Skip to content
Home page - The Prevention Centre

Primary menu

  • About us
    • Our vision and mission
    • Our approach
    • Our partners
    • Our structure and governance
  • About prevention
    • What is prevention?
    • What are the benefits of prevention for health and wellbeing?
    • What is the burden of chronic disease?
    • What are the economic benefits of prevention?
    • What are the co-benefits of prevention?
  • Our people
  • Our work
    • Research projects
    • Knowledge syntheses
    • A systems thinking approach
    • Dynamic simulation modelling
    • Collaboration for Enhanced Research Impact (CERI)
  • Our impact
    • Research impact
  • Resource hub
  • Events
  • News
  • Engage with us
    • The Chronicle newsletter
    • Emerging Leaders Network
    • Communities of practice
    • Work or study with us
    • Contact us
Search
What are you looking for?

You can search across all our content by topic, methodology and content type.

    Home > Resource hub > Community of practice: Systems and citizen science for people with disability

Community of practice: Systems and citizen science for people with disability

In this community of practice, two citizen science projects described how they have engaged adults living with disability to support action and advocacy for inclusive physical environments and service provision.

Session overview

This session focused on the use of citizen science with disabled adults to support action and advocacy for inclusive physical environments and service provision. We note the use of both person-first (“people with disability”) and identity-first (“disabled people”) language in this summary, in line with the preferences of our presenters, the teams and citizen scientists they represent.

We heard about two citizen science projects in this space:

The Dignity Project, presented by Kelsey Chapman and Angel Dixon

Angel and Kelsey shared how they designed and conducted citizen science in partnership with disabled citizens to produce recommendations for action by policymakers and service providers to ensure dignity is preserved in interactions with health services and environments (see more here ).

  • The Dignity project is a research and advocacy initiative which aims to create systems that increase dignified experiences for people with disability through citizen science.
  • The Dignity project is led by people with and without disability, citizens and academic researchers in partnership to deliver meaningful outcomes.
  • Over the past two years, the team have undertaken a suite of projects to understand what dignity means for people with disability and how to ensure that people with disability have dignified experiences and interactions in mainstream services and systems.
  • The project used an extreme citizen science approach, involving citizen scientists in all phases of the research and acknowledging them as integral partners. This included a range of activities with citizen scientists including qualitative data collection to gather and make sense of information about their use of amenities, services and systems using a method called wayfinding.

Findings from this project were presented under four key themes along with recommendations for each theme:

  1. Universal design and/or eliminating barriers, with a focus on designing based on key principles such as flexible use that work to make environments, services and products usable by the highest number of people and with the goal of removing barriers for all users:
    • Decisions about funding and spending must include marginalised voices
    • Co-design and collaboratively identify priorities for improving access
    • Retro-fit existing infrastructure, and if not possible, seek alternative means for inclusion.
  2. Improve system navigation and sense-making with information:
    • Information that is inclusive, accessible, visible, transparent, consistent and accurate is an important mechanism for maintaining and supporting dignity.
  3. Importance of frontline staff to retain a sense of dignity:
    • Systems must support staff to be engaged and empathic, which means organisational pressures such as time, resources, skills, and COVID-19 must be addressed, and organisations are urged to implement empathy training that’s co-designed by people with disability.
  4. Creating spaces for voice, choice and independence:
    • Community consultation and co-design of system change is necessary to better understand the system-specific barriers that limit voice and choice
    • Opportunities for people with disability to express choice and enact independence should be embedded across policy and procedure activities and will need to consider the organisational factors and constraints specific to each service.

Citizen science examining perceived walkability, presented by Dr Tamara Bozovic

Tamara provided insights about how they applied citizen science to examine walkability of local neighbourhoods in Auckland with blind people and the takeaways generated.

  • Citizen science was used after interviewing 56 people, half of whom had at least some difficulty with one or more of the following: walking / seeing / hearing / remembering or concentrating. The interviews examined walking behaviour and specific features of the environment perceived as barriers to walking, as well as aspects enjoyed (see a brief video of interview findings here). These participants were then invited to join the research team as citizen scientists.
  • Four people aged 40+ participated as citizen scientists, of whom two were blind; one had some difficulty walking and was the primary carer of her husband, having dementia; and another was non-disabled.
  • Citizen scientists were asked to document walks of their choice and to document anything about their environment that may support or hinder walkability. The Our Voice Discovery Tool mobile app was used to enable data gathering of photo, text and/or audio data. The app also automatically tracks geolocation.
  • This process highlighted the potential of the app but also issues and limitations in terms of usability for blind people. Special arrangements were worked out with the blind citizen scientists, such as walking with another person who would take photos for them.
  • Findings demonstrated a need for greater inclusion and accessibility of data gathering tools to enable use by disabled citizen scientists. Several adaptions and recommendations were made, such as using wearable cameras and recording devices with GPS and physical switches to enable use by blind people.
  • Findings also highlighted the differences between a citizen science approach and traditional interviews, regarding features considered important for walkability: the citizen science approach seemed to facilitate a more granular and rich data collection, including ‘micro’ features (such as for instance specific footpath obstructions), mentioned more often and presented in more detail than in the interviews.
  • Finally, Tamara offered reflections about the reasons for this difference, probably having to do with the relative ease of inputting feedback through the app (photo, voice recording, and “good and/or bad” button).

Visual summary

Download a graphic illustration of this community of practice session here.

More about this community of practice

The Community of Practice for Citizen Science in Prevention brings together people from research, policy, practice, and community settings to share knowledge, ideas, and resources to support the design, delivery and evaluation of citizen science in prevention.

Details

DATE 28 Sep 2022

TYPE Videos

Prevention experts

  • Kelsey Champman

    The Dignity Project
    Head shot of Kelsey Chapman
  • Angel Dixon OAM

    The Dignity Project
    Headshot of Angel Dixon
  • Dr Tamara Bozovic

    Research Fellow, UWE Bristol
    Headshot of Tamara Bosovic

Topics

  • Priority populations ,

Prevention methodologies

  • New methods and tools ,

Related projects

  • Harnessing the power of citizen science for prevention

    Illustration of many heads made out of cogs, with loose cogs flying between them
SHARE
TweetLinkedInFacebookEmail

More resources

  • Community of practice: Scaling the voice of older adults

    Resource category: Videos Videos
    Date 15 Mar 2023
  • What makes a neighbourhood healthy, active and happy to live in?

    Resource category: Videos Videos
    Date 23 Jan 2023
  • Seminar: Multisectoral collaboration and its impact on health and wellbeing

    Resource category: Videos Videos
    Date 08 Dec 2022

Acknowledgement of Country

The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre acknowledges Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Australians and Traditional Custodians of the lands where we live, learn, and work.

Newsletter sign-up

Newsletter

Follow the Prevention Centre

Follow us

  • TwitterTwitter
  • LinkedinLinkedin
  • YoutubeYoutube
  • PodcastPodcast

Funding Partners

The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre is funded by the NHMRC, Australian Government Department of Health, ACT Health, Cancer Council Australia, NSW Ministry of Health, Wellbeing SA, Tasmanian Department of Health, and VicHealth. The Australian Government also contributed through the Medical Research Future Fund. Queensland Health became a financial contributor in 2022. The Prevention Centre is administered by the Sax Institute.

©2023 The Sax Institute.

Footer Navigation

  • Contact us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Copyright
  • Terms of Use
  • Sitemap

BROWSER NOT SUPPORTED

It seems you’re using a browser that we no longer support, so this site might not function as expected.

Please use Chrome, Safari, Firefox or Edge to visit this website.

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!