IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v277y2021ics0277953621002124.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lay participation with medical expertise in online self-care practices: Social knowledge (co)production in the Running Mania injury forum

Author

Listed:
  • Campbell, Patricia A.

Abstract

Recent literature on the public understanding of science has focused on replacing the deficit model of public communication in which experts disseminate information with one that encourages public participation and dialogue. Situated within this call for increased participation, this study looks at self-care practices in which medical expertise is not passively consumed by the layperson, but shared and (re)produced through arenas of lay practice. This collective knowledge production is facilitated by the online environment, which provides access to mediated medical knowledge and the ability to form communities in which users can negotiate this expertise and share their experiences. The laypersons examined here are members of the Canadian online collective, Running Mania, highlighting how this negotiation of expertise occurs in a “wellness” community. Drawing from member interviews and website observations of the site's injury forum, the study examines collective injury management using two dominant theoretical discourses surrounding lay knowledge and participation in medical expertise: the lay expert whose knowledge arises from experience and the expert patient whose knowledge base parallels dominant biomedical discourse. Using the coproduction model and the related concepts of tinkering and logic of care from material semiotics, the research examines how these knowledge forms articulate to produce an intermediary discourse unique to this collective's articulation of running and caring practices, a discourse that is enacted in individuals' embodied negotiation of these multiple forms of medical expertise. It suggests that the logic of care has the potential to bridge the expert/lay boundary since the need for persistent, attentive tinkering applies across epistemological divides: in “good” care practices, multiple expertises are needed, both expert and lay, to hold the body together.

Suggested Citation

  • Campbell, Patricia A., 2021. "Lay participation with medical expertise in online self-care practices: Social knowledge (co)production in the Running Mania injury forum," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:277:y:2021:i:c:s0277953621002124
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113880
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953621002124
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113880?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lorraine Holtslander & Nola Kornder & Nicole Letourneau & Hollie Turner & Barbara Paterson, 2012. "Finding straight answers: identifying the needs of parents and service providers of adolescents with type 1 diabetes to aid in the creation of an online support intervention," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(17‐18), pages 2419-2428, September.
    2. Kempner, Joanna & Bailey, John, 2019. "Collective self-experimentation in patient-led research: How online health communities foster innovation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Madeleine Akrich, 2010. "From Communities of Practice to Epistemic Communities: Health Mobilizations on the Internet," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 15(2), pages 116-132, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Smailhodzic, Edin & Boonstra, Albert & Langley, David J., 2021. "Social media enabled interactions in healthcare: Towards a taxonomy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
    2. August-Rae, Brianna C. & Baker, Jonathan T. & Buzzanell, Patrice M., 2024. "“Not just rebellious, it's revolutionary”: Do-it-yourself hormone replacement therapy as Liberatory Harm Reduction," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 345(C).
    3. Tian, Xiaoli & Zhang, Sai, 2022. "Expert or experiential knowledge? How knowledge informs situated action in childcare practices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Enric Senabre Hidalgo & Mad P. Ball & Morgane Opoix & Bastian Greshake Tzovaras, 2022. "Shared motivations, goals and values in the practice of personal science: a community perspective on self-tracking for empirical knowledge," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Claire Edwards & Etaoine Howlett & Madeleine Akrich & Vololona Rabeharisoa, 2012. "Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in France and Ireland: parents' groups' scientific and political framing of an unsettled condition," CSI Working Papers Series 024, Centre de Sociologie de l'Innovation (CSI), Mines ParisTech.
    3. Kuchinskaya, Olga & Parker, Lisa S., 2018. "‘Recurrent losers unite’: Online forums, evidence-based activism, and pregnancy loss," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 216(C), pages 74-80.
    4. Almudena Alameda Cuesta & à lvaro Pazos Garciandía & Cristina Oter Quintana & Marta Elena Losa Iglesias, 2021. "Fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity: Illness Experiences," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 30(1), pages 32-41, January.
    5. Rojatz, Daniela & Forster, Rudolf, 2017. "Self-help organisations as patient representatives in health care and policy decision-making," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(10), pages 1047-1052.
    6. Madeleine Akrich & Orla O'Donovan & Vololona Rabeharisoa, 2013. "The entanglement of scientific and political claims:towards a new form of patients’ activism," CSI Working Papers Series 035, Centre de Sociologie de l'Innovation (CSI), Mines ParisTech.
    7. Raz, Aviad & Jongsma, Karin R. & Rimon-Zarfaty, Nitzan & Späth, Elisabeth & Bar-Nadav, Bosmat & Vaintropov, Ella & Schicktanz, Silke, 2018. "Representing autism: Challenges of collective representation in German and Israeli associations for and of autistic people," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 65-72.
    8. Madeleine Akrich & Maire Leane & Celia Roberts & João Arriscado Nunes, 2012. "Practising childbirth activism: a politics of evidence," CSI Working Papers Series 023, Centre de Sociologie de l'Innovation (CSI), Mines ParisTech.
    9. Alexandre Hannud Abdo & Jean‐Philippe Cointet & Pascale Bourret & Alberto Cambrosio, 2022. "Domain‐topic models with chained dimensions: Charting an emergent domain of a major oncology conference," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(7), pages 992-1011, July.
    10. Schneid, Iris & Raz, Aviad E., 2020. "The mask of autism: Social camouflaging and impression management as coping/normalization from the perspectives of autistic adults," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 248(C).
    11. Lhoste, Evelyne F., 2020. "Can do-it-yourself laboratories open up the science, technology, and innovation research system to civil society?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:277:y:2021:i:c:s0277953621002124. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.