Abstract
An emancipatory agenda is emerging within occupational science, building on the work of scholars who have advocated for a more critical, reflexive and socially responsive discipline. Although several analyses of the discipline's genesis and underpinning paradigms have been presented and there has been an increasing use of critical approaches in recent publications, little is known about how critical perspectives have been taken up in the occupational science literature. This study presents a critical interpretive synthesis, a methodology that enables synthesis of large amounts of diverse qualitative data and facilitates critical engagement with the assumptions that shape and inform a body of research. The study included articles published between 1996 and 2013 in the Journal of Occupational Science that implicitly or explicitly took up critical perspectives. It was conducted in relation to questions regarding: (a) how “critical” has been defined in this literature and (b) how critical perspectives are being utilized to inform occupational science. In addition to describing three “turns” in how critical perspectives have and are being employed, this article discusses the implications of these results in relation to the aim of developing as a socially responsive discipline.
Acknowledgements
This study was completed as part of the first author's Doctoral work, supervised by the second author, in the program of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences at Western University, Ontario, Canada. The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their helpful and constructive comments. Parts of this article were presented by both authors at the International Occupational Science Conference “Globalization & Occupational Science: Partnerships, Methods & Research” held in Minneapolis Minnesota, USA, October 2014. Partial funding support was received from the Ontario Trillium scholarship.