondiscrimination, underscores access to rights for everyone. In
an ideal world, there should be no intended or unintended discrimination of
international laws, policies, or practices.
(3) The principle, indivisibility and interdependence, guides governments, as duty
bearers, to ensure political and civil rights as well as social, economic, and
cultural rights to its citizens, the rights holders. For example, if a government
does not recognize a social right, such as the right to health and well-being, it
challenges rights holders’ access to achieving these other areas of rights, such
as the right to education and safety and protection from violence and
discrimination.
(4) The principle of participation refers to everyone’s rights, especially those most
affected, have the right to participate in decisions that may infringe upon the
protection of their rights. In the most ideal situation, governments should
engage, support, and provide a platform for the participation of civil society on
political, civil, social, economic, and cultural issues.
(5) The principle of accountability suggests that governments are responsible for
creating a mechanism of accountability for the enforcement of equal rights,
which includes monitoring and evaluating the implementation of laws and
policies to protect rights.
(6) The principle of transparency means that governments should communicate to
civil society about all information and decision-making processes affecting
human rights. Society’s members should be educated to be part of the
informed decision-makers about how major decisions affect their rights. This
includes not only the national and international levels but also at the institu-
tional level, such as public institutions, such as how hospitals and schools are
structured and managed, which are needed to protect such rights, such as the
right to health and education (IJRC 2014; NESRI 2014, UN 2015). Table 2.1
illustrates how a human rights framework can serve as a guideline to design
and implement a research or evaluation study that is consistent with a human
rights framework and thus a rights research approach.

The Human Rights Trilogy: Human Rights Instruments

and Implementation Mechanisms

The second aspect in understanding and applying a human rights lens involves the
human rights trilogy, which consists of human rights instruments and implemen-
tation mechanisms (Wronka 2007). As illustrated in Fig. 2.1 the human rights
14 2 Understanding and Applying a Human Rights Lens

Fig. 2.1 The human rights

trilogy: guidance for a rights
research approach. ©2015
Tina Maschi

Universal
Declaration of
Human Rights

Human Rights
Trilogy

Implemtation Human Rights

Mechanisms Instruments

trilogy consists of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), other

human rights instruments, and implementation mechanisms.
The top triangle of the trinity is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR) that provides an authoritative definition of human rights standards (UN
1948). The UDHR consists of the five crucial notions: (1) human dignity,
(2) nondiscrimination, (3) civil and political rights, (4) economic, social, and cul-
tural rights, and (5) solidarity rights (Wronka 2007). After the signing of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, additional instruments, such as
covenants, conventions, and treaties, were developed to further operationalize and
monitor the implementation of human rights. The bottom right triangle represents
these “instruments” (e.g., treaties, covenants, declarations, and/or other reports). In
a rights research approach, ideally these documents are consulted to identify how to
conceptualize research problems and/or to developing and evaluating micro, mezzo,
or macro interventions.
The bottom-left triangle represents the implementation mechanisms or structure
charged with some aspect of advancing specific human rights using research and
evaluation. Under the large umbrella of the United Nations Generally Assembly
there are committees or commissions (that Wronka (2008) and others (UN 1994)
refer to as implementation mechanisms) that carry out realizing the human rights
outlined in these instruments. For a more detailed description of the implementation
mechanisms please refer to Policy Analysis book in this series by Gatenio Gabel
(2015). As illustrated in Table 2.2 examples and the human rights instruments and
associated committees are listed. These committees’ major roles include to initiate
research studies and make recommendations based on these findings. For example,
the Commission on Human Rights conducts studies, makes recommendations, and
develops human rights instruments related to civil and political rights. The
Committee on Crime Convention conducts research and prepares recommendations
The Human Rights Trilogy … 15

Table 2.2 United Nations Human Rights Instruments and Associated Committees
Human Rights Instruments Monitored/Year
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(ICCPR, 1996a)
International Covenant on Economic, Social, and
Cultural Rights (CESC, 1966b)
Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC, 1990b)
International Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD, 1968)
Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination
Against Women (CEDAW, 1979)
Convention Against Torture (CAT, 1987)
Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of
Prisoners (SMRTP, 1977)
Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of
Juvenile Justice (“Beijing Rules,” SMRAJJ, 1985)
Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All
Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.
(CPR-MWF, 1990c)
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(CPD, 1990a)
Houses Open-ended Working Group on Aging for
the purpose of strengthening the protection of the
human rights of older persons and the possible
development of a Convention on the rights of older
persons: http://social.un.org/ageing-working-group/
desa-ageing.shtml
Associated Committees
Human Rights Committee
Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights
Committee on the Rights of the
Child
Committee on the Elimination of
Racial Discrimination
Committee on the Elimination of
Discrimination Against Women
Committee Against Torture
Committee on Crime Convention
Committee on the Rights of the
Child
Committee on Migrant Workers
Committee on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities
UN Department of Economic and
Social Affairs

and report on the global status and the promotion of the fair treatment of incar-
cerated people or what the United Nations refers to as prisoner rights (UNODC
2009). For example, in an article my colleagues and I published about the inter-
national crisis on incarcerated elders in prison and make reference to just some of
the human rights issues raised and referencing sections of relevant human rights
instruments. See Table 2.3 or refer to Maschi et al. (2013) for a more detailed
description. Readers also are referred to Gatenio Gabel’s (2015) policy analysis
book in this series to explore the policy implications of research.
For the purposes of research and evaluation, social workers also have access to
resources provided by specialized agencies housed in the United Nations. These
agencies provide information, including reports related to the human rights issues in
which they are charged to monitor their implementation. Specialized agencies such
as, the International Labour Organization, Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization, assist with realizing human rights, such as the right to health, work,
education, and culture. For example, the World Health Organization (WHO 2007)
is a specialized agency that deals with matters related to the right to health and
well-being as originally outlined in Article 25 of the UDHR and further detailed in
16 2 Understanding and Applying a Human Rights Lens

Table 2.3 Summary of a Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). Universal

Published Journal Article Declaration of Human Rights. Ratified in 1948 as a response to
Human Rights Instruments the atrocities of World War II, the Universal Declaration of
and Reports to the Human Human Rights (UDHR; UN 1948) provides the philosophical
Rights Crisis of the underpinnings and relevant articles to research questions that
Overgrowth of Mistreatment apply human rights approach to research and evaluation
of Older Adults in Prison
For example, the UDHR preamble underscores the norm of
“respect for the inherent dignity and equal and inalienable
rights” of all human beings, which in this case includes older
adults in prison. Of the 30 articles, five of them are of particular
relevance to addressing the aging prisoner crisis. Article 25
states that “Everyone has the right to a standard of living
adequate for the health and well-being” (UN 1948, p. 5). These
guarantees are relevant to older adults before, during, and after
prison, include housing, medical, mental health, and social
services as well as the right to security in case of
unemployment, sickness, disability, or old age (UN 1948).
Research questions for descriptive studies can provide a profile
of what are the characteristics or profile of a population of
incarcerated adults aged 50 and older? Program evaluation
questions can address research questions in regard to extent to
which they advance the health and well-being of older adults in
prison or after their release
See Maschi et al. (2013) for a detailed human rights explanation
of the experiences of older people in prison that warrant further
research and program development and evaluation.
Also, see Gatenio Gabel’s (2015) policy analysis book in this
series to explore the policy implications of research

the Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. The WHO compiles the
Global Health Report on global public health and key statistics. They also engage in
global health campaigns and technical assistance related to public health. Their web
site has a host of other resources on global health (http://www.who.int/en/).

Vulnerable or Special Needs Populations

Additionally, the United Nations commonly classifies socially disadvantaged

groups as “vulnerable” or “special needs” populations that are often an interest of
social workers conducting research and evaluation (e.g., UNODC 2009). The
United Nations recognizes vulnerable populations, such as children, women, older
adults, persons with physical and mental disabilities, LGBT persons, prisoners
(including older prisoners), detainees, migrants and their families, refugees and
political asylees, individuals with HIV/AIDS, victims of genocide and torture (UN
1994). These groups may be at a heightened risk that may include living in poverty,
stigma, and discrimination in all areas of violence and abuse and a lack of access to
Vulnerable or Special Needs Populations 17

services and justice (Maschi and Aday 2014). Applying a rights research approach
social workers should understand this classification because many human rights
guidelines and reports are issued for these populations (e.g., women) or the themes
or issues (e.g., gender discrimination) that impact them.
Other sources of information relevant to the design of a research or evaluation
project that addresses human rights include nongovernmental organizations.
Examples of such organizations are: Human Rights Watch (http://www.hrw.org/),
Amnesty International (http://www.amnesty.org/), and the American Civil Liberty
Union (http://www.aclu.org) These organizations have publicly available infor-
mation that describe a social problem or human rights condition and recommen-
dations for solutions as well as opportunities for social workers and other citizens to
participate in advocacy campaigns.

Central Constructs of a Rights Research Approach

A third aspect of understanding and applying a human rights lens involves being
familiar with it the constructs or “variables” often under investigation in a research
or evaluation project. These four central constructs are: human rights, social justice,
well-being, and cultural relativism. As illustrated in Fig. 2.2, human rights have
been conceptualized as a necessary condition for achieving, social justice and the
well-being of all individuals, families, and communities and are shaped by culture
and cultural relativism. The two-sided arrows in the diagrams suggest that there is a
mutually influential relationship between them. In theory, this conceptual diagram

Cultural Relativism

Human Social
Rights Justice

Well-Being
-Individual
-Family
-Community

Fig. 2.2 Central constructs of a rights research approach: human rights, social justice, well-being,
and cultural relativism. ©2015 Tina Maschi
18 2 Understanding and Applying a Human Rights Lens

suggests that human rights are a mechanism to promote social justice and indi-
vidual, family, and community well-being and consistent with the mission of social
work (Wronka 2007).
For the purposes of research, these central constructs also can be operationalized
as core indicators or variables for investigation and are briefly described below.
These variables include root “causes” (i.e., independent variables, such as eco-
nomic insecurity or education), moderators (i.e., moderating variables, such as age,
race/ethnicity, gender, or country of origin), mediators (i.e., mediating variables,
such as social support, social inclusion, or access to healthcare), and correlates or
consequences (i.e., relational or dependent variables, such as health and justice
disparities; Maschi and Aday 2014; Maschi and Youdin 2012).
Cultural relativism is an overarching consideration in conceptualizing, imple-
menting, and evaluating research from a rights research approach. In essence,
cultural relativism basically says that cultures differ on how they understand and
respond to human rights. Donnelly (1984) referred to cultural relativism as a global
doctrine holds that some cultural variations are exempt from legitimate criticism by
outsiders and supersede some human rights. For example, the cultural practice of
female genital circumcision in some African countries may be perceived by as a
human rights violation (Reichert 2011). Cultural relativism is grounded in notions
of communal autonomy and self-determination in which a culture’s or community’s
right to autonomy may trump human rights. For example, there are culture variation
on how define what constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment” and “torture” (UN
1948). When conducting a rights research study, cultural relativism should be a
consideration on how participants from diverse backgrounds and cultures perceive
human rights, social justice, and well-being. When evaluating a research study or
program, they can be assessed to what extent cultural relativism was taken into
account and ideally are documented in publications about the study.

Summary

This chapter reviewed the first theme-based strategy of a rights research approach,
understanding and applying a human rights lens. Four aspects were identified which
where: (1) the values and principles of a human right framework (UN 2015),
(2) guidance from relevant human rights instruments, such as the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, (3) familiarity with human rights implementation
mechanisms, and (4) knowledge and application of the central constructs for
research that advances human rights and the mission of social work. These four
aspects are important considerations for social workers who are seeking guidance
on how to apply a human rights lens to design and implement research and eval-
uation projects that advance human rights and individual, family, and community
well-being. The next chapter reviews the second theme-based strategy, “research
that makes a difference” and provides examples of social workers who have
Summary 19

implicitly and explicitly used research and evaluation to advance human rights and
individual, family, and community well-being.

Exercises

The following individual or group experiential exercises can be used as an indi-

vidual writing assignment or small group or discussion thread experiential
exercises.
1. Pick a population of interest, such as immigrants or migrants, incarcerated
people, persons with disabilities, racial/ethnic minorities, women, or children.
(A) Review the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to identify at least 2–3
of the most salient human rights impacting this population. As an indi-
vidual exercise, write a one–two page essay or give a class presentation
about your key findings that describe that rights outlined in regard to this
population. Make at least one recommendation for a research study that
can be conducted using one or more of these rights. As a group exercise,
form a team of 3–5 people to research your findings. Present these findings
to the large group.
(B) Review the list of United Nations Core Human Rights Instruments to
identify a human rights instrument that speaks to that population by
visiting this link http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/
CoreInstruments.aspx.
An example is the Convention on the Rights of the Children for a population of
children.
As an individual exercise, write a one–two page essay or give a class presen-
tation about your key findings that describe thet rights outlined in regard to this
population. Make at least one recommendation for a research study that can be
conducted to explore one or more of these rights. As a group exercise, form a team
of 3–5 people to research your findings. Present these findings to the large group.
2. Choose a human rights issue, such as child maltreatment, elder abuse, mass
incarceration, or LGBT or women’s rights. For parts A or B, as an individual
exercise, write a one–two page essay or give a class presentation about your key
findings that describe what rights outlined in regard to this population. Make at
least one recommendation for a research study that can be conducted to explore
one or more of these rights. As a group exercise, form a team of 3–5 people to
research your findings. Present these findings to the large group.
Identify two to three research studies from different countries.
(A) Identify and read two to three research studies from different countries.
Assess the extent to which the study adopts a human rights framework as
outlined in Table 2.1.
20 2 Understanding and Applying a Human Rights Lens

(B) Identify one research study from a country of choice. Assess the extent to
which the study addresses one or more of the central constructs of a rights
research approach: human rights, social justice, well-being (individual,
family, and community well-being), and culture (cultural relativism) (See
Fig. 2.1).
3. The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment (commonly known as the United Nations
Convention against Torture or CAT) is a core human rights instrument or
treaty. It is the most noted prohibition against torture and other acts of cruel,
inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. It has influenced international
law widely and is one of the three core treaties the U.S. has ratified. The CAT
has been used in advocacy campaigns for the treatment of prisoners and to end
solitary confinement. Reviewing the CAT, identify a prison or criminal justice
issue and apply the CAT to it. See examples and additional information about
CAT at:

CAT text: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CAT.aspx

Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment
or punishment, Juan Mendez: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Torture/
SRTorture/Pages/SRTortureIndex.aspx
US Human Rights Network: http://www.ushrnetwork.org/our-work/project/cat-
convention-against-torture
National Religious Campaign Against Torture: http://www.nrcat.org

References

Council on Social Work Education [CSWE]. (2015). 2015 Educational policy standards.
Retrieved September 1, 2015, from http://www.cswe.org/File.aspx?id=69943
Donnelly, J. (1984). Cultural relativism and human rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 6(4),
400–419.
Gatenio Gabel, S. (2015). A human rights approach to policy analysis. New York: Springer.
Ife, J. (2012). Human rights and social work towards rights-based practice (3rd ed.). London:
Cambridge University Press.
International Justice Resource Center [IJRC]. (2014). Overview of a Human Rights Framework.
Retrieved April 1, 2015 from http://www.ijrcenter.org/ihr-reading-room/overview-of-the-
human-rights-framework/
Maschi, T., & Aday, R. (2014). The social determinants of health and justice and the aging in
prison crisis: A call to action. International Journal of Social Work, 1(1), 1–15.
Maschi, T., & Youdin, R. (2012). Social workers as researcher: Integrating research with
advocacy. Boston: Pearson Publishers.
Maschi, T., Viola, D., & Sun, F. (2013). The high cost of the international aging prisoner crisis:
Well-being as the common denominator for action. The Gerontologist, 53(4), 543–554. doi:
10.1093/geront/gns125, first published on October 4, 2012.
References 21

National Economic and Social Rights Initiative [NESRI]. (2014) What are the basic principles of a
human rights framework. Retrieved May 9, 2015 from https://www.nesri.org/programs/what-
are-the-basic-principles-of-the-human-rights-framework
Reichert, E. (2011). Social work and human rights: A foundation for policy and practice (2nd ed.).
New York: Columbia University Press.
United Nations (1966a). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Retrieved May 9,
2011 from http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm
United Nations (1966b). International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights.
Retrieved May 9, 2011 from http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cescr.htm
United Nations. (1969). Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
(CERD, 1969). Retrieve June 1, 2012 from http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/
Pages/CERD.aspx
United Nations. (1977). Minimum Standard Rules for Treatment of Prisoners. Retrieved May 9,
2011 from http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/treatmentprisoners.htm
United Nations. (1978). Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women
(CEDAW, 1978). Retrieve June 1, 2012 from http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/
text/econvention.htm
United Nations. (1985). Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice.
Retrieved May 1, 2014 from: http://www.unrol.org/doc.aspx?d=2670
United Nations. (1987). Convention Against Torture. Retrieved May 1, 2012 from http://www.
ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CAT.aspx
United Nations. (1990a). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Retrieved May 1,
2014 from:http://www.un.org/disabilities/convention/conventionfull.shtml
United Nations. (1990b). Convention on the Rights of the Child. Retrieved May 1, 2014 from:
http://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx
United Nations. (1990c). International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant
Workers and Members of Their Families. Retrieved May 1, 2014 from: http://www2.ohchr.org/
english/bodies/cmw/cmw.htm
United Nations [UN]. (2015). Human Rights Framework. Retrieved May 9, 2015 from http://
www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Migration/Pages/HumanRightsFramework.aspx
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime [UNODC]. (2009). Handbook for prisoners with
special needs. Vienna, Austria: Author.
United Nations. (1948). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from September 1,
2011 from http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
United Nations. (1994). Human rights and social work: A manual for schools of social work and
the social work profession. Geneva: United Nations Centre for Human Rights.
World Health Organization [WHO] (2007). The world health report 2007 - A safer future: global
public health security in the 21st century. Retrieved September 15, 2011 from http://www.who.
int/whr/2007/en/index.html
Wronka, J. (2007). Human rights and social justice: Social action and service for the helping and
health professions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Wronka, J. (2008). Human rights. In T. Mizrahi & L. E. Davis (Eds.), Encyclopedia of social work
(pp. 425–429). Washington, DC: National Association of Social Workers.
Chapter 3
Research and Evaluation that Make
a Difference

Introduction

The second theme-based strategy of a rights research approach is “research and

evaluation that makes a difference.” Since the birth of our profession in the early
twentieth century, social workers have integrated research in their practice and
advocacy strategies to identify challenges and monitor and evaluate solutions to
local and global challenges, such as poverty, violence, urbanization, mental illness,
substance abuse, crime, and the oppression of emerging and historically under-
represented and underserved groups (Maschi and Youdin 2012). For example, early
social work leaders, such as Jane Adams and Mary Richmond, provided supportive
individual, family, and community supportive services and also were politically
active and spearheading social and ethics and legal precedents, such as correctional
reform; establishing juvenile courts; federal and state legislation to protect families
living in poverty, women and children, immigrants, racial/ethnic minorities, and
older persons (Addams 1910; Austin 2003; Breckinbridge and Abbott 1912;
Richmond 1899). Additionally, during what was known as the Progressive Era,
social workers also established social work education and educational standards for
those who sought to make a difference with an university level applied social
science degree in social work to do so (Abbott 1942). The purpose of this chapter is
twofold: (1) to briefly explore how social workers historically have used to research
and evaluation strategies to make a difference, and (2) to present an integrated
practice model that social workers can use to conceptualize, plan, and classify
research and prevention and intervention projects.

© The Author(s) 2016 23

T. Maschi, Applying a Human Rights Approach to Social Work Research
and Evaluation, SpringerBriefs in Rights-Based Approaches to Social Work,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-26036-5_3
24 3 Research and Evaluation that Make a Difference

Historical Evidence of Making a Difference

Social work’s historical commitment to make a difference also has been shaped by
the use of scientific methods and evidence-based practice (Agnew 2004). In her
1917 book, Social Diagnosis, Richmond (1917) cautioned that if social work were
to be a profession, it must move beyond assuming we are “doing good” and provide
evidence that we are actually doing so. Integrating science with social work practice
was first proposed in the late 1800s as part of the scientific philanthropy movement
to fight poverty (Orcutt 1990). Scientific research in social work was used as a
mechanism to uncover the causes of human rights issues, such as poverty, assess
individuals, families and communities, and evaluate the effectiveness of social
workers’ attempts, such as for those living in poverty (Kirk and Reid 2002).
Perhaps one of the most well-known social workers, Jane Addams, is an early
classic example of how research was used to make a difference. The settlement
house she founded, Hull House, used the slogan: research, reform, and residence to
address social reforms, such as immigration, poverty and employment, and juvenile
delinquency (Maschi and Youdin 2012). Addams and her colleagues regularly used
community mapping and descriptive survey research to gather data for public
awareness and advocacy and publish their work for the purposes of advocacy
(Addams 1910; Ely 1895). Through collective professional efforts they pitched a
winnable argument that a separate justice system is needed for youth because youth
were developmentally different that their adult counterparts. The use of research and
evidence for advocacy helped to establish the juvenile court system in 1899 that
was subsequently adopted worldwide (Breckinbridge and Abbott 1912; Maschi
et al. 2009).
The rise of evidence-based practice (EBP) in medicine 1960–1970s and later
adopted by social workers in the 1980s has influenced how social workers have
used research and evaluation to make a difference using process and outcomes
(Gibbs 2002; Sackett et al. 1996). Social workers who engage in EBP as a process,
the more commonly used definition of evidence-based practice (EBP) is “the
conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making deci-
sions about the care of the individual patient. It means integrating individual clinical
expertise with the best available external clinical evidence from systematic
research” (Sackett et al. 1996). EBP as a process is consistent with a human right
perspective because of the importance of monitoring and evaluating progress
toward human rights. As an outcome, social workers use EBP treatments or other
interventions for which there is a body of research evidence that supports their
efficacy and effectiveness (Sackett et al. 1996), such as the use of family functional
therapy (Alexander and Sexton 2002). Social workers engaging in human rights
practice can integrate EBP as a process in which they evaluate their practice
decision-making as well as the outcomes of their clinical, community, program-
matic, and policy-level interventions.
Advanced Generalist/Public Health Model 25

Advanced Generalist/Public Health Model

A public health model, which takes into account multi-level prevention and inter-
vention efforts, is consistent with a human rights approach. The advanced generalist
public health model (AGPH) provides a bigger picture that can be used for the
designing, planning, or classifying rights research or evaluation studies at one or
one or more of its levels of interventions (Wronka 2007). Social workers who
engage in micro-, mezzo-, and macro-level interventions address some aspect of
promoting human rights and providing supports for individuals, families, and
communities well-being. As illustrated in Fig. 3.1, the AGPH model conceptualizes
four intervention levels designed to prevent or alleviate social problems and address
human rights and well-being. In this model, the levels of intervention are referred to
as primary, secondary, tertiary, and quaternary and target macro-, meso-, micro-,
meta-micro, and meta-macro research levels of intervention. Although research has
its own level, it also informs the other three intervention levels. Interventions at all
levels involve research for the purposes of social action and/or services and sup-
ports (Wronka 2007). So social workers, you cannot escape the variables!
In the AGPH model, social workers target the macro level to engage in primary
intervention strategies and target an entire population, such as the total population
of the United States. The purpose of a primary intervention strategy is to prevent
ALL individuals from compromising their health and well-being, such as substance
abuse prevention that targets U.S. citizens of all ages (Wronka 2007). The devel-
opment and implementation of a national campaign for substance abuse awareness
is an example of a primary intervention strategy. In the meta-macrolevel, the focus

Meta-micro

Micro -Tertiary Intervention

Mezzo -Secondary Intervention

Macro -Primary Intervention

Meta-macro

Research & -Quaternary Intervention

Evaluation

Research that Makes a

Difference at Many Levels

Fig. 3.1 AGPH model: types of interventions to advance human rights and social justice
26 3 Research and Evaluation that Make a Difference

will be on the international level, which acknowledges the global interconnected-

ness of people and places. A social media campaign promoting the importance of
universal substance abuse education for persons of all ages everywhere is an
example of a global prevention initiative.
Social workers who engage in the meso-level target secondary intervention
strategies among groups at risk (Wronka 2007). These strategies may be inter-
ventions in high-risk environments, such as a social worker developing a drug
prevention program and monitoring the effectiveness of outcomes, such as a
reduction in neighborhood drug sales, drug arrests, or drug overdoses.
Social workers who engage in the microlevel targets tertiary intervention
strategies and populations directly affected by a personal or social condition, such as
serious mental illness and substance abuse. Tertiary-level interventions frequently
entail individual level clinical interventions using one-on-one or group counseling
(Wronka 2007). For example, a social worker employed at a substance abuse clinic
may design and implement a cultural arts intervention group for youth with mental
health and substance use issues. Social workers may also engage in practices at the
meta-microlevel that also targets tertiary intervention strategies (Wronka 2007). This
may involve strategies that engage the everyday life with families and communities,
such as engaging social connections, such as family, friends, and others to assist in
youth’s substance use recovery and provide therapeutic benefits.
In the AGPH model, social workers can engage in research and evaluation at the
quaternary intervention strategies. Social workers’ findings from research and eval-
uation studies may provide informed knowledge for prevention and intervention
strategies across the other intervention levels. In turn, the primary, secondary, and
tertiary levels influence the research questions to be asked and the methodologies
used (Wronka 2007). As noted in chapter 1, social workers can consult human rights
documents, such as the UDHR, are a way of defining a research problem and
developing research questions (Ife 2001a, b). Using a human rights lens, social
workers also should consider the historical context of the research problem. This
includes examining the historical experiences of minority population under investi-
gation, such as African American and Native American communities (Wronka 2007).
Therefore, using a rights research approach on a micro- and meso level, social
workers can perform research and evaluation by defining problems in their com-
munities. This includes conducting needs assessments to identify gaps in services,
developing programs, and evaluating outcomes. Social workers can also engage in
practice evaluation, including the use of EBPs to ensure that the individuals and
families served obtain the best possible services. Monitoring the intervention will
help social workers modify interventions as needed (Maschi and Youdin 2012;
Sackett et al. 1996; Wronka 2007).
On a meta-macro- or macro level, some research and evaluation projects involve
gathering information that can be used to gauge progress on human rights and
social justice issues. Social workers can also use research for policy reform efforts
by critically examining legal and public discourse and the extent to which they
comply with the principles of human rights. For example, although the United
States has political and civil rights as part of its legal system, there is a paucity of
Advanced Generalist/Public Health Model 27

economic, social, and cultural rights in both the U.S. Constitution and state con-
stitutions (Wronka 2007).
After determining the research question, social workers’ next steps are to
identify the best available method(s) to answer the research question/s (Maschi and
Youdin 2012). Social workers have a host of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed
methods designs for use in a research and evaluation study (Creswell 2012; Kirk
and Reid 2002; Maschi and Youdin 2012). These will be examined in the remainder
of the book, therefore, only a brief overview is provided here. Quantitative research,
mostly using numeric data and large population samples, is a means of docu-
menting the magnitude and severity of a problem among a target population
(Maschi and Youdin 2012). For example, according to the American Civil Liberty
Union, there are over 200,000 adults aged 50 and older in U.S. prisons (ACLU
2012). Qualitative research methods often using narrative data and smaller sample
sizes, is an effective means of exploring relatively unknown areas and elevating the
voices of subjugated groups. For example, in my study of 677 adults aged 60 and
older in a state prison system, many participants reported abuse and stress while in
prison (See Maschi et al. 2015c). One man wrote, “I am 72 years old and I am
afraid of getting raped again in prison” (See Drisko and Maschi 2015 and Maschi
et al. 2015d). Mixed methods studies often offer the best of the quantitative and
qualitative worlds (Creswell 2012). They can be particularly useful for wide-scale
comparative analyses of international policies on work conditions, family violence,
or children’s, adults’, and/or older adults’ well-being (Mayer 2009). For example,
my colleagues and used a content analysis strategy to examine the geriatric and
compassionate release laws in the United States (See Maschi et al. 2015a). Of 47
state or federal laws located, only one state, Oregon, used human rights language
and referred the incarceration of adults in later life as a form of cruel and unusual
punishment. Finally, alternative methodologies, such as community mapping,
participatory action research, empowerment evaluation, and community-based
participatory research involves central stakeholders in partnerships with social work
researchers (Maschi and Youdin 2012). For example, my colleagues and I were
involved in a participatory action research project that was a documentary of older
LGBT persons involved in the criminal justice system. More information about this
study and its documentary project can be found at the following website: http://
www.betheevidence.org/rainbow-justice-project/ (Be the Evidence & Prisoners of
Age 2014; Also, see Maschi et al. 2015b).

Summary

In summary, this chapter outlined the second theme-based strategy of a rights

research approach, research that makes a difference. It explored how the social work
profession historically has used research and evaluation to advance human rights to
make a difference in the lives of individuals, families, and communities. The
advanced generalist pubic health model was presented as an integrated model in
28 3 Research and Evaluation that Make a Difference

which prevention and intervention strategies at the micro, mezzo, and macro levels
of intervention can be used for the design, planning, and classification of research
and evaluation studies. This model incorporates the use of quantitative, qualitative,
mixed methods, and alternative research methodologies that have relevance for a
rights research approach. Examples from contemporary work on aging and LGBT
people involved in the criminal justice system that involved quantitative, qualita-
tive, and participatory action methods to build public awareness and create avenues
for advocacy. The next chapter reviews the third theme-based strategy of a rights
research approach, informed decision-making, differing perspectives, approaches,
and methods.

Exercises

The following individual or group experiential exercises can be used as an indi-

vidual writing assignment (one to two pages) or small group or discussion thread
experiential exercise.
(1) Visit the International Federation of Social Workers web site dedicated to
global social work efforts. Read at least five stories or short articles posted on
the web site. Identify patterns and themes as to how they view their work as
making a difference (if at all) http://ifsw.org.
(2) Go to a National Association of Social Work web site (e.g., United States:
http://www.naswfoundation.org/pioneers/default.asp). Read at least five bio-
graphical sketches and identify common themes in leadership qualities and
contributions toward making a difference in the lives of individuals, families,
and communities. Describe how you might emulate these or other leadership
qualities and the contributions you have made or might make to advance
human rights and/or individual, family, and community well-being.
(3) Choose a social problem that was evident during social work history that
remains today (e.g., poverty, child maltreatment, juvenile delinquency, racial
discrimination). Discuss how reframing the problem throughout history has led
to different solutions. Then reframe it from a rights-based perspective and apply
the AGPH model to classify what level of intervention/s could be addressed.
(4) Choose a contemporary social problem that was evident during social work
history that remains today (e.g., poverty, child maltreatment, juvenile delin-
quency, racial justice, police brutality, solitary confinement). Using the ad-
vanced generalist public health model reviewed in this chapter, give a brief
description of what intervention might be used addresses the primary, sec-
ondary, tertiary, and quaternary intervention levels.
(5) Identify a contemporary research or evaluation study. Using the advanced
generalist public health model reviewed in this chapter, classify whether the
study uses a primary, secondary, tertiary, and/or quaternary intervention levels.
Provide a rationale for your response.
References 29

References

Abbott, E. (1942). Social welfare and professional education. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Addams, J. (1910). Twenty years at Hull house. New York: The Macmillan Company.
Agnew, E. N. (2004). From charity to social work: Mary E. Richmond and the creation of an
American profession. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Alexander, J. F., & Sexton, T. L. (2002). Functional family therapy: A model for treating
high-risk, acting-out youth. In F. W. Kaslow (Ed.), Comprehensive handbook of psychother-
apy: Integrative/eclectic (Vol. 4, pp. 111–132). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
American Civil Liberties Union [ACLU]. (2012). At America’s expense: The mass incarceration
of the elderly. Washington, DC: Author.
Austin, D. (2003). The history of social work research. In R.L. Edwards (Ed.-in-Chief),
Encyclopedia of social work (19th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 81–94). Washington, DC: NASW Press.
Be the Evidence & Prisoners of Age. (2014). Rainbow Justice Documentary. New York: Be the
Evidence Press. Retrieved August 14, 2015 from http://www.betheevidence.org/rainbow-
justice-project/
Breckinbridge, S. P., & Abbott, E. (1912). The delinquent child and the home: A study of the
delinquent wards of the juvenile court of Chicago. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Drisko, J., & Maschi, T. (2015). Content analysis: Pocket guide to social work research.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Ely, R. T. (1895). Hull-House maps and papers. A presentation of nationalities and wages in a
contested district of Chicago together with comments and essays growing out of the social
conditions by residents of Hull-House. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell & Company.
Gibbs, L. (2002). How social workers can do more good than harm: Critical thinking,
evidence-based clinical reasoning, and avoiding fallacies. In A. R. Roberts & G. J. Greene
(Eds.), Social workers’ desk reference (pp. 752–757). New York: Oxford University Press.
Ife, J. (2001a). Human rights and social work: Towards rights-based practice. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Ife, J. (2001b). Local and global practice: relocating social work as a human rights profession in
the new global order. European Journal of Social Work, 4(1), 5–15.
Kirk, S. A., & Reid, W. J. (2002). Science and social work: A critical appraisal. New York:
Columbia University Press.
Maschi, T., & Youdin, R. (2012). Social worker as researcher: Integrating research with
advocacy. Boston: Pearson Publishing.
Maschi, T., Bradley, C., & Ward, K. (Eds.). (2009). Forensic social work: Psychosocial and legal
issues in diverse practice settings. New York: Springer Publishing Company.
Maschi, T., Kalmanofsky, A., Westcott, K., & Pappacena, L. (2015a). An analysis of United States
Compassionate and Geriatric Release Laws: Towards a rights-based response for diverse elders
and their families and communities. New York, NY: Be the Evidence Press, Fordham
University. Available at www.beetheevidence.org
Maschi, T., Rees, J., Klein, E., & Levine, R. (2015b). LGBT elders and the Criminal Justice
System. In D.A. Harley & P.B. Teaster (Eds.). Handbook of LGBT elders: An interdisciplinary
approach to principles, practices, and policies. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International
Publishing.
Maschi, T., Viola, D., & Koskinen, L. (2015c). Trauma, stress, and coping among older adults in
prison: Towards a human rights and intergenerational family justice action agenda.
Maschi, T., Viola, D., Morgen, K., & Koskinen, L. (2015d). Trauma, stress, grief, loss, and
separation among older adults in prison: the protective role of coping resources on physical and
mental well-being. Journal of Crime and Justice, 38(1), 113–136.
30 3 Research and Evaluation that Make a Difference

Mayer, S. (2009). Using evidence in advocacy. In A. Thomas & G. Mohan (Eds.), Research skills
for policy and development: How to find out fast (pp. 264–274). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications Inc.
Orcutt, B. A. (1990). Science and inquiry in social work practice. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Richmond, M. (1899). Friendly visiting the poor. Montclair, New Jersey: Paterson Smith
Publishing Corporation.
Richmond, M. (1917). Social diagnosis. Philadelphia: Russell Sage Foundation.
Sackett, D., Rosenberg, W. M., Gray, J., Haynes, R., & Richardson, W. (1996). Evidence-based
medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. British Medical Journal, 312, 71–72.
Wronka, J. (2007). Human rights and social justice: Social action and service for the helping and
health professions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Chapter 4
Informed Decision-Making, Multiple
Perspectives, Approaches, and Methods

Between stimulus and response, there is a space.

In that space is our power to choose our response.
—Victor Frankl (1971, p. 53)

Introduction

The third theme-based strategy of a rights research approach is informed

decision-making, multiple perspectives, approaches, and methods. In a rights
research, it users must be aware of the ‘space’ between a ‘stimulus’ or ‘problem’ and
the thought process that shapes the ‘response’ to it. Using a right research approach,
social workers use multiple perspectives, approaches, and methods to make an
informed decision about defining the ‘problem’ that takes into account cultural rel-
ativism and empowerment strategies, choosing the research method/s to study it, and
developing interventions and actions based on the findings. In regards to the person in
the environment, the rights-based research approach does not fault or blame an
individual for the current situation but rather to help an individual understand his/her
relationship within the larger society. Therefore, multiple perspectives are gathered
from diversity of data sources and topic areas, which include the empirical and
scholarly literature and United Nations instruments and human rights reports as well
as key stakeholders first hand experiences and narratives (see Chaps. 2 and 5).
The purpose of this chapter is to explore differing perspectives, methods, and
approaches that influence the internal experience of a social worker’s informed
decision-making process. It reviews how deductive and inductive thought processes
applied to research that can contribute to an empowerment-based holistic approach
to informed decision-making. Next, it provides examples of select theories, such as
cumulative inequality and empowerment theories that are consistent with a rights
research approach. The end of the chapter exercises provides critical thinking

© The Author(s) 2016 31

T. Maschi, Applying a Human Rights Approach to Social Work Research
and Evaluation, SpringerBriefs in Rights-Based Approaches to Social Work,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-26036-5_4
32 4 Informed Decision-Making, Multiple Perspectives, Approaches …

Table 4.1 A rights research
cycle
Engage in ongoing critical self-reflection with any method used
(see introduction)
Consciously apply a human rights lens (HR framework,
cultural relativism, central constructs; see Chap. 2)
Ongoing engagement with key stakeholders (see Chap. 5)
Identify the ‘problem’ or human rights situation
Formulate research questions and/or hypotheses
Select a research or evaluation design
Select qualitative and/or quantitative data source/s
Select a sample
Collect data
Analyze and interpret the findings
Take action (see Chap. 7) © 2015 Tina Maschi

training exercises using case vignettes based on a mixed methods study on aging
people in prison to explore differing perspectives, approaches, and methods that
might be used to design future research or intervention choices.
As illustrated in Table 4.1, a rights research approach, often follows this similar
research cycle or process to traditional research which commonly consists of:
(1) identifying the ‘problem,’ (2) formulate research questions and/or hypotheses,
(3) select a research or evaluation design, (4) select qualitative and/or quantitative
data source/s (5) select a sample, (6) collect data, (7) analyze and interpret the
findings, and (8) share the findings (Maschi and Youdin 2012).
A rights research approach differs from a traditional research approach its ‘users’
engage in ongoing critical reflection with any method or approach used, con-
sciously apply a human rights lens to the process, take action based on these
findings in the form of public awareness, social or service transformation, and
advocacy, and whenever possible, using ongoing engagement with key stakeholders
in the research process. These additional steps can be infused into the structural
framework ‘research process as usual’ and similarly are circular not linear. Perhaps
what is most important is the use of empowerment-based strategies to maximize full
participation of all key stakeholders in the design and implementation of the results.

Process and Informed Decision-Making

As part of informed decision-making in a rights research approach, it is useful for

social workers to use inductive and deductive processes or approaches to guide
identify and interpret a ‘problem’ and to design solutions and actions using differing
perspectives. As illustrated in Fig. 4.1, when using deductive processes in a rights
research approach, a social worker begins with an existing knowledge, such as
human rights documents and a theory (or theories) that are consistent with a rights
approach, and then test one or more hypotheses or theory propositions from a
Process and Informed Decision-Making 33

Problem Formulation Using a Human Rights Lens

-Quantitative Test Existing Theory
-Qualitative-Generate Theory

Analyze and Interpret

Findings and Take Action Formulate
-Qualitative-Build Theory Research Questions/
-Quantitative: Determine -Quantitative Methods Use
Theory Support Hypotheses to Test Theory
-Take Action -Qualitative-Research
Question/s

Collect Data
-Quantitative Methods: Numeric Data
-Qualitative-Narrative Data

Fig. 4.1 The cycle of inductive and deductive processes for use in informed decision-making in a
rights research approach

theory or theories. Their research or evaluation project either supports or refutes the
hypothesis (Maschi and Youdin 2012). For example, a social worker who wants to
examine the disproportionate confinement of minority youth, may test the following
hypothesis using police and/or court records: black male youth are more likely to be
arrested than white male youth.
In contrast, when using an inductive approach, a social worker begins with
observing data (e.g., watching one or more neighborhood street corners where black
and white youth frequent and observe their interaction with law enforcement;
Maschi and Youdin 2012). Based on these inductively generated observations, the
social worker may develop empirical generalization or hypotheses to explain his or
her findings about how law enforcement interacts with black and white youth.
Using more than one perspective to understand a research problem creates an
opportunity for a broader understanding of an issue that can be used for informed
decision-making (Jordan and Franklin 2011). A holistic perspective is similar to
understanding a coin in the whole context of its front, back, and side with an acute
awareness that others may interpret the same coin differently as a sum or a piece of
it parts. The chapter appendix includes a survey developed by the author and
colleagues to assess the extent to which a person uses inductive and deductive
processes in interpreting the world. At the end of the chapter, there are exercises
using this survey (Fig. 4.2).
34 4 Informed Decision-Making, Multiple Perspectives, Approaches …

Concept/Construct 1 Concept/Construct 1
(e.g., oppression) (e.g., health and
Proposition Linking well-being)
Concept/Construct
(in this proposition based on
cumulative inequality theory Construct
1 is predicted to cause Construct 2)

Fig. 4.2 Components of a theory for theory testing or development

Quantitative and Qualitative Methods

A social worker using a rights research approach has the freedom to choose among
available research methods from a quantitative and/or qualitative approach to
explore problems and design actions. Since these methods are detailed in most
foundation level social work research texts, this next section provides guidance on
how a rights research approach can be infused in social work research ‘as usual.’
Quantitative methods are more commonly associated with deductive reasoning and
qualitative methods from inductive reasoning (Maschi and Youdin 2012). Both
perspectives have relevance for rights research informed decision-making that
incorporates diverse perspectives, approaches, and methods.
Quantitative research methods generally refer to systematic investigations using
descriptive or inferential statistical analysis. Undergirded by a post-positivist or
objective approach, quantitative research starts with an existing theory (or empirical
evidence) and tests a hypothesis (or hypotheses). It is built upon a nomothetic
causal model that seeks to understand one part of a problem using a limited number
of factors (Rubin and Babbie 2012). Most quantitative investigations use
closed-ended questions and to make comparisons and draw conclusions (Grinnell
and Unrau 2005). Common quantitative research methods that explore human
rights issues include the use of descriptive surveys to document a social problem,
such as the aging in prison crisis (American Civil Liberty Union 2012; Human
Rights Watch 2012). Using a research attempts to draw a total or representative
sample of people in order to create “generalizable” findings that can be extended to
Process and Informed Decision-Making 35

the larger population (Engel and Schutt 2010). Ideally, to explore the aging pop-
ulation in a prison at a state, national, or international level, using the total popu-
lation of adults age 50 and older would be idea to gather an accurate portrait of the
total number and sociodemographic and health characteristics. Table 4.2 provides
an example are how descriptive statistics are used to underscore the magnitude and
severity of a human rights issue of an aging prison population. It also illustrates
how the ‘size’ of the problem has similarities and differences in different cultural
settings. For more a more detailed description see Maschi et al. (2013).
Experimental or quasi-experimental designs can be used to gather data on the
effectiveness of an intervention (Rubin and Babbie 2012). For example, a social
worker that promotes health as a human right may evaluate a health literacy training
on the health and well-being of older adults in prison using a randomized control
design of individuals and compare those who participate in the intervention and
those who do not. If the intervention is found to be effective on improving human
rights conditions and/or health and well-being, it can be replicated across settings.
In contrast, qualitative methods most commonly apply an inductive approach
and holistic and circular thought processes (Patton 2015). It is based on a con-
structivist paradigm in which subjectivity and multiple perspectives are recognized
(Maschi and Youdin 2012). Creswell (2012) described qualitative research as an
“inquiry process of understanding based on distinct traditions of inquiry that
explores a social or human problem” (p. 3). Strauss and Corbin (1998) defined
qualitative research as “any kind of research that produces findings not arrived at by
means of statistical procedures or other means of quantification” (p. 5).
A qualitative method uses an ideographic or holistic model of causation and
attempts to obtain a comprehensive picture of an individual (or a case) and com-
monly includes all factors that might influence a case (e.g., an individual, family,
group, agency, or community). In general, qualitative methods adopt a holistic
approach to examine the richness, depth, and complexity of phenomena, and from
generates narrative data from information-rich cases (Guba and Lincoln 1994).
Qualitative methods (inductive) emphasize the deeper meanings of experience that
are not captured in quantitative studies (Padgett 2008).

Table 4.2 Using Numeric data to illustrate the magnitude and severity of a human rights issue
using the global aging prison population
The crisis of aging people in prison continues to gain international attention as the high
human, social, and economic costs of warehousing older adults with complex physical,
mental health, social, and spiritual care needs in prison continue to rise at a disproportionate
rate compared to the general prison population (HRW 2012; UNODC 2009). For example, in
the United Kingdom between 2000 and 2009, the general prison population grew by 51 %
compared to those aged 50–59 that grew by 111 % and those aged 60 and above grew by
216 %. In Japan between 2000 and 2006, the number of prisoners of 65 and older increased
by 160 % (UNODC 2009). The United States has the largest number of prisoners aged 55 and
older and that population has grown 282 % between 1981 and 2011 compared to 42 % in the
general prison population (HRW 2012). Canada has the lowest percentage increase in which
prisoners aged 50 and older increased 9 % in 1996 to 16 % in 2005 (UNODC 2009; based on
Maschi et al. 2013). © 2015 Tina Maschi
36 4 Informed Decision-Making, Multiple Perspectives, Approaches …

A qualitative approach enables the social worker to gather information-rich data

about human experiences and their interactions with the social environment. The
social worker builds a complex, holistic picture, analyzes worlds, reports detailed
views of information and conducts the study in a natural setting (Patton 2015).
Likewise, Lincoln and Guba (1985) emphasized the “discovery oriented” nature of
qualitative methods. It is a flexible design that often occurs in the natural setting in
which the participants live and/or work. A qualitative (inductive) approach is a
good way to capture the authenticity of individuals and cultures and is very con-
sistent with social work practice in real-world settings. Qualitative methods are
quite conducive for engaging participants to share their experiences. Qualitative
methods most often gather narrative data using such strategies from one-on-one or
focus group interviews, observations, and/or reviews of documents (including case
records, photos, and written correspondence). This narrative data is then sifted for
patterns and themes that can be developed for theories (Padgett 2008).
Qualitative methods may be a powerful source of evidence on its own or it may
be used in conjunction with quantitative methods often referred to as a mixed
methods study. In both approaches, the social worker needs to consult the existing
literature and use existing theoretical and empirical literature to inform and/or frame
a study. Using qualitative methods, this information does not dictate the direction of
the study, unlike a quantitative study, which is directed by hypothesis testing.
Qualitative methods are most often recognized for the flexible and emergent design
and use of open-ended and nondirective questions (Krueger and Neuman 2006;
Marshall and Rossman 2010; McLeod and Thomson 2009). Whereas, quantitative
approaches often use large random samples, experimental designs, and valid
measures, in contrast, qualitative approaches often use in-depth interviews, notes
from field observations, and document reviews, such as written narratives or
visuals, such as photographs (Creswell 2012; Patton 2015).
Qualitative methods also are flexible and diverse. With their roots in late nine-
teenth century ethnography (Madden 2010), there is a diverse array of theoretical
traditions, from many professional disciplines, that are considered part of qualita-
tive approaches. This diversity in perspectives provides insights that can range from
an individual’s lived experience (e.g., psychology and phenomenology), the social
world (e.g., sociology and grounded theory) to a community’s experience of culture
(e.g., anthropology and ethnography). Therefore, even within qualitative methods,
there are multiple perspectives that may be used in a rights research study. For
example, a social worker interested in exploring a how one or more cultures
describe the human rights issue of child maltreatment or elder abuse.
In general, a qualitative investigation begins with a research question (as opposed
to hypotheses), followed by the gathering of data about “sensitizing concepts”
(Patton 2015). Sensitizing concepts could be “internal and external resources” or
“well-being” among juvenile justice involved youth with mental health problems.
After the data are gathered and analyzed, empirical generalizations and themes are
identified and/or developed into themes, or in some cases, a theory (Padgett 2008).
Subjective awareness of self and others is a critical component of accurately
uncovering the individuals’ experiences, which may include their thoughts and
Process and Informed Decision-Making 37

feelings. Because a qualitative approach is our focus, we will explore how social can
best prepare to use a qualitative methods in a rights research approach.
Comparing quantitative and qualitative methods each have strengths and
weaknesses for a rights research approach, especially in terms of the breadth and
depth of the findings (Patton 2015). On the one hand, quantitative methods can
generate generalizable findings by analyzing the responses of a large sample, such
the frequency of substance abuse among correctional and health professionals and
its influence on providing quality of care and the health and well-being of the
incarcerated population they serve (Creswell 2009, 2012). Although this informa-
tion is useful identifying human rights or social issues, we have little information as
to why the pattern of substance abuse exists, or how other factors (e.g., cultural
background) may influence correctional and correctional health professionals to
misuse substances and how it impacts the services they provide. This is where
qualitative methods might help to fill in the gaps.
Because qualitative and quantitative methods have different strengths and
weaknesses, they represent alternative, but not mutually exclusive, strategies for
research and evaluation. Some researchers opt for mixed methods (i.e., using both
qualitative and quantitative methods) to garner the benefits of both approaches
(Creswell 2009; Teddlie and Tashakkori 2008). Therefore, when choosing one or
more methods for a rights research study, it is important to weigh the difference
between needing to know “how much,” or “how meaningful,” or both (Patton 2015).
Critical qualitative methods are perhaps the most consonant with research
methods that get at the core of human rights, social justice, and empowerment, and
thus a rights research approach. Gaining momentum in the 1990s, this method, such
as participatory action research and anti-oppressive social work research, are pur-
ported to be consistent with human rights based social work aims (Healy 2001;
McIntyre 2008; Stier 2006). As the word “critical” suggests, this approach explores
the social world for the purpose of critiquing it and achieving individual and social
transformation (Foucalt 1980). It moves from critical reflection to action steps. It
examines subjective and shared realities among groups, which are reinforced
through language (Foucalt 1982).
The critical social science approach asserts that there is an intergenerational
transmission of a collective reality that is historically based. Although individual
and group empowerment is a goal, it is tempered by a recognition of structural
barriers, such as institutional oppression and social and economic disadvantages,
create obstacles to achieving this goal. Building upon constructivist approaches, the
critical social science approach assumes that reality is not only socially but struc-
turally constructed. This includes social, political, cultural, and economic forces as
well as other aspects, such as ethnicity and gender (Buchanan 2010; Foucalt 1982).
What is distinctive about the critical qualitative methods is an examination of
group oppression that incorporates action. This approach rejects the false
dichotomies of either/or black and white thinking (positivist vs. constructivist) and
instead delves into shades of intellectual graey. Another unique feature is its use of
reflective dialogue that moves the researcher (i.e., the social worker) toward
action-oriented solutions, with the purpose of challenging existing viewpoints.
38 4 Informed Decision-Making, Multiple Perspectives, Approaches …

A central aspect is community (or key stakeholder) involvement from problem

formulations, methods, and implications, and applications. The research endeavor
strives for individual and social transformation (Healy 2008; Held 1980; McIntyre
2008). In theory, this approach appears to be the most obvious for its incorporation
of human rights practice and action-oriented research.

Highlight on Photovoice: A Critical Qualitative Method

An example of the use of the arts, such as photography and narratives, in critical
qualitative inquiry, photovoice methods are a powerful visual tool to build public
awareness that leads to social change efforts. Photovoice is a process in which
people—usually those with limited power due to poverty, language barriers, race,
class, ethnicity, gender, culture, or other circumstances—use video and/or photo
images capture aspects of their environment and experiences and share them with
others. Photovoice has been used in many countries, including youths in difficult
circumstances, people with disabilities and particular medical conditions (e.g.,
tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS), the very poor, groups subject to violence, and others
whose experiences are unknown or seemingly ignored by the community and by
those in power. The pictures can be used, usually with captions composed by the
photographers, to bring the realities of the photographers’ lives home to the public
and policy makers and to spur change. It uses a combination of Friere’s (1973)
notion of “critical consciousness” (a deep understanding of the way the world
works and how society, politics, and power relationships affect one’s own situa-
tion); feminist theory, which emphasizes the importance of voice; and documentary
photography, which is often used to help bring about social change (Wang and
Burris 1994, 1997; Wang et al. 1998) (Table 4.3).

Table 4.3 Case example of a photo voice project

In their 1997 article, Wang and Burris gave cameras to a group of Chinese rural village women in
Yunnan Province in China to document their lives and environment for one year and to discuss
as a group their pictures through the year. Once the project ended, the photographs were put on
exhibition. Not only was it empowering to the participants but it also raised the consciousness of
the general public and policy makers about their needs. The researchers found that the women
had gained a stronger voice, greater self-respect, and a sense of increased control over their lives.
Wang, now a professor at the University of Michigan, became a founding mother of Photovoice.
Wang (1999) identified five key concepts of Photovoice
1. Images teach
2. Pictures can influence policy
3. Community members ought to participate in creating and defining the images that shape
healthful public policy
4. The process requires that from the outset planners bring policy makers and other influential
people to the table to serve as an audience; and
5. Photovoice emphasizes individual and community action (Wang 1999; Wang and Burris 1994,
1997; Wang et al. 1998)
Theories and a Rights Research Approach 39

Theories and a Rights Research Approach

Theories can assist with social workers in design research that engages key
stakeholders and available evidence that can be to social problem conceptualization
and translation to practice and action. Theories are useful for understanding aspects
of clients’ internal and external worlds, and for explanations that can facilitate
individual or social transformation, especially related to understanding human
behavior in the social environment. Theories help us make sense of the world and
offer explanations for common patterns found in psychological and social behavior,
as well as social work practice. Useful theories for a rights research approach are
grounded in “real-world” biopsychosocial concepts that are relevant to promote
human rights, social justice, and well-being and help frame research and practice
evaluation activities (Turner and Maschi 2015).
Social workers often use a combination of theoretical perspectives, to guide
research and practice evaluation. Although a subject of debate in the real world of
accountable social work practice, the use of a conceptual framework or sensitizing
concepts is an important aspect of conceptualization and framing a perspective
about human behavior and the social world (Patton 2015). As shown in Fig. 4.1,
propositions from theories can be testable hypotheses for investigation (Maschi and
Youdin 2012).
Cumulative Disadvantage/Inequality Theory. Cumulative inequality theory is a
middle-range sociological theory and examines the overall impact of stress across
the life course (e.g., Ross and Mirowsky 2001). Cumulative inequality theory uses
micro- and macro-level contextual factors, which include intersectional identities
and locations that include belonging to a member of a racial/ethnic minority or
socioeconomically disadvantaged group, being female, unemployment, belonging
to a single parent household, and/or living in an impoverished neighborhood. The
accumulation of stressors or deficits may affect an individual’s overall well-being
across the life course (Maschi et al. 2011, 2015; Mirowsky and Ross 2005; Ross
and Mirowsky 2001; Sampson and Laub 1997). However, it also has a
strengths-based element because it takes into account constructs, such as human
agency (acting on personal goals), social support, and other factors that assist
individuals, families, and groups prevent or overcome that most challenging of
experiences. Cumulative inequality theory is an example of an explanatory theory,
which does not include a practice component. However, it is relevant to social work
research and practice. The theory helps social workers conceptualize the pathways
to health and justice disparities among disadvantaged groups in society. Using this
conceptual framework, multilevel interventions can be designed to help eradicate
poverty and increase overall well-being among all individuals in society.
Empowerment Theory and Practice. Developed by Friere (1998) and further
developed by Lee (2001), the purpose of empowerment theory is to increase the
personal, interpersonal, and political power of oppressed and marginalized popula-
tions for individual and collective transformation for action. The root of the indi-
vidual or oppressed group “problem” is the response to discrimination, oppression,
40 4 Informed Decision-Making, Multiple Perspectives, Approaches …

violence, and poverty. The practice intervention is designed to tap the core concept of
“empowerment,” which can be described as the process of increasing oppressed
individuals’ and groups’ personal, interpersonal, or political power to achieve social
justice and respect for their human rights on par with privileged or dominant groups
(Lee 2001).
Conscientization or critical consciousness on the part of social workers, which is
an understanding of the relationship personal experiences to the social, cultural,
legal, and political aspects of marginalized individuals, families, and communities
to partner with them toward their development of individual and collective critical
consciousness and social action. Empowerment interventions wed clinical and
community oriented approaches because it targets the needs and rights of indi-
viduals, families, groups, communities, and political systems. Empowerment-based
assessment and intervention strategies often target the construct, self-efficacy (e.g.,
degree of one’s control over one’s environment), which, in turn, leads to
empowerment-based behavior change (Turner and Maschi 2015).

Summary

This chapter explored the third rights research theme-based strategy, multiple,
methods, and approaches that influence the internal experiences of a social worker’s
informed decision-making process. It reviewed how deductive (using existing
knowledge) and inductive (generating knowledge) thoughts processes and how they
are applied to research that can contribute to a more holistic approach to informed
decision-making. Select theories, cumulative inequality and empowerment theories,
were reviewed as existing theory that are consistent with promoting human rights
and well-being and developing and monitoring interventions. The chapter con-
cluded with critical thinking activities based on case vignettes based on a mixed
methods study on aging people in prison. This chapter provides a foundation for the
fourth theme-based strategy, social contexts, meaningful participation, and rela-
tional communication presented in the next chapter.

Exercises

1. Please complete the Inductive and Deductive Orientation Assessment Survey

(IDOAS; Maschi et al. 2012) found in the chapter appendix. After completing
the survey, generate a score. Scores closer to 50 suggest a deductive orientation,
whereas scores closer to 10 reflect an inductive orientation. Scores closer to 30
suggest a mixed inductive–deductive orientation. For individuals, write a one
page critical reflection about how the survey results are consistent or inconsis-
tent with how you perceive yourself. If groups are an option, match individuals
with different ranges of scores (closer to 10, 30, or 50) to meet in groups of 3–4
Exercises 41

people discuss their personal findings and your reactions about hearing from
other group members. Briefly summarize the group discussion to the larger
group.
2. Using one or more case vignettes developed from the mixed methods study of
older adults in prison for one or more of the following exercises:
Exercise 1: In four small groups of 3–4 people, review one or more vignettes
and explain the ‘problem’ from a critical qualitative methods perspective.
Develop at least one research question or hypotheses each group would like to
explore in a future study drawing from this method.
Exercise 2: After developing a research question or hypotheses, what method or
methods (i.e., quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods approach) might be
used? Provide a rationale for your choice.
Exercise 3: Apply one of the theories of the problem identified in the vignettes
‘problem.’ How can it be explained from a cumulative inequality or empow-
erment perspective? Provide suggestions for possible interventions a social
worker might use to address micro, mezzo, and/or macro interventions for an
incarcerated elder or the aging prison population. Write a short assessment paper
applying the theory to one or more cases and/or conduct the exercise in a small
group of 4–5 people. Briefly share each group’s assessment with the larger
group.

Vignettes

A. Mr. D. is a 59-year-old African American male and can be classified chronic

recidivist due to 5 incarcerations starting at the age of 19. His life history reveals
that experienced multiple interruptions or transitional life events, such as being
the victim of child sexual abuse, the death of both parents, foster care
involvement, expelled from school. In later life, he reports multiple losses of
jobs that he perceives had been because of racism and ageism and homelessness
and health problems. He acknowledged his response to what he referred to as
difficult life events was to medicate himself by using alcohol and drugs. He
describes life periods of desperation in which he resorted to committing crimes
to cope with his feelings of loss and disempowerment. He also reports having
been reluctant to use available services because he didn’t like the way he was
treated at the shelter and substance abuse agencies.
B. Juan is a 56-year-old Puerto Rican male and the youngest of nine children. He
has a history of the unexpected death of his father at age 5, sexual victimization,
poverty, prostitution, drug dealing, substance abuse (heroin addiction), and
recidivism (incarcerated two times). At age 17, he reported committing armed
robbery to support his heroin addiction and was sentenced to 20 years in prison.
During his prison term, he continued to use drugs. He violated parole within
fifteen months of release and was charged with aggravated sexual assault. As a
42 4 Informed Decision-Making, Multiple Perspectives, Approaches …

result, he is now serving his second and current 35-year sentence. In prison, he
has spent eight of the past fifteen years in solitary confinement. He perceives
prison as “an overcrowded monster” designed to hold, degrade and punish
people. He views the staff as disinterested and disengaged and is despondent
over the limited access to counseling and education rehabilitative services. Jorge
developed a chronic lung condition while in prison and is projected to receive
parole in 6 months to one year. He has had monthly visits from his wife,
children, and grandchildren during his most recent incarceration.
C. Jane is a 54-year-old, Caucasian, Catholic woman who is incarcerated in a
women’s facility in a northeastern state correctional facility. As a child, she
experienced the divorce of her parents, abandonment by her mother, and
physical and verbal abuse by her father, whom she described as having serious
mental health problems. At age 25, Jane married a man ten years younger, had
two children, and divorced. This is her first criminal conviction, and she is
serving a ten-year prison sentence (85 % minimum) for conspiracy and the
attempted murder of her husband. Jane describes this sentence as unfair and
unjust based on mitigating circumstances. She has a medical history of
hypertension and vision impairment. At age 54, Jane’s extensive dental prob-
lems have resulted in a premature need for dentures. She describes her current
prison experience as “degrading, especially the way correctional officers treat
inmates.” Jane copes with her prison experience by “finding meaning” in it
through spirituality. Her projected parole date is in five years, when she will be
59 years old. Due to the long distance, she corresponds monthly by mail with
her two children and every three months by phone but has not had any in-person
visits since her incarceration.
D. Ryan is a 60-year-old Caucasian male of Irish and Polish descent; his family
has an intergenerational history of alcoholism. Ryan is a Vietnam War veteran.
As a child he experienced “extreme” corporal punishment from his parents that
left him generally fearful of communicating with them. Ryan was sexually
molested for years by his little league manager. At age 13, he made a conscious
decision to “get tough” to protect himself; at 18 he joined the Marine
Corp. After his release, Ryan witnessed a man in a bar offering cocaine to
several young girls whom he believed would be sexually molested. In a blinding
rage, he took the man outside the bar with another peer and murdered the man.
In prison, Ryan spent time in solitary confinement. During these periods of
isolation he describes engaging in self-reflection. Ryan is serving a life sentence
in prison. He has not been in communication with his family while in prison.
E. John is a 57-year-old Caucasian male with five children and a grandchild. He
has a history of substance abuse. As a child, he witnessed family violence,
parental infidelity, and parental divorce. At age 13, John began using illegal
substances, such as LSD and alcohol; he quit school at age 17. As an adult, his
wife was unfaithful to him. In a drunken rage, John murdered his wife when he
saw her with her new partner at a local bar. In prison, he finds the conditions of
confinement (overcrowding, violence, poor diet, staff mistreatment of inmates)
stressful. He is taking psychotropic medication to treat his depression and
Exercises 43

participates in prison programming to help him cope with prison life. Having
served 17 years in prison, John is scheduled to be released in one year. He has
been visiting by his three of his siblings once a year since his imprisonment.
F. Earl is a 57-year-old, bisexual, African American male with a history of
homelessness and mental illness (Schizoid-Affective Disorder). He describes his
situation as unique since he committed a crime to get into prison. In 2007, he
reports having had a nervous breakdown because he “lost everything,” including
his job and apartment. In 2009, in a drunken rage, he “broke the law” and spent
one year in a county jail. After his release, he reports being unable to obtain basic
needs, such as food, water, clothing, housing, and healthcare. He was reluctant to
seek assistance from family and friends, social services, or church due to shame
and embarrassment. He subsequently committed a crime (grand larceny) for the
purpose of returning to prison where his basic needs would be met. Earl reports
improved coping capacity due to access to psychotropic medication and mental
health treatment; however in the past year he was diagnosed with diabetes. Earl is
expecting to be released from prison in 2026 when he will be 70 years old. He
has not been in communication with his family.
3. Using the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), apply it to developing research
questions based on the aging in prison crisis or some other prison related reform
issue. See CAT text: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/
CAT.aspx.
Other resources include: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman
or degrading treatment or punishment, Juan Mendez: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/
Issues/Torture/SRTorture/Pages/SRTortureIndex.aspx.
US Human Rights Network: http://www.ushrnetwork.org/our-work/project/cat-
convention-against-torture.
National Religious Campaign Against Torture: http://www.nrcat.org.

Appendix

Part A: Inductive and Deductive Assessment

Directions: For each of the statements listed below, please complete the statement
list below by place a check or circle the one answer that BEST DESCRIBES your
views using the following scale: Strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, and
strongly agree. After completing the survey please calculate your scores using the
right hand column (labeled score). Using the scoring key, determine whether you
lean more toward an inductive, deductive, or mixed approach to decision-making.
To best ensure your privacy, please do not write your name on the survey. The
information provided will help us to gain a better understanding of practice
decision-making processes among professionals (Fig. 4.3).
44 4 Informed Decision-Making, Multiple Perspectives, Approaches …

Inductive and Deductive Orientation Assessment Survey

(IDOAS)

(Maschi, Morgen, & MacMillan, 2012)

Professionals, including social workers and counselors, need to make practice decisions

on a regular basis. Practice decision-making often involves a problem solving process

that uses deductive reasoning, drawing knowledge from existing theories and research,

and/or an inductive reasoning in which data directly from the field is used to build case

level explanations. This anonymous survey was developed to assist professionals in

assessing their natural tendencies towards using inductive and deductive approach to

decision-making. It should take about 5-7 minutes to complete

Location: ________________ Date : __________________ Survey Code: ___________________

Fig. 4.3 Inductive and deductive orientation assessment

Statements Level of agreement with following statements Score

1. I like to plan ahead Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
about what I do and Disagree 2 3 4 Agree
not deviate from the 1 5
plan
2. I see myself as a Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
rational person Disagree 2 3 4 Agree
1 5
3. I can separate who I Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
am from what I Disagree 2 3 4 Agree
know 1 5
4. I am comfortable Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
using statistics Disagree 2 3 4 Agree
1 5
5. I believe most Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
people perceive a Disagree 2 3 4 Agree
similar reality that 1 5
they can agree upon
(continued)
Appendix 45

(continued)
Statements Level of agreement with following statements Score
6. I see myself as a Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
creative person Disagree 4 3 2 Agree
5 1
7. I believe that there Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
are multiple Disagree 4 3 2 Agree
subjective realities 5 1
in which people see
the world
differently from
each other
8. I prefer to Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
communicate using Disagree 4 3 2 Agree
written or spoken 5 1
word with others as
opposed to numbers
and statistics
9. I am flexible, Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
adaptive, and will Disagree 4 3 2 Agree
initiate changes, 5 1
when needed
10. My personal Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
values are an Disagree 4 3 2 Agree
important 5 1
consideration
when I make
decisions
Total score
Scoring: Using the right hand side score column, add up your total score. Scores closer to 50
suggest a deductive orientation, whereas scores closer to 10 reflect an inductive orientation.
Scores closer to 30 suggest a mixed inductive–deductive orientation

Part B: Background Information

This next section asks about some brief background information. Please answer the
following questions by placing an “X” in the box and/or filling in the blanks.
46 4 Informed Decision-Making, Multiple Perspectives, Approaches …

1. What is your gender?

1. Male
2. Female
2. What is your current age (in years): __________________________
3. What is your race/ethnicity?
1. White, not of Hispanic Origin
2. African American
3. Hispanic
4. Asian/Pacific Islander
5. American Indian/Alaskan Native
6. Inter-racialor Multi-racial
7. Other (please list): (3a) _____________________________

4. Please check the box that describes your highest educationdegree and major.
1. Less than high school diploma
2. High school diploma
3. BA/BS – criminal justice
4. BA/BS – sociology
5. BA/BS – psychology
6. BA– other major (please list discipline): (4a)
__________________________
7. MA or MSW– social work (MSW)
8. MA/MS/MEd – counseling
9. MA/MS - psychology
10. MA – criminal justice
11. MA – other major (please list discipline)(4b) ___________________
12. Psy.D. – clinical/counseling psychology
13. DSW
14. PhD – (please list discipline) (4c) ____________________________

5. Are you currently in professional practice?

1. No
2. Yes If yes, please list number of years in practice
_________________
3. If Yes, what is the discipline of your professional license?
___________________
6. Are you currently enrolled as a college or university student?
4. Yes (If yes, please answer, question 7 and 10)
5. No (If not a student, please go to question 10).
7. What college or university do you attend? __________________________________

8. What year are you in?

1. Freshman
2. Sophomore
3. Junior
4. Senior
5. Master’s Student
6. PhD Student
7. Other: (6b) ____________________________________________

9. What is your Major? _______________________________________________

10. Have you participated in a field placement internship?
1. No
2. Yes If yes, please list number of months spent in any internships
____________
11. Please think about a recent practice (or even personal) decision you have made and
that you are willing to share. What was the decision? Then briefly describe how you
came to make that decision, including what were you thinking and who or what did
you consult. Please use the back of the paper if additional space. is needed
Appendix 47

You have successfully completed the survey. Thank you for your
participation.
Source: Maschi, T., Morgen, K. & MacMillan, T. (2012). The inductive and
deductive orientation survey (IDOAS). New York: Fordham University Be the
Evidence Press. Permission to used can be requested by contacting the lead author
at: tmaschi@fordham.edu.

References

American Civil Liberties Union [ACLU]. (2012). At America’s expense: The mass incarceration
of the elderly. Washington, DC: Author.
Buchanan, I. (2010). A dictionary of critical theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc.
Creswell, J. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches
(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Engel, R., & Schutt, R. K. (2010). The fundamentals of social work research. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
Foucalt, M. (1980). Power knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings. New York:
Pantheon Books.
Foucalt, M. (1982). The archeology of knowledge and discourse on language. New York:
Vintage/Anchor Books.
Frankl, V. (1971). Man’s search for meaning: An introduction to Logotherapy. New York:
Washington Square Press.
Friere, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Seabury.
Friere, P. (1998). The adult literacy process as cultural action for Freedom. Harvard Educational
Review, 68(4), 480–518.
Grinnell, R. M., & Unrau, Y. (2005). Social work research and evaluation: Qualitative and
quantitative approaches. Itasca: F. E. Peacock Publishers Inc.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N.
K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117). Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications Inc.
Healy, K. (2001). Participatory action research and social work: a critical appraisal. International
Social Work, 44(1), 93–105.
Healy, L. (2008). Exploring the history of social work as a human rights profession. International
Social Work, 51(6), 735–748.
Held, D. (1980). Introduction to critical theory: Horkheimer to Habermas. Los Angeles:
University of California Press.
Human Rights Watch [HRW]. (2012). Old behind bars. Retrieved May 1, 2013 from http://www.
hrw.org/reports/2012/01/27/old-behind-bars.
Jordan, C., & Franklin, C. (2011). Clinical assessment for social workers. Quantitative and
qualitative methods (3rd ed.). Chicago: Lyceum Books.
Krueger, L. W., & Neuman, W. L. (2006). Social work research methods: Qualitative and
quantitative applications. Boston: Pearson Education Inc.
Lee, J. A. B. (2001). The empowerment approach to social work practice. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury park, CA: Sage Publications,
Inc.
48 4 Informed Decision-Making, Multiple Perspectives, Approaches …

Madden, M. (2010). Being ethnographic: A guide to theory and practice of ethnography.

Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2010). Designing qualitative research (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications Inc.
Maschi, T., & Youdin, R. (2012). Social worker as researcher: Integrating research with
advocacy. Boston: Pearson Publishing.
Maschi, T., Morgen, K., Zgoba, K., Courtney, D., & Ristow, J. (2011). Trauma, stressful life
events, and post traumatic stress symptoms: Do subjective experiences matter? Gerontologist,
51(5), 675–686. doi:10.1093/geront/gnr074.
Maschi, T., Morgen, K., & MacMillan, T. (2012). The inductive and deductive orientation
assessment survey (IDOAS). New York: Be the Evidence Press.
Maschi, T., Viola, D., & Sun, F. (2013). The high cost of the international aging prisoner crisis:
Well-being as the common denominator for action. The Gerontologist, 53(4), 543–554.
Maschi, T., Viola, D., Morgen, K., & Koskinen, L. (2015). Trauma, stress, grief, loss, and
separation among older adults in prison: The protective role of coping resources on physical
and mental well-being. Journal of Crime and Justice, 38(1), 113–136.
McIntyre, A. (2008). Participatory action research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
McLeod, J., & Thomson, R. (2009). Researching social change. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications Inc.
Mirowsky, J., & Ross, C. (2005). Education, cumulative advantage and health. Ageing
International, 30(1), 27–62.
Padgett, D. K. (2008). Qualitative methods in social work research: Challenges and rewards (2nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications Inc.
Ross, C., & Mirowsky, J. (2001). Neighborhood disadvantage, disorder and health. Journal of
Health and Social Behavior, 42(3), 258–276.
Rubin, A., & Babbie, E. (2012). Essential research methods for social work (3rd ed.). Belmont:
Brooks/Cole.
Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (1997). A life-course theory of cumulative disadvantage and the
stability of delinquency. In T. Thornberry (Ed.), Advances in criminological theory and
delinquency: Vol. 7 (pp. 1–29). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Stier, R. (2006). Anti-oppressive research in social work: A preliminary definition. British Journal
of Social Work, 1, 1–15.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2008). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating
quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
Turner, S. G., & Maschi, T. (2015). Feminist and empowerment theory and social work practice.
Journal of Social Work Practice, 29(2), 151–162.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime [UNODC]. (2009). Handbook for prisoners with
special needs. Vienna: Author.
Wang, C. C. (1999). Photovoice: A participatory action research strategy applied to women’s
health. Journal of Women’s Health, 8(2), 185–192.
Wang, C., & Burris, M. A. (1994). Empowerment through photo novella: Portraits of participation.
Health Education & Behavior, 21(2), 171–186. doi:10.1177/109019819402100204.
Wang, C., & Burris, M. A. (1997). Photovoice: Concept, methodology, and use for participatory
needs assessment. Health Education & Behavior, 24(3), 369–387.
Wang, C. C., Yi, W. K., Tao, Z. W., & Carovano, K. (1998). Photovoice as a participatory health
promotion strategy. Health Promotion International, 13(1), 75–86.
Chapter 5
Social Contexts, Meaningful Participation,
and Relational Communication

Social advance depends as much upon the process through

which it is secured as upon the result itself.
—Jane Addams (n.d.)

Introduction

The chapter highlights the fourth theme-based strategy in a rights research

approach, social contexts, meaningful participation, and relational communication.
As Jane Addams suggests in her famous quote, social transformation is as much
about the process as the end results. Her statement is quite fitting for this rights
research to emphasize the human rights principle of social participation, inclusion,
and engagement more than a traditional research approach. Research studies that
are designed and implemented in which these social and relationship aspects are a
key consideration honor core human rights values of dignity, respect, and worth of
the ‘whole’ person and equality.
Therefore, the purpose of this chapter is to review how social workers can infuse
this rights research theme in their research and evaluation projects. Drawing from a
human rights perspective and core principles, it explores how social contexts,
participation, and relational communication can be infused throughout the research
process regardless of whether quantitative and/or qualitative methods are used.
Each section explains and provides practical tips on how to maximize the use of the
social environment, key stakeholder participation, and interviewing and observa-
tional techniques to build rapport and relational communication. They are reviewed
in that order, respectively. The chapter concludes with experiential exercises in
which these rights research techniques can be practiced.

© The Author(s) 2016 49

T. Maschi, Applying a Human Rights Approach to Social Work Research
and Evaluation, SpringerBriefs in Rights-Based Approaches to Social Work,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-26036-5_5
50 5 Social Contexts, Meaningful Participation …

Definitions

Social contexts or social settings refer to the diverse places in which social workers
are positioned to conduct human rights-based research and evaluation activities.
Since human rights-based research occurs at the local to global level, social con-
texts may vary by cultural groups and geographic locations. Therefore, a rights
research approach compared to a traditional research approach is perhaps much
more mindful of cultural relativism. That is, how definitions and meaning may vary
across cultures. For example, a cross-cultural study on death and loss must consider
the meaning and response to death and loss across different culture groups or
geographic regions. In general, social contexts include but are not limited to local to
global organization, agencies, or program or institutional or community settings.
In a rights-based approach to research, meaningful participation refers to the
ways in which social workers meaningfully engage in the research and evaluation
process with individuals, families, or one or more groups or organizations, and
society. Depending upon the research design a social worker or research team most
often will choose, equal and/or meaningful participation of all parties, such as the
social worker and others from their agency or community (e.g., members of the
community, community organizations, or state and federal government) is most
consonant with the human rights principle of participation in which all stakeholders
have some voice in the process. However, pending upon the research question or
questions being asked, there may be varying levels of meaningful participation of
researcher or evaluator and other key stakeholders. In some research and evaluation
project, participation will include situations where the social work researcher or
participants voices are more dominant or there may be equality between both
parties in their level of participation.
From a rights research approach, meaningful participation also entails a social
worker engaging in relational communication based on the human rights principles
of dignity, respect, worth, and equality. Relational communication refers to the
verbal, nonverbal, and written exchanges among the social worker in the research
role and other participants. The use of language is a key consideration in relational
communication used to demonstrate a human rights perspective that is respectful of
others. For example, using the term key stakeholders as opposed to human subjects
is more suggestive of dignity and equality for all those involved in the research
process. This relational approach is in stark contrast to a traditional approach in
which objectivity or distance between the researcher and researched versus sub-
jectivity (e.g., subjectivity) is more of the norm.

Social Worker Know Thyself

From a rights research approach, it is important to underscore that a social worker

must know him or herself and be well aware of their thoughts and feelings, before
Definitions 51

effectively engaging with the external social world (see introduction). To this end, a
social worker who adopts a right research approach must actively seeks to take
ownership of the self expression of one’s own voice, authenticity, and perspective
in verbal, nonverbal, and written communication with other key stakeholders.
Communication with self and others includes the use of active reflection and lis-
tening, empathy, neutrality (nonjudgemental stance). These reflective practices can
best ensure that social worker is more self-confident and that they are more likely to
be perceived as authentic, trustworthy, and credible.
In a rights research approach, social workers also should be able to recognize
and correct sources of personal biases and errors in thinking, using advanced
interviewing and observational skills (verbal and nonverbal), and engaging in
formal and informal discussions. As for written or digitally recorded documenta-
tion, it includes the ability to be versatile to communicate both succinctly and
detailed. As for detail, social workers have written communication skills in order to
craft detailed descriptive narratives, field notes, and to document narrative data in
verbatim form (e.g., Cresswell 2012; Moustakas 1990; Padgett 2008; Patton 2015).
As described in Chap. 4, a rights research approach provides social workers with
design choices that include mixed methods or qualitative and quantitative methods.
These methods offer different variations in the extent to which social contexts, equal
participation, and the relational communication are used. Quantitative studies most
often start with deductive processes in which their hypotheses are firmly grounded
in existing theories or prior literature as opposed defining the problem based on key
stakeholder perspectives or gathering or interpreting the results. This is not to
suggest that quantitative methods should never be used. What is suggested is that
social workers who use quantitative methods can consider where they could infuse
meaningful participation from conceptualization and implementation, including
acting upon the results. Another option is to add a qualitative component to a
quantitative study.
In contrast, qualitative methods are by nature consistent with human rights and
values and perspective, such as dignity and worth of the person, equal participation,
subjectivity, and a holistic thinking. In qualitative methods, existing empirical
evidence more loosely guides the study direction as compared to quantitative
methods. In general, a qualitative approach is known for its flexible and emergent
design and is commonly guided by open-ended and nondirective research questions
providing many opportunities for social workers’ design studies in which mean-
ingful participation of all key stakeholders is from conceptualization, implemen-
tation, and action (Krueger and Neuman 2006; Marshall and Rossman 2010;
McLeod and Thomson 2009a, b).
Perhaps the most consistent research method that maximizes meaningful indi-
vidual, group, and community participation is action-oriented qualitative research
methods. An action-oriented research approach represents several methods with
common features, such as action research, participatory action research, and
community-based participatory action. There is a democratic nature among stake-
holders represented by collaboration, which takes place from the initial problem
formulation, through selection and implementation of research methods, and taking
52 5 Social Contexts, Meaningful Participation …

action with the findings to help improve the community. Quantitative and/or
qualitative methods can be used. For example, my colleagues and I (2000) con-
ducted a participatory translational research project with LGBT elders released from
prison. It was important for the participants that they did not continue to remain
invisible based on the intersectional identities and social locations of being older,
LGBT, racial/ethnic minorities, lower class, former prisoners with HIV, and serious
mental health and substance use issues. We worked with the group and created a
short public awareness photo and documentary about the life experiences of a
formerly incarcerated LGBT elders. These video, video transcript, and photos can
be viewed here: http://www.betheevidence.org/rainbow-justice-project/ (Be the
Evidence and Prisoners of Age 2014).

Social Contexts and Research Decision-Making

In a rights research approach, the social worker is sensitive to a how social context
is incorporated in their research design and implementation. The first steps of the
research process are deciding on the problem for investigation and the study pur-
pose and guiding research questions. Whereas, a quantitative design is often pre-
determined and less flexible in the social setting chosen (e.g., research laboratory
that is experimentally manipulated (Patton 2015). Qualitative design, on the other
hand, by nature is more open and flexible design and is mostly conducted in a
natural setting. This data collection strategy appears most suitable to a rights
research approach because it captures data about key stakeholders in their natural
environment.
Since a research or evaluation project is structured in the form of a research
design, it also influences what social context is captured in a study and the angle at
which it captures a human rights perspective. The overall structure of a quantitative
study may take place in a researcher-manipulated environment, such as the Milgram
or Stanford Prison Experiment that was conducted in a researcher’s laboratory
(Blass 2000; Zimbardo 2008; See the end of chapter exercises to further explore
these classic studies).
In contrast, a qualitative research design most often takes place in the natural
environment of participants (Marshall and Rossman 2010). For example, in the
earlier twentieth century qualitative research, the anthropologist, Margaret Mead,
traveled to remote global locations, such as Samoa, to study other cultures
(Fetterman 2010). In the twenty-first century, social workers have extended these
research and evaluation efforts to both local and global locations with diverse
cultures. The questions to be debated in a short essay or oral debate: is a research
environment that is controlled by a researcher or occurs in a natural environment
consistent or not consistent with a rights research approach? Is it black and white or
are there any shades of gray. Provide a rationale for your position or positions.
On a local level, the social settings for a research and evaluation project may be
in the agency, institution, or community where a social worker is employed. For
Social Contexts and Research Decision-Making 53

example, a social work administrator or staff evaluator responsibilities may include

program development, grant writing, and process and outcome evaluation. Their
goals are most often to ensure accountability that their program is achieving their
program objectives, such as a substance abuse program must often demonstrate that
there has been a reduction program participants’ alcohol and drug use. Additionally,
a social worker may be hired as an outside consultant for a community or orga-
nization to evaluate a program or policy for organizational capacity building (Shaw
1999). In a participatory action research project in any of these settings, a social
worker would take into account the views of interested stakeholders in conceptu-
alizing the problem and planning and implementing solutions (Stringer 2007). An
action research design is flexible enough to be open to capture the natural world in
process. However, if it is an action research project, a more active participation role
would engage the social work researcher in perhaps the most collaborative change
effort with key stakeholders (Stringer and Dwyer 2005; Healey 2001).
The role of relational communication varies between quantitative and quality
studies. A quantitative study uses predetermined hypotheses and operational defi-
nitions for variables and the use of closed-ended questions asked (Cresswell 2012).
This choice influences the extent to which participants can freely communicate
beyond short answer replies. In comparison, a qualitative approach often uses
“sensitizing concepts” in which the use of open-ended questions is more likely to
unearth an alternative or broader view of concepts being explored (Patton 2015).
There are some “sensitizing concepts,” such as “mental well-being,” “economic
well-being,” and “the trauma of incarceration.” These concepts might be used to
guide a research or evaluation project in which preexisting or emerging definitions
can be adopted based on the thick descriptions provided by participants as to how
they define these terms from their perspective.

Social Contexts and Fieldwork

In a rights research approach, moving from planning a project to actually doing it is

referred to as going into the “field” to do “fieldwork” and thus shifts the social
context and participation level. During the course of fieldwork, a social worker
often participates using observation and written and oral communication with the
purpose of gathering descriptions of activities, behaviors, actions, conversations,
interpersonal interactions, organization or community processes, or any other aspect
of observable human or social experience. Similar to the phases of generalist
practice, there are beginning, middle, and end phases to social engagement, par-
ticipation, and communication. In a rights research approach, this is referred to the
process of entering and exiting the field (Cresswell 2012). Table 5.1, provides an
example of how communication may differ from a traditional and human
rights-based approach in the beginning, middle, and end phases.
The process of entering and exiting in the social context of a research or eval-
uation project is influenced by the length of time that a social worker or research
54 5 Social Contexts, Meaningful Participation …

Table 5.1 Exploring how relational communication styles may differ in a traditional versus
rights-based approach to research
Traditional approach
Beginning I am conducting a study about
how …
Middle Thank you for responding to
these ten standardized
questions
End Thank you for your time. You
have now completed the survey
Rights-based approach to research
Are there any questions that we did not ask that
more fully captures your experience of …
If you would like to be involved with the
research team in analyzing, and sharing the
findings, please contact …
I am collaborating on a research project that
explores how …

team is embedded in the social environment to conduct their project. On one end of
the continuum are long-term longitudinal studies that may last one year or more to
short term or cross-sectional studies that may involve as short as an hour. The rule
of thumb most social workers recommend is to conduct fieldwork “long enough” to
answer the research or evaluation questions and fulfill the purpose of the investi-
gation (Padgett 2008; Stringer 2007). Evaluation and action research (and their
more modest aims) typically involve shorter duration time periods to generate
useful information for action (Stringer 2007). Other types of research studies may
require prolonged engagement in order to capture the complexities of a social
situation or culture, such as the gulf coast in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. If
this is the case, it will extend the length of time in the field (Madden 2010; Padgett
2008; Yin 2013). The length of time in a social setting may be ongoing as well. In
some instances social work administrators or evaluators may provide research and
evaluation activities as part of their ongoing agency responsibilities.
Beginning or entry phase. In a rights research approach, the beginning or entry
stage is essential to establishing relational communication with key stakeholders.
Thus the beginning or entry stage involves gaining access and building rapport to
lay the groundwork for trust and deep relational communication. If a study location
has not already been located, the first step is to locate a site and gain access to
interested stakeholders or the population of central interest, such as youth who aged
out of foster care or undocumented immigrants. The entry stage requires social
workers to actively use their relational and communication skills to build and
sustain partnerships and collaboration. These partnerships may be with a commu-
nity and/or agency or organizational leaders and constituents (Cresswell 2012).
Middle phase or working phase. Once the social worker enters and establishes a
presence in a setting, the research or evaluation project will shift to a middle phase
or working stage. The social worker moves beyond initial adjustment to begin to
see what is really happening in a setting. The tasks of the social worker to build a
social network of participants and to gather data, includes selecting the purposive
sample, collecting the data (including recording interviews), data management
(storing the data), and attending to unexpected issues that arise (e.g., ethical issues)
(Cresswell 2012). Overall, the middle phase of fieldwork is a time of concentrated
effort and immersion in communicating with participants on a deeper level to gather
data that best captures participants’ lived experiences. Where a rights research
Social Contexts and Fieldwork 55

approach may often differ from a traditional approach is that a rights-based

researcher will more often address their subjective experiences, that is, he or she
may feel an ongoing feeling of connection with participants, and be more
exhaustive about getting data from all key informants who are most knowledgeable
about a topic. Key informants insights can prove particularly useful in helping an
observer understand what is happening and why. Key informants are critical to
providing information about what the observer has not or cannot experience, as well
as sources of explanation for events the observer has actually experienced (Emerson
et al. 1995; Madden 2010). Discipline is needed to maintain high quality, up-to-date
field notes, following emergent possibilities, and building on what is observed and
learned each step along the way. These detailed notes can be especially important
for a rights research approach in which the social workers can use these notes for
critical self reflection and consultation with others.
Ending or exit phase. As fieldwork comes to an end, an exit or disengagement
strategy is needed. The social worker is increasingly concerned with the verification
of data and less concerned about generating new data. If conducting evaluation, the
observer must begin to consider what feedback is to be given to whom and how,
including deliverables such as evaluation reports that present the research or
evaluation results (Cresswell 2012).

Sampling Strategies Influence of Social Context,

Participation, and Relational Communication

Another important rights-based approach decision points involve sampling strate-

gies, that is, access to participants, that influences social context and level of
participation and relational communication. Random probability sampling often
used in quantitative research involves obtaining a large sample to obtain repre-
sentative and generalizable results (Krueger and Neuman 2006). The purpose of a
rights-based research project is to gather data on the impact of adverse environ-
mental conditions on population health, this choice might be better suited for this
purpose. These results of these findings can be used to more persuasively argue a
causal link between adverse social environments and health disparities that are not
limited by methodological limitation of the study design. In contrast, purposeful
sampling in qualitative research and evaluation involves “purposefully” selecting
information from central stakeholders or key informants about the topic of interest
(Cresswell 2012).
In a rights-based approach, social workers also should be aware of sampling
strategies based on qualitative methods which also affect the scope of the social
context and the degree of participation and relational communication with key
stakeholders. The goal of incorporating a qualitative component is to capture the
holistic experience of a person, group, setting, or situation. Generally, there are no
standard rules for sample size in qualitative studies. However, there are some
recommendations offered by experienced qualitative researchers. Lincoln and
56 5 Social Contexts, Meaningful Participation …

Guba (1985) recommended sample selection to the point of redundancy. That is,
continue to include participants until no new information is obtained, to the point of
saturation.
Patton (2014) noted that sample size often depends on the purpose of the inquiry,
usefulness, credibility, time, and resource availability. In the end, this is a decision
that must be made by the social work researcher and/or team conducting the project.
Cresswell (2012) provides some “ball park” sample size figures based on the type of
study. For example, biographical studies, which study the life an individual, jus-
tifiably can be a sample of one. In phenomenological studies that attempt to capture
the lived experience of a phenomenon generally need to be a sample size of 8–10.
Use a grounded theory approach which seeks to generate a theory that generally
involves a larger sample size of 20–30 participants in order to capture the maximum
variation in a phenomenon and to capture confirming and disconfirming evidence.
The sample size of case studies may range from one to four cases depending upon
whether a single case or multiple case study design is used. The sample size of
ethnographic studies varies upon the nature of the culture or setting under inves-
tigation. Using a rights-based approach a social worker must consider the condition
for the highest level of participation met based on the purpose of the study or
evaluation and the quality of the data collected and the extent to which all iden-
tifiable key stakeholders with unique perspectives were reached. The common
critique with small sample sizes is how do we know that we have achieved full
participation.

Data Sources

Using a rights research approach, another design option is a choice of one or more
data sources that also may influence the third theme-based strategy, social context,
participation, and relational communication. In general using quantitative or qual-
itative methods, there are three central types of data sources, which are observa-
tions, interviews, and documents, such as written and visual (Coffey and Atkinson
1996; Rose 2010). These methods can be used individually or combined.
Combining the use of different data sources can be a powerful source of triangu-
lation. That is, establishing data from different angles to see the degree to which
evidence is corroborated. For example, interview data, that is, what people say (in
verbal or nonverbal-including sign language, written, or visual form), is a major
data source. However, in order to avoid the limitations of pure interview data and to
more fully understand complex situations, observation or review of documents may
offer self-standing or supplementary data not captured in the interview process
(Marshall and Rossman 2010; Rose 2010).
Interviews. Interviews are another essential data source using a rights research
approach largely because it can capture the exact words of the participant. This
method is very familiar for many social workers at all levels of practice, as inter-
viewing is an essential practice task. Using a rights research qualitative approach,
Social Contexts and Fieldwork 57

direct quotations from participants provide the raw data in qualitative inquiry.
Interview data can capture an individual’s internal world, including past experi-
ences, thoughts, emotions, values, and behaviors, not readily observable to another
person. It can provide insight into how an individual constructs meaning to their
experiences (Kvale and Brinkman 2008; Patton 2015; Rubin and Babbie 2012;
Seidman 2006; Weiss 1995). The benefit to interviewing is that it can elicit the
participants’ subjective viewpoints and experiences not readily observable to oth-
ers. However, interview data generally only represents one subjective viewpoint,
unless interviews are conducted with multiple stakeholders found in a study setting.
Interviewing approaches. Social workers who infuse a rights research approach
in their practice, are well served by being aware of the qualitative interviews types
that can be used. In general the use of open-ended questions and probes yields
in-depth responses about people’s experiences, perceptions, feelings, and knowl-
edge. There are three basic approaches to collecting qualitative data using
open-ended interviews that have been strengths and weaknesses for applying the
data for human rights implications: (1) the informal conversational interview,
(2) the general interview guide approach, and, (3) the standardized open-ended
interview. These approaches differ to the extent in which interview questions are
determined and standardized before the interview occurs (Marshall and Rossman
2010; Merton et al. 1990).
In the informal conversational interview, questions are generally not prepared in
advance. It generally occurs as a part of spontaneous discussion. A social worker
may attend a community advisory board meeting and have a discussion with a
member of the board. Whereas this method has the benefit of being unstructured
and spontaneous, it is limited because it may be difficult to compare data across
participants (Patton 2015). Therefore, it is questionable to the extent to which this
informal conversational style can be persuasively used as a form of evidence.
The general interview guide is slightly more structured compared to the informal
conversational interview. Generally in outline form, it outlines topics to be covered
without providing specific questions to ask or their sequencing (Patton 2015). For
example, a general interview guide approach to the immigration narrative of older
adults could provide four broad categories that cover experiences related to: (1) life
in the homeland, (2) the immigration journey, (3) arrival to the new country, and,
(4) subsequent experiences in the new country. Whereas this approach is flexible so
that it also may compromise consistency and compare across different participants,
thus making it questionable for the implications and applications for human rights.
Standardized open-ended interviews are interviews that use preset wording and
sequencing of questions. Interviewers are generally trained and administer the
survey uniformly, including the order of questions and the wording of questions.
Questions are in open-ended format. This strategy increases the ability to compare
responses, but lacks flexibility. For example, the Moving Stories Oral History
Interview includes standardized questions to be used by interviewers (Jardim et al.
2009). The benefits of such an approach make it easier to draw empirical gener-
alizations across diverse populations for the common patterns and themes, in this
case the immigration experiences of ethnically diverse older adults. Social workers
58 5 Social Contexts, Meaningful Participation …

can more confidently argue that rigor was used in their data collection methods
when their results are scrutinized for trustworthiness and credibility (Patton 2015).

Recommended Interviewing Strategies for a Rights

Research Approach

In order to maximize the holistic lived experiences of participants, interviewing

strategies that engage participants in relational communication are highly recom-
mended in a rights research approach. Similar to how social workers conduct
psychosocial or community assessments, a rights research qualitative interview
approach uses questions that capture the holistic experiences of an individual,
family, group, organization, or community. Patton’s (2014) typology for interviews
include questions related to life experiences, values (beliefs and opinions), cogni-
tions (thoughts), emotions (feelings), actions (behaviors), knowledge, relationships,
sensory perceptions, and personal background questions. Questions in these areas
also can be asked in the present, past, and/or future tense to gage shifts over time
(Kvale and Brinkman 2008; Maschi and Youdin 2012; Patton 2015; Rubin and
Babbie 2012; Seidman 2006; Weiss 1995). For example, a person can be asked
about what they are doing now, what they did in the past, and what they plan to do
in the future. Table 5.2 in the chapter appendix provides an example on how to use
this type of interview format. As shown in Table 5.3, it also can be used as a
worksheet to design questions for a questionnaire.
Suggestions for sequencing and use of probes. In order to engage participants in
relational communication, interview questionnaires are structured with a beginning
(introductory), middle, and end phases that influence the sequencing of questions
and are incorporated in the recommendations below. It is quite common to begin
the interview with a short introduction followed by noncontroversial straightfor-
ward questions related to behaviors, activities, and experiences. For example,
questions such as “What kinds of books do you enjoy reading?” or “What brought
you to this program?” “What has your experience been like in prison?” questions
related to opinions and feelings are more likely to be elicited once the respondent
has relived the “experience.” The use of follow-up probes or follow-up questions
can be used to elicit more details related to description. For example, once general
life or relationship experiences have been gathered, follow-up with probes related to
thoughts, feelings, or opinions about those experiences. The use of probes helps to
build on the interpretations or aid in understanding how individuals construct
meaning of their experiences. For an example of follow-up probes, see the Moving
Stories Project Interview example found at the end of chapter exercises (Maschi and
Youdin 2012; Patton 2015).
Background and demographic questions also should be asked. These questions
can be short answer questions, such as what is your age? These questions also can
be worded in a way to capture how the participants ascribe meaning, such as how
Social Contexts and Fieldwork 59

Table 5.2 Sample worksheet common question types and objectives for interviews that foster
relational communication
Guiding research question or research problem: Adult survivors of
child abuse
Directions: Based on your research questions, what question types Areas for Inquiry
and time frame you wish to gather information for? Please check all (check all that apply)
that apply
Question types and objectives Sample questions Past Present Future
Life experience questions Please tell me about a memorable x
Aim to elicit data about life experience of your childhood.
experiences What was your experience like?
Values (beliefs, opinion) What values would you say you x x
questions learned from your parents? What
Aim to elicit data about values, is your opinion about violence?
beliefs, opinions
Cognition (thoughts) questions What was your first thought after x x
Aim to elicit information about the event? How did your
cognitive processes thoughts, if at all, change?
Feeling questions What were your feelings about it? x
Aim to elicit data about emotions What do you mean when you say
and feelings you are “sad turned angry”?
Action (behavior) questions What kinds of activities did you x x
Aim to elicit data on observable participate in this week? Thinking
actions, behaviors, and activities back over the past 3 months, how
would you describe your behavior
in relationships?
Knowledge questions For what reasons do you take x x
Aim to elicit factual data psychotropic medication? What
does it help to do?
Relationship questions Currently, how would you x x x
Aim to elicit data about describe relationships in your
interpersonal relationships life?
Sensory questions. Aim to elicit What do you remember seeing? x x
data about the senses (e.g., sight, What do you remember hearing?
sound, touch, taste, smell)
Background questions. Aim to What is your age? What is the x x
elicit background data (i.e., age, highest grade you completed?
ethnicity, relational status,
education)
© 2015 Tina Maschi

do you describe your gender identity? Most recommendations are to place demo-
graphic information at the end of the interview because questions, such as age,
income, education, may be considered as private information and elicit a defensive
response if asked first. Lastly, ending the interview on the participant’s terms is
important. Generally, interviews should provide the participants with an
60 5 Social Contexts, Meaningful Participation …

Table 5.3 Worksheet common question types and objectives for interviews that foster relational
communication
Guiding research question or research problem
Directions: Based on your research questions, what question types Areas for Inquiry
and time frame you wish to gather information for? Please check all (check all that apply)
that apply
Question types and objectives Sample Past Present Future
questions
Life experience questions
Aim to elicit data about life experiences
Values (beliefs, opinion) questions
Aim to elicit data about values, beliefs, opinions
Cognition (thoughts) questions
Aim to elicit information about cognitive processes
Feeling questions
Aim to elicit data about emotions and feelings
Action (behavior) questions
Aim to elicit data on observable actions, behaviors, and
activities
Knowledge questions
Aim to elicit factual data
Relationship questions
Aim to elicit data about interpersonal relationships
Sensory questions. Aim to elicit data about the senses
(e.g., sight, sound, touch, taste, smell)
Background questions. Aim to elicit background data
(i.e., age, ethnicity, relational status, education)
© 2015 Tina Maschi

opportunity to fill in any gaps not captured in the questions asked. For example,
“We have now finished the interview, are there any questions that I should have
asked? Is there anything else you would like to share about your experience?”
(Patton 2015).

Data Collection Strategies

Interviews can be conducted in person using face-to-face interviews, phone inter-

views, or web-based questionnaires. Regardless of the method of administration, it
is critical to “capture” the exact wording of the participants. The raw data is the
interviewee’s actual quotations. Therefore, a good tape recorder and meticulous
note taking are indispensable to fieldwork (Patton 2015). Contemporary social
workers have available to them a number of technological devices that can make
research and evaluation fieldwork considerably more efficient. For example, the use
of battery-operated digital recorders or laptop computers can be used to dictate field
Social Contexts and Fieldwork 61

notes or record interviews. Additionally, the use of video or digital cameras can
capture both verbal and nonverbal interactions (Marshall and Rossman 2010; Patton
2015). However, the use of digital recording devices may make some participants’
uncomfortable or influence them to respond differently. Therefore, it is important to
ask for permission from participants to tape an interview or other types of activities.

Focus Groups

In addition to one-on-one interviews, interviews can be conducted in groups. Focus

groups are a form of “research group work” designed to gather information related
to the social worker’s research questions. Usually organized and led by a member
of the research and evaluation team, a focus group is generally comprised of
unrelated individuals who participate in a facilitated group discussion of a topic for
1–2 h. The approximate size of a group is 6–10 people. The focus group leader
reviews rules and creates expectations for participation. Similar to one-on-one in-
terviews, qualitative data is collected through use of open-ended questions using an
interview format with a beginning, middle, and end phases. Usually several focus
groups are conducted to check for consistency of responses across participants
(Krueger and Casey 2000; Morgan 1997; Patton 2015).

Archival Records, Documents, and Other Artifacts Review

Other essential sources of data collection (for both quantitative and qualitative
studies) are from archival records, documents, and other artifacts. These are
unobtrusive (nonreactive) sources of data that include documents, such as gov-
ernmental or community agency records, newspaper, clinical case records, program
files, personal memoranda and correspondence, official publications and reports,
personal diaries, letters, artistic works, photographs and memorabilia, and written
responses to open-ended surveys (Neuendorf 2002; Richards 2009; Rose 2010).
Because they are unobtrusive and are nonreactive sources of data, they can be
useful sources for triangulating or checking for consistency with interview or ob-
servational data (Patton 2015). These strategies for rigor can enhance the social
workers ability to use their findings based on evidence for the purposes of using
them for public awareness or advocacy (Maschi and Youdin 2012).

Observation

Another essential source of rights research data is observation (Fetterman 2010).

Since human perceptions are known to be highly subjective and variable, the use of
62 5 Social Contexts, Meaningful Participation …

participant observation in qualitative research is a learned skill that must go beyond

“seeing as usual” (Madden 2010). In fact, a skilled qualitative observer generally
has undergone intensive physical, emotional, and psychological preparation to
become more proficient in recording accurate and authentic observations of other
people’s experiences (Patton 2015). Additionally, depending upon the type of
study, the level of participation will range from passive to active participant
observation.
Observational skills are an important component of participant observation.
According to Patton (2002), training to become a skilled observer includes:
(1) Learning to pay attention to seeing and hearing what is actually there, (2) practice
in qualitative descriptive writing, (3) being disciplined with regular field note writing,
(4) learning how to distinguish necessary detail from trivial events, (5) using rigorous
and multiple strategies to validate and triangulate observations, and, (6) recognizing
and documenting one’s own perspective, including the use of self-knowledge and
self-disclosure to identify and address potential biases (Patton 2015).
Field notes. The fundamental work of the social worker who is conducting an
observation is the taking of field notes. Field notes include information with rich
and detailed descriptions of social interactions, environmental contexts, and the
internal perceptions of the observer (Madden 2010). The quality of field notes has
been linked to the quality of data analysis. Lofland (1971) asserted that if field notes
are not recorded, “the observer might as well not be in the setting” (p. 102).
Use of vivid description. In field notes, observers strive for vivid description. The
use of detail is a key factor in description (Patton 2015). Vivid description should
provide sufficient information so that the reader does not have to speculate at what
is meant. That is, the description of the setting should be sufficiently detailed
enough so that the readers feel as if they can see the setting. It is important to use
words that are as close to factual as possible. Vague words, such as “lovely” or
“gargantuous” should be avoided. Avoid “interpretive” or “subjective” adjectives
(e.g., well dressed, poorly groomed, comfortable) except if they appear in quotes
from the participants about their reactions to and perceptions of that environment
(Fetterman 2010; Madden 2010; Patton 2008, 2015).
Writing vivid descriptions requires careful attention to detail. The social worker
as observer must be disciplined to avoid vague, inaccurate, or broad phrases that can
be interpreted differently by others. For example, what if a description of the main
room of a shelter in the South states that it was “too big and had no color.” Let us
compare this statement with Liebow’s (1993) description of a homeless shelter room
in his classic participant observation study, Tell Them Who I Am: The Lives of
Homeless Women. In his study, Liebow (1993) described the main room of the first
emergency shelter for single women in Richmond County, outside of Washingon,
DC. After reading both descriptions, think about which description seems to more
accurately represent the main room of this shelter. Leibow (1993) wrote:
The main room of The Refuge is 55 feet long, 50 feet wide, and 14 feet high. The floors are
alternating squares of black and gray asphalt tiles, waxed and buffed to shine. The
cinder-block walls are painted a pale yellow. The three eight-foot tables arranged in a U
shape near the entrance to the office and kitchen are at the heart of the shelter. Here the
Social Contexts and Fieldwork 63

women eat breakfast and dinner, and here is the center of social life as well. Under the
steady growth of population pressure, the men’s restrooms (two toilet stalls, one useless
urinal, no shower, two basins) were also given over to the women. (p. 7)

Participant observation. Participation is the other essential component of

participant observation and varies depending upon the type of rights research
project. This can range from observation only (with no participation) to complete
participant observation. As illustrated in the exercise example above, participation
involved solely being a spectator in the social setting. At the opposite end of the
continuum is complete immersion. Full participant observation commonly uses
multiple data sources that constitute a collection of field strategies including direct
participation and observation, interviews, document analysis, and critical
self-reflection (Denzin and Lincoln 2005; Healy 2001; Patton 2015). Since some
rights research projects often involve prolonged engagement in a social setting, the
level of participation also may change during the course of a project based on the
different phases of the project or study setting (Padgett 2008; Patton 2008).
Disclosure and participant observation. Participant observation also may vary
on the level of disclosure from covert (hidden) to overt (obvious) participants. It
ranges from overt or full disclosure to no (covert) disclosure. However, the use of
covert methods often raises concerns over whether or not this is consistent with a
human rights perspective and research ethical conduct since it requires observation
of people’s private behaviors, without explicitly and fully receiving their informed
consent. Covert observation has been a matter of debate as to whether it is ethical or
follows a human rights perspective because it brings into question to what extent the
end justify the means. Please do note that the use of covert observation is generally
monitored by Institutional Review Boards that set guidelines for informed consent
procedures that often limit the use of covert methods (Padgett 2008; Patton 2015).
The continuum from solo participation to collaboration. Although a rights
research perspective suggests full participation, the nature and degree of partici-
pation may vary along a continuum often based on what is feasible to do and often
based on resource and time constraints. A social worker may be have the only
option to do a solo project or have the option to be involved as part of a research or
evaluation team or be part of a participatory action research project. On the opposite
side of the collaboration continuum, a rights research project may involve collab-
orations with all identified key stakeholders in a given setting (Suarez-Balcazar and
Harper 2003; Minkler et al. 2010; Mostes and Hess 2007). Other variations in
between may be partial or intermittent collaboration (Patton 2015). As equal
partners in the project, stakeholders would collaborate with the researcher/s in
formulating the research and evaluation questions, choosing a research and eval-
uation design, and implementing the design (locating a sampling, collecting data,
and analyzing the results). Based on these results, they would formulate and
implement an action-based plan (McIntyre 2008).
Using an action-oriented approach has many benefits for clients. Participants
may use the findings and gain an increased sense of being in control of, deliberative
64 5 Social Contexts, Meaningful Participation …

about, and reflective on their own lives and situations (Suarez-Balcazar and Harper
2003). Other collaborative approaches in which qualitative approaches can be used
are participatory action research, and empowerment approaches (McIntyre 2008).
As illustrated in the example of the McIntyre (2000, 2008) participatory action
research study, the researcher becomes a facilitator, collaborator, and teacher in
support of those engaging in inquiry.

Summary

This chapter reviewed how social workers could integrate this rights research theme
in their research and evaluation projects. It explored how social contexts, partici-
pation, and relational communication can be infused throughout the research pro-
cess regardless of whether quantitative and/or qualitative methods are used.
Practical tips were provided on how to maximize the social or cultural environment,
the levels of key stakeholder participation, and interviewing and observational
techniques to build rapport and relational communication. At the end of the chapter,
experiential exercises are provided for social workers to practice these rights
research techniques, particularly in interviewing and observational techniques to
maximize meaningful participation and relational communication.

Exercises

1. In order to explore the third theme-based strategy of social contexts, partici-

pation, and relational communication, the following exercise is recommended.
View the following four video clips of experimental and participatory research
projects. Based on this chapter’s content, explain how each researcher used
social context, participation, and relational communication in their studies. What
similarities or differences did you find? On a scale of 0–10 (0 = not at all and
10 = completely), how would you rate each study? Please explain your response.
This exercise can be done in the form of a short 1–2 page essay or in small group
discussion or course management system discussion thread (3–4 group members
are recommended). Each group shares their assessment and compares their
assessment with the larger group. In a case of a discussion thread, each group
can provide feedback to the other groups on their posting.
(a) Classic Experimental Designs: (1) Stanford Prison Experiment: you tube video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_LKzEqlPto http://www.prisonexp.org
(view at least 5–10 min excerpt). (2) The Milgram Experiment: https://www.
youtube.com/watch?v=DZ-F6Waua3Y (view at least a 5–1-minute excerpt)
Exercises 65

(b) Participatory Research Projects (1) Be the Evidence Participatory

Translational Research Project: http://www.betheevidence.org/rainbow-
justice-project/ (2) Participatory Action Study with Mothers of Children
in a Street Situation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNSl4GMedk8
(Bevernage 2013; Blass 2000; Zimbardo 2008)
2. Moving Stories project: Practicing Interviewing Skills. The oral history exercise
involves practicing how to conduct an oral history interview with older adults
who have personal or family histories of immigration. The oral history ques-
tionnaire contains open-ended questions that attempt to capture the individual’s
personal or family history of life before, during, and after the immigration
experience. This exercise can be practiced with classmates. Some instructors may
choose to officially implement the project. A detailed guide (Jardim et al. 2009)
on how to conduct an oral history project, including how to obtain IRB approval,
can be found on the Moving Stories web site (http://www.betheevidence.org/
moving-stories-project-msp/). Learners can give oral presentations on their
individual interviews results using a timeline and qualitative data analysis
strategies to identify common patterns and themes in an individual’s life. Another
option is for a group, especially learners/students, to analyze the collection of
narratives to identify common patterns and themes identified using qualitative
data analysis strategies outlined in chapter four of this manifesto.
3. Practice observational techniques: This exercise is designed to assist students in
refining their observation skills. Students are asked to observe a public setting
and write a vivid description of that setting. The exercise can be done indi-
vidually or in groups of two to four people who observe the same sight. After
following the directions below for conducting a participant observation, students
can share their writings with one another about a descriptive setting and ask
several people if they can visualize the setting and compare it with their sub-
jective impression of the setting.
Directions for an observational (only) exercise:
A. Observe a public environment for 15–30 min. If there are two or more people,
observe the same environment and exchange descriptions.
B. Since observational notes often involve describing a setting, it is recommended
to begin with observing the larger physical environment. Drawing a picture may
even be helpful. Next, describe the social environment (the people in the
environment). Look for how people organize themselves into dyads or groups. If
the setting is large, focus the observation on a particular section of the room. Pay
particular attention to both verbal and nonverbal (e.g., mannerisms, posture, and
type of dress) communication patterns. The vivid description may include
descriptions of individuals (e.g., age, race/ethnicity, and gender), types of
interactions (verbal and nonverbal interactions), frequency of interactions (e.g.,
number of people participating in conversation), the direction of communication
patterns (e.g., who is talking and who is listening). It is even recommended to
draw a diagram of the layout of the setting.
66 5 Social Contexts, Meaningful Participation …

When sharing your work, learners/students can offer each other constructive
feedback to help each other discern between the use of clear and accurate
descriptive language versus interpretive (vague) adjectives.
4. Choose a research problem that addresses a human rights issue, such as domestic
violence. Using Table 5.3 worksheet, design questions that you might want to
ask a potential participant in that study (e.g., domestic violence survivor). This
exercise can be done individually or in dyads. In groups of two, roleplay in
which one person is the interviewer and the other person is the interviewee.
Share your experiences with the larger group.

References

Addams, J. (n.d.). Jane Addams Quote. Retrieved May 6, 2014 from http://www.notable-quotes.
com/a/addams_jane.html
Be the Evidence & Prisoners of Age. (2014). Rainbow justice documentary. New York: Be the
Evidence Press. Retrieved August 14, 2015 from http://www.betheevidence.org/rainbow-
justice-project/
Bevernage, J. (2013). Participatory action research with mothers of children in street situation.
Retrieved August 4, 2014 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNSl4GMedk8
Blass, T. (Ed.). (2000). Obedience to authority: Current perspectives on the Milgram paradigm.
Philadelphia, PA: The Psychology Press.
Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications Inc.
Cresswell, J. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches
(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Emerson, R., Fretz, R., & Shaw, L. (1995). Writing ethnographic field notes. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Fetterman, D. M. (2010). Ethnography: Step by step (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications Inc.
Healy, K. (2001). Participatory action research and social work: A critical appraisal. International
Social Work, 44(1), 93–105.
Jardim, A., Maschi, T., & Georas, M. (2009). Culturally competent oral history interview schedule
for older adults with personal and/or family histories of immigration. Retrieved from http://
www.fordham.edu/belproject.
Krueger, R., & Casey, M. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Krueger, L. W., & Neuman, W. L. (2006). Social work research methods: Qualitative and
quantitative applications. Boston: Pearson Education Inc.
Kvale, S., & Brinkman, S. (2008). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research
interviewing (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Liebow, E. (1993). Tell them who I am: The lives of homeless women. New York: Penguin Books.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury park, CA: Sage Publications
Inc.
Lofland, J. (1971). Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Madden, M. (2010). Being ethnographic: A guide to theory and practice of ethnography.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
References 67

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2010). Designing qualitative research (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Maschi, T., & Youdin, R. (2012). Social workers as researcher: Integrating research with
advocacy. Boston: Pearson Publishers.
McIntyre, A. (2000). Inner-city kids: Adolescents confront life and violence in an urban
community. New York: New York University Press.
McIntyre, A. (2008). Participatory action research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
McLeod, J., & Thomson, R. (2009a). Researching social change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications Inc.
McLeod, J., & Thomson, R. (2009b). Researching social change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications Inc.
Merton, R. K., Fiske, M., & Kendall, P. L. (1990). The focused interview: A manual of problems
and procedures (2nd ed.). New York: Free Press.
Milgram, S. (2009). Milgram experiment: An experimental view. New York: Perennial Classics.
Minkler, M., Wallerstein, N., & Hall, B. (2010). Community-based participatory research for
health. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Mostes, P. S., & Hess, P. M. (Eds.). (2007). Collaborating with community-based organizations
through consultation and technical assistance. New York: Columbia University Press.
Moustakas, C. (1990). Heuristic research: Design, methodology, and applications. Newbury, CA:
Sage Publications Inc.
Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Padgett, D. K. (2008). Qualitative methods in social work research: Challenges and rewards (2nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications, Inc.
Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization focused evaluation (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications Inc.
Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications, Inc.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications Inc.
Richards, L. (2009). Handling qualitative data: A practical guide (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Rose, G. (2010). Visual methodologies: An introduction to the interpretation of visual materials
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Rubin, A., & Babbie, E. (2012). Essential research methods for social work (3rd ed.). Belmont,
CA: Brooks/Cole.
Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in Education and
the social services. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Shaw, I. (1999). Qualitative evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Stringer, E. T. (2007). Action research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Stringer, E., & Dwyer, R. (2005). Action research in human services. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson Publishers.
Suarez-Balcazar, Y., & Harper, G. W. (2003). Empowerment and participatory evaluation of
community interventions: Multiple benefits. Binghamton, NY: The Haworth Press Inc.
Weiss, R. (1995). Learning From strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies.
New York: Free Press.
Yin, R. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications Inc.
Zimbardo, P. (2008). The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil (Reprint.).
New York: Random House.
Chapter 6
Holistic Analysis, Discerning Meaning
from Narrative and Numeric Data

For the first time in my life I saw the truth, as it is set into song
by so many poets, proclaimed as the final wisdom by so many
thinkers. The truth - that Love is the ultimate and highest goal
to which man can aspire. Then I grasped the meaning of the
greatest secret that human poetry and human thought and belief
have to impart: The salvation of man is through love and in
love.
—Viktor E. Frankl, Author of Man’s Search for Meaning
(1971, p. 5)

Introduction

The fifth theme-based strategy of a rights research approach is holistic data analysis,
discerning meaning from narrative and numeric data. Frankl (1971), a holocaust
survivor and founder of logotherapy, is an example of making meaning from the
mass human trauma of man’s brutality against one another. Interestingly, what he
deduces from his collective lived experiences and multiple information sources is
love as means to achieving personal and societal transformation. The long-winded
question for readers to pause and ponder is: what might have been the process that
Frankl had to go through to come to this conclusion that the poetry of love is man’s
ultimate salvation, despite the fact that he was a holocaust survivor who he wit-
nessed the human brutality and murder of others in concentration camps?
This purpose of this chapter is to guide readers through a similar unfolding
process of using holistic analysis and interpretation to discern the depth of meaning
behind narrative and numeric data collected in a rights research study. First, it
describes how the interpretation of data can be used and applied to human rights
issues. Next, it applies how to discern meaning from data using an example of a
rights research common factors qualitative data analysis method and content
analysis methods for identifying common patterns and themes in the lived expe-
riences of the people we serve. In order to make informed decision-making that
leads to lasting social change that promote human rights, taking the time for a

© The Author(s) 2016 69

T. Maschi, Applying a Human Rights Approach to Social Work Research
and Evaluation, SpringerBriefs in Rights-Based Approaches to Social Work,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-26036-5_6
70 6 Holistic Analysis, Discerning Meaning …

comprehensive analysis using numeric and narrative data is critical. If we are basing
policy and practice change that impacts the lives of the most vulnerable in society,
it is imperative to understand the whole story behind that can be discerned from a
combination of numeric data from descriptive or advanced statistical analyses and
qualitative narrative data.

Discerning Meaning from Data: Contrasting a Traditional

from a Human Rights Approach

The human rights perspective applied in a rights research approach is consistent

with a social work perspective, particularly because they both pay tribute to the
“whole” person in the context of their local and global environment (Ife 2012;
Maschi and Youdin 2012; Turner and Maschi 2015a, b; Wronka 2007).
Quantitative research studies often partialize concepts and variables (Rubin and
Babbie 2012), and therefore only parts of human experience, under investigation,
such as stress, coping, and well-being of a distinct group, such as older people in
prison, these findings can be interpreted in their relationship to the larger conditions
that influence it, such as poor prison conditions and societal attitudes toward crime
and punishment and older people and other disenfranchised groups. In contrast,
qualitative methods traditionally use a holistic analysis plan and analyze the whole
person, group, incident, or culture. This holistic perspective is more consistent with
a human rights framework and thus an important method is to be explored.
Combining quantitative and qualitative findings also can be a triangulation strategy
to confirm how findings from quantitative and qualitative methods that examine the
same phenomenon can point to areas of convergence and divergence and the need
to know more (Patton 2015).
Qualitative data analysis (QDA), more commonly associated with inductive
analysis, moves from organizing narrative data (e.g., interviews, observations, and
documents) from the field into general patterns and themes. However, please do
note that deductive approaches are used in quantitative and qualitative data in which
preexisting categories (as opposed to emerging categories) are used, such as trauma
types and responses as measured by standardized instruments (e.g., Maschi et al.
2015c). Inductive analysis involves emerging categories (as opposed to preexisting
categories) in which the analyst or analysis team members have no preconceptions
about what they are going to find in the data. There is a process of discovery and
empirical generalization and theories developed are supported by the data gathered
from key stakeholders in the field who can speak to their experiences (Bernard and
Ryan 2010; Miles and Huberman 1994; Richards 2009). Using an inductive
approach especially, it is critical at the data analysis step to let patterns emerge
naturally and to not impose personal views on interpretation (Coffey and Atkinson
1996; Richards 2009).
Discerning Meaning from Data … 71

Since the type of data analysis depends upon the type of qualitative approach
chosen, such as content analysis, narrative, phenomenology, ethnography, groun-
ded theory, case study, or action research (Bernard and Ryan 2010; Creswell 2012;
Drisko and Maschi 2015), and is beyond the scope of this chapter. A common
factor approach to qualitative data analysis for rights research followed by a brief
overview of content analysis methods is presented. This method consists of four
major steps: (1) preparation, (2) literal coding, (3) cluster coding, and (4) visual
coding. To some degree, the literal and cluster coding steps are relevant for
quantitative analysis in which the analyst/s can look for patterns among the sig-
nificant variables under investigation (e.g., concepts from cumulative inequality
theory, such as cumulative inequality, resilience, and health disparities) and inter-
pret meaning their individual and relational meaning (Drisko and Maschi 2015;
Padgett 2008). Taking the time with the process of data analysis involves focus and
a concentrated time effort to get to the end result (Glesne 1999; Patton 2015). But
do rest assure that there are findings at the end of the data analysis tunnel. These
findings when systematic methods, especially strategies for rigor, are used will bode
well when these findings are shared for action, including strategies, such as public
awareness campaigns and policy advocacy.

Rights Research Qualitative Data Analysis Methods

There are four steps to the rights research qualitative (narrative) data analysis
methods: preparation, literal coding, cluster coding, and visual coding. They are
reviewed in that order, respectively.
Step 1: Preparation
Transcription. Prior to analyzing the data, it must be prepared in transcript form.
Narrative data may need to be transcribed from written or tape audio or video files.
Transcripts can be in the form of a hard copy, word file, or as a document from a
QDA software package. It also is important to determine who will transcribe the
data; common choices include a member of the research team or a transcription
service. Therefore, informed consent, anonymity, and confidentiality issues must be
addressed in advance, in order to keep private the identity of participant. When
transcribing raw data, it should always be verbatim (Richards 2009).
Transcripts should also be formatted. If using printed or electronic documents,
use wide margins and number your lines. This will allow for ample space for coding
and ease in documenting the line number in which specific codes appear. QDA
software can be used, such as NVIVO or Atlas.ti (Atlast.ti 2015; QSR International
2015). Information about these QDA software packages can be found here: http://
www.qsrinternational.com/products_nvivo.aspx http://atlasti.com/qualitative-data-
analysis-software/.
72 6 Holistic Analysis, Discerning Meaning …

Establishing rules. In the process of data analysis, the analyst commonly

develops definitions for emerging concepts and establishes rules for coding. The
development of rules often flows naturally when the analyst has largely determined
how the patterns begin to cluster into similar codes and/or categories. Since in-
ductive analysis is an emerging process, it is quite common that rules, like a
working definition of identified concepts, such as family values, will be modified
based on new evidence that emerges (Maschi et al. 2015a, b, c). It is also quite
common that near the end of the analysis step the data has been sufficiently
organized and categories are defined so that rules can be consistently applied (Miles
and Huberman 1994; Richards 2009).
Memoing. It is important to use memos to document the decision-making
process during analysis. Memos may be described as notes to oneself about the
analysis process. Because these memos are written for the purposes of analysis,
they are often referred to as analytic memos. Strategies for formatting and content to
include are” (1) date the memo, (2) label memos with headings that describe the
primary category or concept being earmarked, (3) identify the particular code(s) to
which the note addresses, (4) note when you think a category has been sufficiently
defined, and, (5) provide documentation of references or other sources of infor-
mation used for the memo. Content to include in the analytic memo include:
(1) documentation of the free flow of ideas, including brainstorming, (2) the use of
visual diagrams to draw out relationships among concepts, and, (3) documentation
of analyst’s thinking and feeling process to assist with description and interpretation
(Bernard and Ryan 2010; Miles and Huberman 1994; Richards 2009).
Examining the whole and its parts. In the preparation phase, it is best to review
the individual transcripts prior to beginning the coding process. Consistent with a
holistic perspective, it is strongly recommended to read each individual transcript to
understand the whole person. The next step of data analysis begins with starting to
make cross-case comparisons, which result in “partialization” of individuals to
examine some common characteristics or processes, such as “parental abuse,”
“emotional well-being,” “mental well-being,”or “physical well-being” (Richards
2009).
Step 2: Literal Coding
Be literal, code literally. In step 1, literal coding, the analyst should approach the
transcript data thinking literal or “authentic” coding: within the context of the
person interviewed. As the words literal and actual coding suggest, the analysis
should “concretely” identify the “conceptual items” by coding data using the exact
words and phrases verbatim or using words that are specific and validly represent
participant’s words and meaning. For example, a participant who referred to their
emotionally well-being in childhood as “sad, angry, off the hook” was assigned a
code, “sad, angry, off the hook.” The challenge for the analyst is to remain literal
and not jump unduly to inferences not suggested by the data (Coffey and Atkinson
1996).
Rights Research Qualitative Data Analysis … 73

Code assignment suggestions. Assign shorthand codes to conceptual items. This

can consist of one word (e.g., sad) or a short-hand code consisting of letter codes
(DC = depression child or DOA = depression older adult). It is important to keep a
record of assigned codes and their meaning. For example, a conceptual item code
for grassroots activism might be labeled GA and should be documented in a code
book (Tutty et al. 1996).
Identifying categories or families. During the literal step, it is also useful to
begin to identify how codes for conceptual items are related or fit together with
other items into categories or families. A constant comparison approach among
conceptual items of data helps to discern similarities and differences. For example,
conceptual items coded “sad,” “angry,” and “depressed,” suggest a category for
emotional well-being. In contrast, conceptual items, such as doing pushups, jog-
ging, and weight lifting are distinct from emotions and suggest a common category
that addresses physical well-being (Coffey and Atkinson 1996; Richards 2009).
Sifting, sorting, and categorizing. As noted by the examples above, a process of
sifting and sorting conceptual items into common categories or families helps the
analyst to discern what conceptual items can be compared with other conceptual
items according to similarities and differences. Once the analyst identifies con-
ceptual items that have similar characteristics, these items can be placed in the same
category. The analyst at this step also begins to create preliminary definitions for
categories. What defines each category should be recorded. These notes are kept in
analytical memos that comprise part of the audit trail (Bernard and Ryan 2010).
Category saturation. However, conceptual item codes, categories, and defini-
tions may change based on new evidence found during the data analysis “mining”
process. Therefore, it is important for the analyst to remain open and continue to
refine and reorganize. Eventually, category saturation will be reached where items
seem unified and complete and represent the overarching category themes, such as
in cumulative inequality theory with categories for cumulative inequality (e.g., race,
gender, social class) and well-being (See example in Chap. 3, Fig. 3.1; Richards
2009).
Step 3: Cluster Coding
The next step of data analysis, cluster coding, is to move from literal and begin to
make more abstract inferences or interpretations of the data within conceptual
categories. At this step, the large chunks of narrative data are reduced to the codes
that represent them. This is a process often referred to as data reduction. The
conceptual items (e.g., no chronic or serious illness, asthma, HIV/AIDS) are
classified into categories (e.g., health status) (Richards 2009).
The next step is to look for pattern recognition within each category among the
conceptual items clustered into their respective categories. Common relationships
within categories may include nested categories or subcategories (e.g., chronic or
serious health condition or not), temporal processes (how participants with histories
of trauma perceive how social support influences their current health), reactions to
stimuli (emotional, cognitive, behavioral), and context influences (such as
social/environmental conditions, such as prison). Temporal (e.g., time related)
74 6 Holistic Analysis, Discerning Meaning …

processes may reflect a point in a process where things shift, such as different points
in the process where negative versus positive emotions were salient. Response to
stimuli may reflect different emotions in response to a situation. Contextual influ-
ences may be represented by conditions in the environment, including the level of
stress participants perceive as related to their health or systemic barrier, such as the
lack of healthcare insurance that is perceived as a barrier to healthcare (Patton
2015).
The next step is to compare across categories to discover relationships between
them. This consists of locating patterns, themes, and relationships. Using a
cross-category comparison, the analyst should examine for potential temporal
processes that suggest that the relationship among categories is part of a process, a
causal relationship where one category proceeds another, such as: temporal (parts of
a process), causal, one contained within the other, or possibly a typology of
characteristics. For example, results of an analysis with thought, feelings, and
actions suggest a causal process that thought led to feeling or emotion, which led to
behaviors that were acted upon.
Step 4: Visual Coding
The next step is to develop a diagram or conceptual classification scheme. It is
common to use a diagram, matrix (i.e., table), or metaphor to describe the results.
As in Chap. 3 (Fig. 3.1), the visual diagram of the relationship between human
rights, social justice, and well-being is shown. Visualizing the findings assists in
identifying the individual conceptual categories and how they are related. Scholars
also recommend that researchers search for potential alternative explanations to
evaluate contrary information (Glaser and Strauss 1967; Miles and Huberman
1994).
Strategies for Rigor Applied to Rights Research Qualitative Data Analysis
Although rigor is important to all stages of qualitative research in a rights research
approach, it is especially important during the analysis phase and thus briefly
reviewed here. Rigor in qualitative research generally refers to being
self-disciplined and vigilant during each step of the qualitative research process,
including data analysis. These strategies include an audit trail and trustworthiness.
Additional strategies for rigor include: triangulation, prolonged engagement,
member checking, peer debriefing and support, negative case analysis, and
reflexivity (Padgett 2008).
Audit trail. An audit trail is an essential part of the entire research process,
including the QDA process. Journal or field notes and analytical memos provide an
ongoing record of the decision-making processes and subjective impressions.
Without careful documentation, the trustworthiness of the researcher and credibility
of the study can be undermined. Considerations to address throughout the research
process include keeping checks and balances on potential flaws, which include:
losing one’s subjective view due to personal biases or taking on the views of
participants (going native). The analyst should attempt to reduce biases that might
Rights Research Qualitative Data Analysis … 75

affect interpretation, such as making premature conclusions and intentionally dis-

regarding contradictory evidence (Creswell 2012).
Trustworthiness. Guba and Lincoln (1994) asserted that trustworthiness must
be established such that ethical and fair practices and the results accurately repre-
sent the participants’ actual experiences. Strategies that enhance believability of
your findings include establishing credibility or consistency (or dependability).
Credibility. Credibility is providing evidence and reasons to your audience as to
why you are credible and should be believed. Demonstrating credibility includes
sharing information about your relevant training experiences, and keeping a
detailed journal that documents the decision-making processes during the data
collection and analysis steps. This includes keeping meticulous records to create an
audit trail so that the steps can be retraced back to see how final interpretations of
results were made (Padgett 2008).
Consistency. Consistency, also referred to as dependability, is also a factor in
establishing trustworthiness and believability. Although the research design is
flexible, it is quite feasible to also be consistent. Consistent strategies include
conducting rigorous interviews, establishing and following results for coding,
keeping detailed journal and analytic memos, developing rules for coding, and
having written detailed records (include context of study) of decision-making
processes (for an audit trail or for use in study replication; Creswell 2012).
Triangulation. Triangulation is a strategy for rigor, which refers to using two or
more sources of evidence to confirm conclusions. Patton (2015) refers to theory
triangulation (using more than one theory to explain results), data triangulation
(using multiple data sources such as interviews, documents, and observations),
methodological triangulation (using more than one method, such as quantitative and
qualitative methods), and observer triangulation (using more than one observer or
informants to check for intersubjective agreement or disagreement) (Padgett 2008;
Patton 2015).
Prolonged engagement. Prolonged engagement is when fieldwork occurs over
an extended period of time. A possible benefit is that it reduces reactivity of
participants to a research “outsider” in their setting. However, prolonged engage-
ment must be balanced by remaining neutral in the setting and resisting “going
native” (Padgett 2008; Patton 2015).
Member checking. Member checking is a strategy for rigor in which partici-
pants have a say in the research process. Member checking consists of obtaining
feedback about the results and conclusions drawn directly from the research par-
ticipants. Member checking commonly occurs during the data analysis and inter-
pretation step, which allows participants to confirm or refute interpretations
(Padgett 2008).
Peer debriefing and support. Padgett (2008) noted peer debriefing and support
as a strategy for ensuring rigor. In peer debriefing, research and evaluation team
members often meet on a regular basis to provide feedback and be a sounding board
for processing insights from the field or processing biases.
Negative case analysis. Negative case analysis is another strategy that can be
used to ensure rigor. Negative case analysis resembles constant comparison,
76 6 Holistic Analysis, Discerning Meaning …

looking for outliers and using extreme cases that provide contradictory evidence.
Negative case analysis is especially useful during the preliminary data analysis step
when conclusions are made to see if any data contradict or are inconsistent with
interpretations drawn (Patton 2014; Tutty et al. 1996).
Reflexivity. Reflexivity involves engaging in critical self-reflection. It is
important to document in field notes and journal writing, biases that were uncov-
ered and what was done to control them, especially in the data analysis
step. Keeping a memo or log can serve as a reminder to keep potential biases in
check. Part of the reflexive process involves conducting an ongoing assessment of
one’s positionality: A research practitioner engaged in using a qualitative approach
should carefully evaluate his or her position (“positionality”) to the participants.
Common questions to self-reflect upon include: “what is relevant and important
about me and which might impact on me when carrying out research?” This
includes a careful assessment of one’s age, gender, sexual orientation, religious
beliefs, political views, personal experiences, relational status, socioeconomic sta-
tus, and occupational background (Padgett 2008).

Content Analysis for a Rights Research Approach

Other analysis strategies that may be used in rights research projects are content
analysis methods (e.g., Maschi et al. 2011). The use of content analysis to review
the empirical literature, policies, or transcripts is a method that also can be used by
social workers that guide their research using a human rights lens. Whereas defi-
nitions have varied, content analysis generally refers to a “systematic, replicable
technique for compressing many words of text into fewer content categories based
on explicit rules of coding” (Krippendorff 2004, p. 5). Content analysis can be
conducted with text documents, such as interview data, written documents, or
visual images, such as photographs or films. A coding scheme is developed to
extract information from articles that may involve deductive approach with existing
categories and frequency counts of how often certain words or images appear, or
trends and patterns across the literature (Drisko and Maschi 2015; Neuendorf 2002).
The data also can be analyzed inductively, in which emerging categories can be
used with a QDA method, such as the one presented in this chapter (Drisko and
Maschi 2015; Hsiu-Fang and Shannon 2005).
What is helpful about a content analysis is the methods section for readers that
clearly document the search and decision-making process of the authors. For
example, Maschi et al. (2011) conducted a content analysis of all articles published
about the peer-reviewed journal articles that examined the relationship between
clinical social work and social justice. The purpose of this content analysis was to
evaluate the existing scholarly literature (e.g., peer-reviewed publications) on
Content Analysis for a Rights Research Approach 77

Table 6.1 Example of a
content analysis of the
Clinical Social Work and
Social Justice Literature
(Maschi et al. 2011)
In July 2009, an online search of the university databases
EBSCO Host (1988–2009) was conducted to identify articles on
clinical social work and social justice. The authors found
identified and extracted thirty-six peer-reviewed journal articles
were identified. They found the majority were nonempirical
articles (75 %) published in the United States (94 %) over a
21-year period from 1988 to 2009. The results of the content
analysis revealed that clinical social work practice was
described as psychological and/or sociopolitical interventions
that had a direct and/or indirect effect on psychological and
sociopolitical level social justice outcomes. Theories and
practices consistent with social justice were advanced. Based on
the dearth of reliable empirical literature, the authors concluded
that the about clinical social work’s promotion of psychological
well-being remains an underdeveloped area in the scholarly and
research literature. In this era of professional educational
reform, additional research and professional training on social
justice-based clinical social work practice should be an
imperative
(To read this entire article, please see Maschi et al. 2011).
© 2015 Tina Maschi

clinical social work and social justice. Table 6.1 provides a brief description of the
content analysis study that provides a brief overview of the search, the deductive
(frequency counts) and inductive findings (major themes) and the implications for
practice.
Drisko and Maschi (2015) present a step model to ensure rigor in content
analysis studies and reports. These steps are: (1) starting with a research question of
merit and worth, (2) identifying the selected study epistemology, (3) ensuring
appropriate research ethics and participant safeguards, (4) stating the research
design, (5) clarifying the characteristics of the sample, (6) detailing the data col-
lection methods, (7) detailing coding and data analysis, (8) researcher reflexivity,
(9) discussing results, and (10) maintaining the internal consistency of the study.
Their text provides a case example of how these 10 steps can be applied in a
combined basic and interpretive content analysis project. The following content
analysis was conducted using primary data collected from a mailed survey ques-
tionnaires to a sample of 677 older people in prison. The specific study focus was
on the narrative responses of a subsample of 201 older adults in prison and their
experiences of trauma, stress, and coping in prison. A more detailed description to
see how these steps were applied can be found in Drisko and Maschi (2015).
Another useful example is the peer-reviewed publication by Maschi et al. (2015b).
Recommendations for Writing up the Results
After analyzing the findings, the next step is to write up the results. When writing
up qualitative results, self-awareness and self-expression play an important part. It
is important to know one’s own voice, one’s own creative writing skills, and
conduct a critical self-analysis (see introduction). The first person active voice often
78 6 Holistic Analysis, Discerning Meaning …

is used and the descriptions must be factual and authentic. The piece should be
written in a way that the reader feels the experience of the individuals’ as well as
feel a part of the setting described. The writing also must reflect the depth, breadth,
and detail of the settings, its inhabitants, and their interactions. Appealing to the
multiple senses of the readers, such as sight, sound, and smell help recreate the
setting for readers as if readers feel as if they were there. The next chapter details
how research can be shared for action, including for public awareness campaigns
and advocacy (Padgett 2008).
Qualitative studies that make empirical generalizations or build theories form the
foundation of an important next step, which is using the findings to apply to
practice or take action. For example, Maschi et al. (2015a, b, c) released a free and
publicly available report that used content analysis methods to assess the extent to
which existing United States laws were consistent with a human rights framework.
A foreshadowing of the post-release report action phase included a social media
campaign (e.g., petition) and newspaper coverage with the intent to build more
public awareness that leads to practice and policy reform. An example of a
newspaper article published about the results can be found here: http://news.
fordham.edu/university-news/prisonmaschi-stoelker/ (Stoelker 2015).
This report also provided worksheets to analyze laws and group exercises that
included the use of photos and short narratives of older and seriously
ill-incarcerated people. These tools can be used as sensitizing exercises to stimulate
dialogue or as a guide. The worksheet also can be used to design new or amend
existing policies to be more consistent with human rights principles and guidelines
or develop a policy advocacy campaign (Maschi et al. 2015a). The free and publicly
available report is available at www.betheevidence.org. A link to the petition that
advocates for the release of serious and terminally ill people in prisons also can be
found on the web site.

Summary

This chapter describes how the interpretation of quantitative numeric and qualita-
tive data can be used and applied to human rights issues. The use of a rights
research qualitative data analysis method was presented for identifying common
patterns and themes in the lived experiences of the people we serve as well as a
brief description of content analysis methods. It provided recommendation on
strategies for rigor and writing up results that can be incorporated in the design and
implementation of a rights research study. As the chapter underscored, in order to
make informed decision-making that leads to lasting social change that promote
human rights, taking the time for a comprehensive analysis using numeric and
narrative data is important. If we are basing policy and practice change that impacts
the lives of the most vulnerable in society it is an imperative to understand the
problem in its entirety to develop lasting solution. Briefly foreshadowed in this
chapter, these research findings can be used for the sixth theme-based strategy,
Summary 79

thoughtful sharing and action, including the use of public awareness and advocacy
campaigns.

Exercises

To further explore the fourth theme-based strategy, holistic data analysis and dis-
cerning meaning from narrative and numeric data, the following exercises are
recommended.
1. Revisit the case vignettes of incarcerated elder at the end of Chap. 3. Use the
rights research qualitative analysis, the step–by-step data analysis methods, to
identify categories/patterns/themes. If relevant, create a table or draw a con-
ceptual model of the results.
2. Review the article, The Psychological Good on Clinical Social Work (Maschi
et al. 2011; see link below). Using a human rights framework: dignity and
respect of the person, universality, political, civil, social, economic, and cultural
rights, participation, accountability, and transparency. Based on this content
analysis of the empirical literature, assess the extent to which clinical
social work advances these principles. Provide a rationale for each response.
This exercise can be done as an 1–2 page essay or small group exercise
(3–4 people are recommended). Share each group findings and discuss the
similarities and differences between what each group found. Link to arti-
cle: http://www.betheevidence.org/pdfs/publications/Psychological%20Goods%
20on%20Clinical%20Social%20Work.pdf.
3. Review the Be the Evidence Press, Compassionate Release Report (Maschi
et al. 2015a; see link below). Either or both of these exercises can be used in the
form of a 1–2 page essay or small group exercise that leads to a shared dis-
cussion or debate.
(a) Discuss the appendix photos and short narratives of older people in prison.
Follow the directions for this exercise.
(b) Identify a compassionate or geriatric release law in your state or the federal
law. If there is no identifiable state, choose another state of interest. Using
the appendix legal assessment checklist, assess the extent to which the law in
your chosen meets these human rights standards. Develop an ideal law or
proposed amendments to the law. Using a role play strategy in which one
person is the advocate and the other person is a state or federal legislature.
The advocate should use respectful persuasive communication skills to
influence the legislature as to why your proposed bill or amendment should
be passed.
Link to the compassionate and geriatric release report: http://www.betheevidence.
org/pdfs/Compassionate-Release-Report-FINAL.pdf.
80 6 Holistic Analysis, Discerning Meaning …

References

Atlas.ti (2015). Atlas.ti. Retrieved August 1, 2015 from http://atlasti.com.

Bernard, H. R., & Ryan, G. W. (2010). Analyzing qualitative data: Systematic approaches.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications Inc.
Creswell, J. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches
(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Drisko, J., & Maschi, T. (2015). Content analysis: Pocket guide to social work research.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Frankl, V. (1971). Man’s search for meaning: An introduction to Logotherapy. New York:
Washington Square Press.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative
research. New York, NY: Aldine Publishing Company.
Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (2nd ed.). New York:
Longman Publishers.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N.
K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Hsiu-Fang, H., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.
Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. doi:10.1177/104973230527668.
Ife, J. (2012). Human rights and social work towards rights-based practice (3rd ed.). London:
Cambridge University Press.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Maschi, T., Baer, J., & Turner, S. (2011). The psychological goods on clinical social work:
A content analysis of the clinical social work and social justice literature. Journal of Social
Work Practice, 25(2), 233–253.
Maschi, T., Kalmanofsky, A., Westcott, K., & Pappacena, L. (2015a). An analysis of united states
compassionate and geriatric release laws: Towards a rights-based response for diverse elders
and their families and communities. New York, NY: Be the Evidence Press, Fordham
University. Available at: www.beetheevidence.org
Maschi, T., Viola, D., & Koskinen, L. (2015b). Trauma, stress, and coping among older adults in
prison: Towards a human rights and intergenerational family justice action agenda.
Maschi, T., Viola, D., Morgen, K., & Koskinen, L. (2015c). Trauma, stress, grief, loss, and
separation among older adults in prison: the protective role of coping resources on physical and
mental well-being. Journal of Crime and Justice, 38(1), 113–136.
Maschi, T., & Youdin, R. (2012). Social workers as researcher: Integrating research with
advocacy. Boston: Pearson Publishers.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Padgett, D. K. (2008). Qualitative methods in social work research: Challenges and rewards (2nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications, Inc.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications Inc.
QSR International. (2015). NVivo. Retrieved August 1, 2015 from http://www.qsrinternational.
com/products_nvivo.aspx
Richards, L. (2009). Handling qualitative data: A practical guide (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
References 81

Rubin, A., & Babbie, E. (2012). Essential research methods for social work (3rd ed.). Belmont,
CA: Brooks/Cole.
Stoelker, T. (2015, May 28). Report compares compassionate release laws for incarcerated elders.
Fordham News. http://news.fordham.edu/university-news/prisonmaschi-stoelker/
Turner, S. G., & Maschi, T. (2015a). Feminist and empowerment theory and social work practice.
Journal of Social Work Practice, 29(2), 151–162.
Turner, S. G., & Maschi, T. M. (2015b). Feminist and empowerment theory and social work
practice. Journal of Social Work Practice, 29(2), 151–162.
Tutty, L. M., Rothery, M., & Grinnell, R. M. (1996). Qualitative research for social workers.
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Wronka, J. (2007). Human rights and social justice: Social action and service for the helping and
health professions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
 Chapter 7
Thoughtful Sharing and Action

What after all has maintained the human race on this old globe
despite all the calamities of nature and all the tragic failings of
mankind, if not faith in new possibilities and courage to
advocate them?
—Jane Addams (n.d.)

Introduction

This final chapter explores the sixth theme-based strategy of a rights research
approach, thoughtful sharing and action. It is a natural procession for social workers
that findings generated from research, practice, and program evaluation can be
shared and acted upon. In a social work research “as usual” approach may or may
not result in action that extend beyond a peer-reviewed journal article publication.
However, in a rights research approach it is a mandate regardless of what methods
are used to generate findings that some type of community action is taken by the
research team (Maschi and Youdin 2012). As suggested by Jane Addams inspira-
tional quote, faith and courage are internal qualities that can be used to visualize
new possibilities and to take action steps. Rights research users are encouraged to
embrace faith and courage as part of their internal toolkit that is guided by a human
rights lens. Faith and courage can assist in advancing one’s personal values as well
as our profession’s goals to realize human rights and social justice and individual,
family, and community well-being for everyone everywhere, especially for those in
the most vulnerable situations.
To this end, the purpose of this chapter is to highlight suggested strategies and
practices on how social workers can translate research and evaluation into actions
that promote human rights and influence social change at the agency, community,
and policy level. First, it reviews the reviews how persuasive communication skills

© The Author(s) 2016 83

T. Maschi, Applying a Human Rights Approach to Social Work Research
and Evaluation, SpringerBriefs in Rights-Based Approaches to Social Work,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-26036-5_7
84 7 Thoughtful Sharing and Action

in oral and written communication can be applied to research for social change.
Next, a series of courageous recommendations are provided for social workers to
consider. It reviews agency and policy-level advocacy based on the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR; UN 1948), (1) everyone has the right freely
to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in
scientific advancement and its benefits, it reviews the use of arts for social change.
It concludes with closing remarks on how social workers can embrace research as a
human right.
As advocated in this manifesto’s introductory chapter, social workers who want
to embrace a rights research approach will be most successful in their external
social change efforts if they commit to self-liberation and empowerment as their
own personal research process. Yes, the evolution revolution starts within and then
“manifests” without. Social workers can embrace faith in oneself as an agency of
social change as opposed to social control (see Chap. 1). This chapter explores
some common ways that social workers can use their research and evaluation
findings to press for social change at the micro, mezzo, macro (policy) level. As
noted in the introduction, social workers’ self-awareness, self-confidence, and
self-empowerment are the undergirding driver that may increase the likelihood of
successful public awareness and advocacy campaigns that translate into social
transformation with the power to last.
With personal and collective empowerment at social workers' fingertips, per-
suading administrators, policymakers, and the general public to act upon critical
social issues, such as homelessness and community violence, increases the odds of
achieving our mission. In fact, many policy makers are open to consulting with
experts, including social workers in community or university settings that are
familiar with the population and the problem. Therefore, organizational staff will be
best able to advocate for their population’s causes when they know the empirical
literature as well as the local population profile (Chataway et al. 2009; Mayer
2009). Social workers also can use evidence to influence agency administrators and
politicians to develop or change their policies or the general public to mobilize
community members (Humphries 2008; McIntyre 2008; McLeod and Thomson
2009).
Social workers also can facilitate the self and collective empowerment of the
profession or the populations. We also can use our skills to facilitate the capacity
building of the individuals, families, and community we serve to be their own
advocates. For example, Alice McIntyre (2000) and a group of inner city youth,
who used participatory action research to determine the problem, which they
described as community violence, which their definition included that too much
garbage was strewn everywhere in their low-income community. The youth then
mobilized for change based on their definition and developed and implemented to
clean up the trash in their neighborhood. They also advocated with their local town
official who honored their request to place garbage cans on each block in their
community.
Inspiring Others for Action … 85

Inspiring Others for Action: Persuasive

Communication Skills

As social workers, part of our position is to advocate for social change, whether it is
at the individual, organizational, community, or society level. As illustrated in
Fig. 7.1, effective written or oral communication, the combined effect of ethos,
logos, and pathos can be used as an inspirational tool for social workers who have
research or evidence in which they want to inspire others to take action and are
described below (Wronka 2007). Any advocacy strategies presented in this chapter
or other sources can incorporate the skills of persuasive communication.
The Inspirational Spoken Word. Persuasive communication skills can be
applied to oral presentations (speeches) and writing. It also is important that social
workers use accessible language (not jargon) that can be understood by laypeople as
well as scholars. As reviewed in Chap. 2, a rights research approach is thoughtful in
that any language used conveys dignity and respect and equality, such as the use of
the term domestic violence survivor as opposed to victim. Therefore, one’s speech
and writing should be clear and succinct, easy for listeners and/or readers to grasp,
and convey dignity and respect. The use of effective and persuasive communication
is an effective tool for moving an audience to action and to humanize those, such as
immigrants among others, who are often vilified in society. Perhaps the most well
known is Aristotle’s (350 BCE/2000) rhetoric for persuasion, which includes three
forms of rhetoric referred to as ethos, logos, and pathos.
Ethos is a speaker’s authority or honesty, which is how he or she demands authority
to speak on a topic. The speaker exerts a demeanor of sincerity and fair-mindedness
and the use of appropriate and respectful language, including vocabulary and gram-
mar (Wisse 1989).
Logos is the use of logic, in the form of evidence and reason, for the purpose of
persuading an audience. For example, logos mostly describes the use of evidence to
support an important point, such as national statistics on children who were mal-
treated or aging people who experienced the trauma of long-term incarceration. The
use of logic to persuade an audience might include the use of definitions, factual
data and statistics, quotations, and/or opinions or citations from one’s own work or
other experts and authorities. In the case of a rights research approach, an expert can
refer to an individual or group directly affected by an experience and offers personal

Ethos INSPIRING OTHERS FOR ACTION

PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION Audiences
ETHOS Individuals
Speaker’s Authority/Honesty Policymakers
LOGOS General Public/Society
Use of Logic/Evidence
PATHOS

Fig. 7.1 Persuasive communication as the impetus for inspired action (© 2015 Tina Maschi)
86 7 Thoughtful Sharing and Action

testimony about their experience. Examples include individuals who directly

experienced immigration detention or adult survivors of sexual abuse. The use of
logos often supplements the speaker’s ethos as an authority to speak on a desig-
nated topic. The speaker also appeals to reason using established theories and/or
cause-and-effect arguments when appropriate (Wisse 1989). For example, if a social
worker wants to build an argument about the adverse mental health effects of
incarceration, there is available research that speaks to just that (e.g., Maschi et al.
2015).
Pathos, on the other hand, represents an appeal to the emotions. This can be in
the form of passionate delivery, including the assertion that a topic is a human
rights and social justice issue in which actions need to be taken. Techniques for
pathos include the use of vivid descriptions, emotionally charged and figurative or
metaphorical language. The use of pathos is most effective when a speaker connects
with an underlying value, such as fairness and equity, and when that connection is
coordinated with the character of ethos and logic of logos (Aristotle 350 BCE/2000;
Wisse 1989).
Social workers who skillfully using intellectual (thoughts) in combination
empathy (feelings) to appeal to an audience can provide the inspiration for others to
take action. Although there is this professional expectation that social workers
should engage in social action, it is my view that intrinsic motivation and passion
for action is preferred (NASW 1999). Social work advocacy actions can be done
individually or in collaboration with other stakeholders. So the only thing stopping
a social worker from taking action is him or herself. So I implore you to overcome
fear and self-doubt and instead embrace courage and follow suit with action. This
manifesto has been designed to offer inspiration and practical tips for social workers
to conduct rights research with the goal of action, including as the impetus for
practice and policy reform (Thomas and Monan 2007).
The Inspirational Written Word. Using persuasive writing, ethos represents a
writer’s authority to write on a particular topic. Logos often reinforces ethos with its
use of evidence and reason, such as factual data and statistics, for the purposes of
persuading others. For example, logos mostly describes the use of evidence to
support an important point, such as the national statistics of children who were
maltreated. Pathos, on the other hand, represents an appeal to emotions, in the form
of passionate delivery, including the assertion that it is an issue of human rights.
The combined effect of making a connection with an underlying value, such as
fairness and equity, and coordinating it with ethos and logos is a key factor for
making persuasive arguments to others (Aristotle 350 BCE/2000; Wisse 1989).
This next section provides some selection recommendations on activities on how
to put research findings into action in which the use of persuasive communication
skills might be warranted. This includes disseminating findings to academic and
community audiences through published reports and journal articles, making public
presentations, using the arts, sciences, and social media (Ife 2001a, b; Reichert
2011; Wronka 2007), and building community collaborations and coalition to
translate findings into achievable action steps with the goal of individual and social
transformation.
Recommendations for Earning a Social Worker’s Badge of Courage 87

Recommendations for Earning a Social Worker’s

Badge of Courage

This next section provides common examples that can be used in a rights research
approach where research is applied to public awareness and advocacy. Like many
other social workers, rights research users have the option to present your findings
at research or professional conferences or to community members. As for the
format of a presentation, it can be an oral presentation, a poster presentation, or
workshop that includes prepared handouts. Conference oral presentations, whether
done solo or with other members of your research team, are most a succinct
20-minute presentation of the research report. The presentation includes an over-
view of the problem, literature review, research questions or hypotheses, methods
used, major findings, and implications and applications of the findings for action.
There are some instances where similar research studies in a topic area (about three
to five research studies) are presented together as part of a symposium. Whatever
the venue is, the social worker should practice giving the presentation to others that
could provide helpful feedback (Maschi and Youdin 2012).
Poster presentations often combine a large group of research presentations using
a large poster format. Posters are commonly 4 feet by 6 feet. Figure 7.2 provides an
example of a poster presentation that was given to an international audience of
researchers and practitioners about the international aging prisoner crisis. As this
example shows, human rights documents was used as a source of background

Fig. 7.2 Poster presentation given at an International aging conference on the international “aging
prisoner” crisis. © 2015 Tina Maschi
88 7 Thoughtful Sharing and Action

evidence that led to the current study as well as the implications for human rights
based on recommendations from United Nations documents (UNODC 2009).
In addition, social workers often give workshops to share their research and
practice evaluation knowledge and skills. Workshops generally are 60 to 90 min
long but can be longer. Workshops often include lecture content, media (e.g., video
clips) and experiential learning exercises so participants can practice the skills they
are learning (e.g., roleplays). Some research conferences may provide a workshop
on conducting participatory action research studies. Some professional conferences
might provide skills workshop on topics such as: community organizing, policy
advocacy, or trauma-informed treatment. Whether it be an oral or poster presen-
tation, academic or professional conferences provide a venue to build networks,
foster collaborations, or build action-oriented coalitions with other action-oriented
researchers and practitioners (Maschi and Youdin 2012).

Sharing Research and Practice Findings for Advocacy

In a rights research approach, perhaps the most important reason for sharing
research findings is for the purpose of public awareness/advocacy activities and
campaigns (Centre for Civil Society 2003). Mickelson (1995) defined advocacy as
“the act of directly representing, defending, intervening, supporting, or recom-
mending a course of action on behalf of one or more individuals, groups, or
communities with the goal of securing or retaining social justice” (p. 95). There are
two major types of advocacy: case level and class advocacy. Case advocacy refers
to working directly with the clients and advocating on their behalf in the agency or
immediate community environment. In contrast, class advocacy refers to inter-
vention to change the environment through social policy (Gibelman 1995;
Mickelson 1995).
Before taking action, social workers should have a good understanding of the
situation, policies, public perception, client environment intervention, and issues
related to a human rights issue or condition. Social workers must assess the indi-
vidual and the community because the differing positions of key stakeholders may
require that a different advocacy tactic be used (Mayer 2009). Case-level advocacy
efforts may resemble case management, such as advocating for needed resources,
such a person who is homeless in need of a safe residence. In contrast, policy-level
advocacy may involve acting as a political advocate. However, there is also a
critical communication that can occur between case-level advocates who are privy
to information from the ground about a population that is your advocacy area of
focus, such as youth in foster care or aging people in prison. This information can
be shared with class advocates, who in turn, can share this information with policy
makers. The class advocate in return can provide the case advocate with critical
information on laws, policies, and potential service loopholes to best help their
clients (Mickelson 1995).
Sharing Research and Practice Findings for Advocacy 89

The use of research and evaluation can be a powerful advocacy tool, because it
provides agency administrators and public policymakers evidence on which to base
their decisions and the general public data-driven research to base their opinions
(Reisch 2009). The use of research for advocacy purposes must move beyond the
mere generation of findings to its application in community and policy practice
arenas. This shift from conducting research to advocacy often lies with the social
worker’s ability to effectively communicate this information, often in a respectful
but persuasive manner, to key stakeholders as reviewed in the section on persuasive
communication skills (Chataway et al. 2009).
Research may serve as the bright light at the end of a dark tunnel that moves a
social issue, such as the plight aging people in prison. The simple lack of data about
an issue may be the cause of public and governmental inaction. When presented
with research, key stakeholders are more likely to recognize the issue. The chal-
lenge becomes, once key stakeholders are aware of an issue to move them to do
something as opposed to knowing about it and choosing to ignore it (Mayer 2009).
For example, child maltreatment was not always considered a social problem. In
fact, the “discovery” of child maltreatment in 1962 was the result of the “x-ray
vision” of a team of radiologists and doctors to identify and document visual signs
of physical abuse, such as broken bones and fractures in infants and children. Dr.
Kempe’s coining of the term “battered child syndrome” put a face to the
once-hidden social problem of child abuse (Kempe et al. 1962). The research that
followed, and the work of child advocates, eventually made child maltreatment an
illegal act with the passage of the federal Child Abuse Prevention Act in 1974
(Finkelhor et al. 2005).

Policy Advocacy: Brief Overview

Policy advocacy is an action-oriented activity that is consistent with a right research

approach. Since policy advocacy in social work is widely covered in the profession
as well as in other books in this series, only a brief overview of the strategies most
useful to engaging in a rights research approach are highlighted here. Several policy
advocates provide recommendations on how to apply research for policy advocacy
purposes. Chataway et al. (2009) recommended thinking beyond results in policy
research and engaging stakeholders in all phases of the process. It is recommended
that social workers meet with participants, funders, and other stakeholders to clarify
issues, try out ideas, and determine what matters most. Policy initiatives often may
change, which may influence a research project. Therefore, if a reflexive dialogue
occurs early in the process, it can help to refine the course of research, and make it
relevant to all stakeholders (Mayer 2009). Communicating results should be done
strategically. Some options include formal or informal presentations to stakehold-
ers, breakfast/lunch/dinner talks, newspaper, and articles in the popular press.
Public workshops with people from the policy world, experts, academics, and
participants in the research also can be used (Chataway et al. 2009; Reisch 2009).
90 7 Thoughtful Sharing and Action

The format for meetings and how the results will be communicated should be
carefully weighed. The scope of the project effects, the environmental context, and
level of stakeholders involved will influence the choice. The social worker also
should be clear about the purpose of the meeting, what type of feedback is desired,
and when the meeting should be scheduled. Culture and context also can influence
the communication of results (Chataway et al. 2009). For example, the language
(e.g., formal vs. informal) used for certain audiences, especially research of a
technical nature, should be carefully considered. (See Table 7.1 for possible
strategies and venues to present research and evaluation projects and results.) There
also are sober realities to consider when using evidence to take action or to make
changes in public policy. Perhaps most important, using empirical evidence will not
always result in a shift in other people’s views. An important strategy is to talk
about evidence realistically. That is, avoid talking about results as if they “prove”
something. This assertion makes it easy for others to attack it because all research
results are to some degree inconclusive (Mayer 2009).

Table 7.1 Possible strategies and venues to present a rights research and evaluation project results
Actions Potential venues Potential activities
Share research
and/or practice
knowledge
Write Publications Publish peer-reviewed research or
practice journals
Publish in e-journals
Publish books or book chapters in area
of expertise
Blogs and other types of social media
Present Professional research Oral presentation
conferences—international, Roundtable discussion
national, regional
Poster presentation
Workshop
Broadcast Internet Your own or organization’s Web site,
social media sites (e.g., twitter,
facebook, etc…)
Electronic communication Email newsletters, petitions
Television or radio (local, Press release, documentary, news item,
national, international) interview
Magazines, newspaper (local, Editorial, press release
national, international)
Events Professional practice Do a workshop or presentation
conferences—International,
national, local
Advocate Political events Use research to advocate
Charity events
Network Community stakeholders Build coalitions
© 2015 Tina Maschi
Full Participation in the Arts and Scientific Advancement 91

Full Participation in the Arts and Scientific Advancement

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN 1949) recognizes participation in

the arts and scientific advancement as a basic and core human rights. An
often-overlooked article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN 1948),
Article 27, clearly specifies this: (1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in
the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific
advancement and its benefits (UN 1948, p. 5). History and a growing body of
empirical evidence supports the role the arts are an important tool for individual and
social change and improving health and well-being (e.g. group drumming and
well-being intervention project by Maschi et al. 2013). Examples include the visual
art, music, and writing associated with social movements, such as the civil rights,
feminist, and LGBT and formerly incarcerated movements. An example of a social
work rising empowerment documentary films from Be the Evidence Project can be
found here. https://vimeo.com/121833041 (Be the Evidence and Prisoners of Age
2014). It includes the testimony of a formerly incarcerated gay man describing his
experiences of coming out as a gay person as well as coming out of prison.
In addition, the use of autobiographical case studies visual arts, community
murals, documentary films are an important aspect of dissemination of human rights
and social justice violations. Another social media article from a public forum that
Be the Evidenced hosted that underscores the use of the arts for individual and
social transformation can be found here: http://fordhamnotes.blogspot.com/search?
q=maschi (Klimanksi 2013).
Another powerful example is the Willard Suitcase Project documents the lives of
persons with mental illness who were institutionalized (Community Consortium,
Inc 2014). This project can be reviewed at: http://www.suitcaseexhibit.org/index.
php?section=about&subsection=suitcases.

Research as a Human Right

As illustrated throughout this manifesto, social workers have used and can use
research and evaluation strategies to increase people’s awareness of human rights
violations and socially unjust conditions with the purpose of improving these
adverse human rights conditions. It is my hope that the reader’s thoughtful review
of this manifesto has sparked the social warrior and the confidence that you can do
this! The human rights values that many social workers revere, such each person’s
intrinsic value, dignity and worth of each person just because of the mere fact that
they are human. You also now can fully embrace research as your basic human
right if you have not done so already. It is clear from Article 27 of the UDHR that
every human has the rights to participate in the scientific advancement of their
community (UN 1948). And this means social workers too can own this right.
92 7 Thoughtful Sharing and Action

Closing Remarks

In embracing this right, adopting a human rights lens a core theme of a right
research approach. Human rights provide us with the dual vision: we can imagine
the possibilities of an ideal world while recognizing the stark reality of existing
conditions that are fraught with the ravages of oppression and use constructive
anger to move oneself and with others for action. Although we have made minor
strides in eradicating oppression and human rights violations, such as child mal-
treatment, we have much more work to be done working with professionals in other
disciplines and other key stakeholders to achieve the realization of rights, especially
as it is related to mass liberation as opposed to mass incarceration. We also have
more work to be done to be agents of change as opposed to agents of control
(Gatenio-Gaebel 2015).
Although it is a long and arduous climb up the mountain to reach mass liber-
ation, the journey is so worth it. The good news reminder is the change must first
start with you. Through self-actualization and empowerment we can revel in the
distance we have made at this moment and for many social work generations to
come. I offer to each of you the fortune cookie that I received while eating at an
outdoor Chinese restaurant in Highland Park, New Jersey (of all places). As shown
in Fig. 7.3, the fortune reads, “Human rights: know them, demand them, defend
them.” I share this fortune now with all of you to take with you on your journey of
personal and social transformation.
On your personal and professional journeys, each of you have six theme-based
strategies for a right research approach as part of your toolkit to draw from at any
give time. These themes are weightless and only take up minimal space in the vast
contours of the mind. These six themes based strategies can be used like social
work mantras or prayers that make your journey up the mountain where choosing
the road less traveled the “rights” path. You can repeat theme themes in your mind
to silence the voices of fear and doubt in the inside and the external pressures of
control. Repeat after me six times: understanding and applying a human rights lens;
research and evaluation that makes a difference; informed decision-making, mul-
tiple perspectives, approaches, and methods; social contexts, meaningful

Fig. 7.3 Fortune cookie saying: human rights: know them, demand them, defend them
Closing Remarks 93

participation, and relational communication; holistic analysis, discerning meaning

from numeric and narrative data; and thoughtful sharing and action.
The rights research approach is as organic as the natural world. Once the outer
synthetic skin of oppression is shed, you will find your truth and there were be no
obstacles that can stop you from pursuing your purpose and passion for justice.
Human rights can be realized everywhere and for everyone. They are everywhere in
varying forms like butterflies in a butterfly garden. But you have to carefully
observe to be aware of them and feed them to make them grow when concrete
jungles and pollution mask this vision. If you practice dignity and worth of the
whole person, this wild flower of a thought can grow to be the most beautiful field
of wildflowers that any has ever seen. The “rights” attitude is about growth because
it empowers and elevates oneself and others to create a human rights culture. This is
in contrast to feeding oppression and stigmatization of oneself and historically and
emerging underrepresented and underserved individuals and groups. Human rights
can be manifested through verbal and nonverbal communication and actions that
honor the humanness in all people and their overall well-being. The spoken words
between others create interconnections that we may not be able to literally see but
we certainly can feel these cords.
As described in the introduction, our profession has fallen short of this mission
including in contemporary time. We can use our gift of hindsight and the reignited
faith and courage to fix what needs to be fixed. And although we can learn from the
past, it is important to be fully present as we build the foundation for the emerging
leaders to finish where we have left off to the mountaintop of where mass liberation
patiently awaits. Our foremother and forefathers were moved by faith in a better
world and the courage to advocate them that inspired them to climb higher. These
trailblazers left markers for us in the trails they took, including those strategies that
led to systemic and social transformation, especially in regards to minority rights.
Today, we enjoy the fruits of their research, practice, and legislative labors. Now it
is up to you and your generation to carry this faith and courage forward. So
manifest this manifesto. There is no better time than the present to start to fulfill this
book. Although, you can do it alone, you will not have to do so. If you call upon
them, our ancestors referred to throughout these pages, they will guide you. Yes,
that is “rights,” that is human right. I wish all of you a safe and fruitful journey and
remember to mark your trail.

Exercises

1. This chapter discussed the thoughtful sharing and action, which includes the use
of the research, the arts and writing for human rights awareness and advocacy.
To further explore how this has or might be done please complete one or more
of the following activities. Each exercise can be completed as a 1–2 page essay
or as a small group exercise (3–4 people are recommended) and the results
94 7 Thoughtful Sharing and Action

shared with the large group, or as a discussion thread (150–250 words) in which
one groups makes a post and each group responds to the other groups response
(50–100 words).
(a) Review the advocacy piece, Forget Me Not: Dementia in Prison (see link to
publication below; Maschi et al. 2012). What are two to three ways the
authors used language and information to educate other for action? How was
persuasive communication used (ethos, logos, pathos) used?
Article link: http://www.betheevidence.org/pdfs/publications/Forget%20Me
%20Not_%20Dementia%20in%20Prison.pdf
(b) Review the blog posting and listen to the song, “We are All Aging
Prisoners”, referred to in the blog link below (Maschi 2014).
Exercise 1: How did the researcher/songwriter/musician use the arts to build
awareness and advocate for reform?
Link to blog post: http://gssnews.blog.fordham.edu/2015/01/30/what-if-we-
set-the-prisoner-free-humanity-raising-contemporary-moral-questions-
through-research-and-the-arts/ (Fordham GSS news blog 2015).
Exercise 2: Listen and review the lyrics to the song, “We are All Aging
Prisoners.” Please share your views on the moral and ethical dilemmas
raised and answer the questions posed at the end of verses 1, 2, and 3.
Review the short documentary piece, entitled Social Work Rising (see link
below), that highlights contemporary social workers and allied professionals justice
reform efforts. Answer the following questions: (a) What is your thoughts and
feelings in response to the documentary? (b) What role, if any, should individual
social workers and the profession at large in regards in taking a position on the
justice issues, including LGBT rights and criminal justice reform, raised in this
video? Video documentary link: https://vimeo.com/121833041.
3. Social workers use research and evaluation strategies to foster universal
human rights, such as social, economic, cultural, and collective rights as outlined in
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN 1948). This section revisits the
strategies recommended by the United Nations (1994), which has recommended
certain intervention strategies to help advance human rights (see Chap. 3). At this
stage, students’ knowledge and skills in how research and evaluation facilitate the
change process have probably increased.
For this exercise, we are asking students (individually or in groups of three to six
students) to review these strategies again (see below) and answer the following
questions:
1. Which of the strategies are feasible in your current practice situation?
2. What knowledge, values, and skills of research and evaluation can be used?
3. If there are several feasible strategies, choose the one that is determined to have
the most effective short-term outcomes and long-term impacts. Explains why.
Exercises 95

These intervention strategies include:

1. work with local, regional, and national organizations to promote, develop, and
implement needed changes in policy, planning, and programming on human
rights issues;
2. (2) recognize and adapt existing services to maximize effectiveness;
3. involve qualified leaders from the community to identify, plan, and implement
needed services and advocacy efforts;
4. develop self-capacities of those disadvantaged in their human rights;
5. organize previously unorganized disadvantaged groups for self-help;
6. form alliances with like-minded social and political movements;
7. develop mechanisms to enhance local and global awareness, including the use
of mass media;
8. raise funds for the cause;
9. assess the impact of actions undertaken in collaboration with persons and
groups affected and associated groups and organizations;
10. document and disseminate information on human rights abuses; and
11. promote legislation that benefits disadvantaged groups (UN 1994).

References

Addams, J. (n.d.). Jane Addams quote. Retrieved May 6, 2014 from http://www.notable-quotes.
com/a/addams_jane.html.
Aristotle. (2000). The rhetoric and the poetics of Aristotle (Rev. ed.). New York: MacMillan
(Original work published 350 BC).
Be the Evidence and Prisoners of Age. (2014). Social work rising documentary. Retrieved June 1,
2015 from https://vimeo.com/121833041.
Centre for Civil Society. (2003). An activist’s guide to research and advocacy. Retrieved June 3,
2014 from http://www.csrsc.org.za/Documents%5Cactivism%20and%20research%20manual.
pdf.
Chataway, J., Joffe, A., & Mordaunt, J. (2009). Communicating results. In A. Thomas &
G. Mohan (Eds.), Research skills for policy and development: How to find out fast
(pp. 95–110). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc.
Community Consortium, Inc. (2014). The willard suitcase project. Retrieved May 1, 2015 from
http://www.suitcaseexhibit.org/index.php?section=about&subsection=suitcases.
Finkelhor, D., Cross, T. P., & Cantor, E. (2005). How the justice system responds to juvenile
victims: A comprehensive model. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention.
Fordham, G. S. S. (2015). What if we set the ‘prisoner’ free, humanity? Raising contemporary
moral questions through research and the arts: Fordham GSS News Blog. http://gssnews.blog.
fordham.edu/2015/01/30/what-if-we-set-the-prisoner-free-humanity-raising-contemporary-
moral-questions-through-research-and-the-arts/.
Gatenio-Gaebel, S. (2015). Preface to a rights research approach to social work. New York:
Springer Publishing.
Gibelman, M. (1995). What social workers do (4th ed.). Washington, DC: NASW Press.
Humphries, B. (2008). Social work research for social justice. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
96 7 Thoughtful Sharing and Action

Ife, J. (2001a). Human rights and social work: Towards rights-based practice. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Ife, J. (2001b). Local and global practice: relocating social work as a human rights profession in
the new global order. European Journal of Social Work, 4(1), 5–15.
Kempe, C. H., Silverman, F. N., Steele, B. F., Droegemueller, W., & Silver, H. K. (1962). The
battered-child syndrome. Journal of the American Medical Association, 181, 17–24.
Klimanksi, J. (2013, April 18). The power of making art behind bars. Fordham Notes. http://
fordhamnotes.blogspot.com/search?q=maschi.
Maschi, T. (2014). We are all aging prisoners. Retrieved May 9, 2015 from https://soundcloud.
com/tinam59/we-are-all-aging-prisoners.
Maschi, T., & Youdin, R. (2012). Social workers as researcher: Integrating research with
advocacy. Boston: Pearson Publishers.
Maschi, T., Kwak, J., Ko, E., & Morrissey, M. B. (2012). Forget me not: Dementia in prison. The
Gerontologist, 52(4), 441–451.
Maschi, T., Macmillan, T., & Viola, D. (2013). Group drumming and well-being: A promising
self-care strategy for social workers. Arts and Health, 5(2), 142–151. doi:10.1080/17533015.
2012.748081.
Maschi, T., Viola, D., & Koskinen, L. (2015). Trauma, stress, and coping among older adults in
prison: Towards a human rights and intergenerational family justice action agenda.
Mayer, S. (2009). Using evidence in advocacy. In A. Thomas & G. Mohan (Eds.), Research skills
for policy and development: How to find out fast (pp. 264–274). Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications Inc.
McIntyre, A. (2000). Inner city kids: Adolescents confront life and violence in an urban
community. New York: New York University Press.
McIntyre, A. (2008). Participatory action research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
McLeod, J., & Thomson, R. (2009). Researching social change. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications Inc.
Mickelson, J. (1995). Advocacy. In R. L. Edwards & J. G. Hopps (Eds.), Encyclopedia of social
work (19th ed., pp. 95–99). Washington, DC: National Association of Social Workers.
National Association of Social Workers. (1999). Code of ethics of the National association of
social workers. Washington, DC: NASW Press. Retrieved January 1, 2012 from http://www.
naswdc.org/pubs/code/code.asp.
Reichert, E. (2011). Social work and human rights: A foundation for policy and practice (2nd ed.).
New York: Columbia University Press.
Reisch, M. (2009). Legislative advocacy to empower oppressed and vulnerable groups.
In A. R. Roberts & G. L. Greene (Eds.), Social workers desk reference (2nd ed.,
pp. 545–550). New York: Oxford University Press.
Thomas, A., & Monan, G. (2007). Research skills for policy and development: How to find out
fast. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime [UNODC]. (2009). Handbook for prisoners with
special needs. Vienna: Author.
United Nations. (1948). The Universal declaration of human rights. Retrieved from http://www.
un.org/en/documents/udhr/.
United Nations. (1994). Human rights and social work: A manual for schools of social work and
the social work profession. Geneva: United Nations Centre for Human Rights.
Wisse, J. (1989). Ethos and pathos: From Aristotle to Cicero. Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert.
Wronka, J. (2007). Human rights and social justice: Social action and service for the helping and
health professions. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication.
Index

A Covenants, 4, 14
Accountability, 2, 6, 11–13, 53, 79 Credibility, 56, 58, 75
Action research, 51, 71 Criminal justice, 8, 27
Addams, Jane, 24, 49, 83 Critical qualitative methods, 37
Advanced generalist public health model, 25, Cross-sectional studies, 54
26, 28 Cultural relativism, 6, 17, 18, 20, 31, 50
Advocacy, 2, 3, 8, 12, 23, 24, 28, 32, 61, 78, Culture, 6, 15, 17, 18, 20, 36, 38, 50, 52, 54,
84, 87, 88, 93 70, 90
Aging, 85 Cumulative disadvantage theory, 39
Aging people in prison, 2, 8, 32, 35, 40, 88 Cumulative inequality theory, 39, 71, 73
Aging prisoners, 87, 94
Archival records, 61 D
Aristotle, 85, 86 Data collection strategies, 52, 60
Artifact, 61 Data sources, 7, 31, 56, 75
The arts for social change, 84 Deductive analysis, 8
Audit trail, 73, 74 Deductive process, 32, 33, 51
Descriptive data, 24
B Descriptive statistics, 7, 34, 35
Be the Evidence, 8, 52, 91 Discerning meaning, 1, 5, 7, 8, 69, 70, 79, 93
Dissemination, 1, 5, 7, 8, 12
C
Case advocacy or case-level advocacy, 88 E
Category saturation, 73 Emotion, 57–60, 73, 74, 86
Charity, 2 Empathy, 51, 86
Class advocacy or legislative advocacy, 88 Empirical generalizations, 36, 57, 78
Clinical social work, 4, 76, 77, 79 Empowerment, 1, 37, 84, 92
Cluster coding, 71 Empowerment theory, 31, 39
Communication, 42, 51, 53, 90 Ethos, 85, 86
Communication skills, 7, 54 Evidence-based practice, 6, 24, 26
Compassionate release laws, 27 Expert authority, 85
Competency, 5
Concepts, 38, 53, 71, 72 F
Conceptualization, 39, 51 Faith, 83, 93
Consistency, 57, 61, 75 Field notes, 51, 61, 62, 74, 76
Constructs, 17, 57 Fieldwork, 53–55, 60, 75
Content analysis, 8, 27, 71, 76, 77 Film documentary, 2, 91
Context, 33, 70, 73, 90 Focus groups, 61
Conventions, 4, 14 Framework, 6
Courage, 83, 93 Frankl, Victor, 31, 69

© The Author(s) 2016 97

T. Maschi, Applying a Human Rights Approach to Social Work Research
and Evaluation, SpringerBriefs in Rights-Based Approaches to Social Work,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-26036-5
98 Index

G Manifesto, 1–3, 5, 6, 8, 11, 65, 83, 84, 86, 91,

General interview guide, 57 93
Geriatric release laws, 27, 79 Marley, Bob, 1
Mass incarceration, 19, 92
H Meaningful participation, 1, 5, 7, 40, 49–51,
Holistic, 35 64, 93
Holistic analysis, 1, 5, 8, 69, 93 Member checking, 74, 75
Holistic perspective, 33, 70, 72 Memoing, 72
Holocaust, 69 Meta-macrolevel, 25
Human rights, 1, 2, 6, 7, 13, 14, 18, 24–27, 34, Meta-micro level, 25, 26
37, 39, 40, 51, 57, 70, 74, 78, 83, 93 Mezzolevel, 14, 23, 25, 28, 41, 84
Human rights framework, 3, 5, 79 Micro, 3, 9, 14, 23, 25, 26, 28, 39, 41, 84
Human rights instruments, 4, 11, 14, 18 Microlevel, 26
Human rights lens, 1, 5, 6, 11, 13, 18, 32, 83 Milgram experiment, 64
Hypotheses, 32–34, 36, 41, 51, 87 Mixed methods, 2, 6, 7, 23, 27, 28, 32, 36, 37,
40, 51
I Multiple approaches, 6
Implementation, 6, 12, 15, 49, 51, 52 Multiple methods, 1, 31
Incarcerated older adults, 7 Multiple perspectives, 1, 5, 6, 31, 35, 36, 92
Individual transformation, 5
Indivisibility, 6, 11–13 N
Inductive analysis, 70, 72 Narrative data, 27, 35, 36, 51, 70, 71, 73, 78,
Inductive and Deductive Orientation 93
Assessment Survey (IDOAS), 40 National association of social workers
Inductive process, 7 (NASW), 2
Informal conversational interview, 57 Negative case analysis, 74, 75
Informed decision-making, 1, 5–7, 31, 33, 69, Neutrality, 51
78, 92 Nondiscrimination, 6, 11–14
Integration, 3, 4, 9 Numeric data, 1, 5, 7, 8, 27, 35, 69, 70, 79
Interdependence, 6, 11–13
Interdisciplinary, 5, 6 O
International Federation of Social Workers Objectivity, 50
(IFSW), 4, 28 Observation, 33, 36, 49, 51, 53, 56, 61–63, 65,
Interviewing strategies, 58 70, 75
Interviews, 36, 54, 56–61, 63, 65, 70, 75 Oppression, 6, 8, 23, 37, 92, 93
Oppression discrimination, 39
K Oral history interviews, 57, 65
Key stakeholders, 1, 5, 7, 12, 31, 32, 39,
50–56, 63, 70, 88, 89, 92 P
Participant observation, 62, 63, 65
L Participation, 1, 2, 5–7, 11–13, 32, 40, 49–51,
LGBT elders, 2, 52 53, 56, 61–64, 79, 91
LGBT persons, 16, 27 Pathos, 85, 86, 94
Liberation, 1, 84, 92, 93 Peer debriefing and support, 74, 75
Logic, 85, 86 Personal change, 3
Logos, 85, 86, 94 Persons with serious illnesses, 26, 73
Logotherapy, 69 Persons with terminal illnesses, 78
Longitudinal studies, 54 Persuasion, 85
Love, 69 Persuasive communication, 79, 83, 85, 86, 89,
94
M Photovoice, 38
Macro, 3, 9, 14, 23, 25, 28, 41, 84 Policy, 1, 2, 6, 14, 15, 24, 26, 38, 53, 70, 71,
Macro level, 25, 26, 28, 39 78, 83, 84, 86, 88–90, 95
Index
Policy advocacy, 89
Preparation, 8, 62, 71, 72
Prison, 2, 7, 8, 15, 16, 20, 27, 34, 35, 41–43,
52, 70, 73, 77–79, 89, 91, 94
Prison population, 35, 41
Probes, 57, 58
Professional identity, 3, 4, 9
Prolonged engagement, 54, 63, 74, 75
Proposition, 32, 39
Q T
Qualitative, 2, 6, 7, 23, 27, 28, 32, 34–38, 41,
49, 51–53, 55–58, 61, 62, 64, 65, 69–71,
74, 78
Qualitative data analysis, 65, 69–71, 74, 76
Quantitative, 2, 6–8, 23, 27, 28, 32, 34–37, 41,
49, 51–53, 55, 56, 61, 64, 69–71, 75, 78
Quantitative analysis, 2, 7, 8
R United Nations, 14–16, 19, 20, 31, 88, 94
Reflection, 3, 4, 8, 9, 37, 40, 42, 51, 55
Reflexivity, 74, 76, 77
Relational communication, 1, 5, 7, 40, 49–51,
53–56, 58, 64, 93
Research and evaluation that makes a
difference, 1, 5, 6, 23, 92
Research process, 4, 5, 8, 32, 49, 50, 52, 64,
74, 75, 84
Research related anxiety, 2, 5, 6
Research related empowerment, 27
Richmond, Mary, 23, 24
Rights research approach, 1, 3–7, 11, 13, 14,
17, 18, 20, 23, 26–28, 31–34, 37, 39,
49–58, 69, 70, 74, 83, 87, 89
S
Sharing findings, 5
99
Social contexts, 1, 5, 7, 40, 49–51, 64, 92
Social justice, 1, 2, 4, 7, 11, 17, 20, 26, 37, 39,
40, 74, 76, 83, 86, 91
Social problems, 5, 25
Social transformation, 3, 37–39, 49, 84, 91–93
Social work history, 28
Standardized open-ended interview, 57
Stanford prison experiment, 64
Subjectivity, 35, 50, 51
Theory building, 8
Theory testing, 34
Transcription, 71
Transparency, 2, 6, 11–13, 79
Triangulation, 56, 70, 74, 75
Trustworthiness, 58, 74, 75
U
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 4, 6,
11, 14, 16, 18, 19, 84, 91, 94
Universality, 2, 6, 11, 13, 79
V
Variables, 17, 18, 25, 53, 70, 71
Vision, 1, 2, 42, 92, 93
Visual coding, 71, 74
W
Well-being, 1, 5–7, 11, 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 25,
27, 28, 36, 37, 39, 40, 53, 70, 72, 73, 91, 93
Writing for social change, 76, 85, 91, 93
Writing up results, 78