Why do we centre lived experiences in intimate partner violence research?

Lived experience research bridges the gap between theory and reality, ensuring that intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors’ voices shape policies, interventions, and support systems. By prioritizing survivor perspectives, we create more relevant, impactful, and compassionate solutions.

5 Reasons to Include Lived Experience in Intimate Partner Violence Research:

1. Provides contextual understanding – By keeping people with lived experience (PWLE) at the centre, it provides us with a better understanding of the they have experienced, their perceptions and emotions, and helps to provide a social and cultural context.
2. Tailors research impact – By working with people with lived experience, we can understand their needs and the needs of those we are trying to find solutions for. This will lead to real-world utility, allowing the solutions to be tailored and more effective for survivors, and make real impact within the communities.
3. Promotes advocacy for return of power – Allowing people with lived experience to be involved in the research process leads to dismantling of traditional hierarchy, making people with lived experience the “experts”. This allows them to be part of the decision making and gives them shared ownership in the process.
4. Amplifies survivor experiences – Often times, survivors are silenced and are not given the opportunity to share their experiences. However, centering research around people with lived experience creates a platform for survivors to share their stories and become knowledge creators.
5. Directly addresses community needs – By having people with lived experience as part of the process, we can identify gaps within their communities and create actionable solutions to address those gaps.

Source: 

1. Beames et al. (2021). A New Normal: Integrating Lived Experience Into Scientific Data Syntheses. Frontiers in psychiatry, 12, 763005. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.763005
2. Gupta et al. (2023). Understanding the identity of lived experience researchers and providers: a conceptual framework and systematic narrative review. Research involvement and engagement, 9(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-023-00439-0
3. Baum, F., et al. (2006). Participatory action research. Journal of epidemiology and community health, 60(10), 854–857. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2004.028662
4. Alyce, S., et al. (2023). Centring the voices of survivors of child sexual abuse in research: an act of hermeneutic justice. Frontiers in psychology, 14, 1178141. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1178141
5. Nelson et al. (2024). Engaging people with lived experiences on community advisory boards in community-based participatory research: a scoping review protocol. BMJ open, 14(3), e078479. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-078479