This research is guided by feminist research principles in that it sets out to make a
positive impact on the lives of women by setting the case for housing providers to
improve their practice in relation to domestic abuse. Feminist theory asserts that
gender inequality is the cause and consequence of women’s inequality. Men’s abuse of women according to Mullender (2002) can only be understood in the wider concept
of all of its forms in a social system of male control of women (Stanko,1985). In
30
control and the regulation of a woman in the household. In his explanation of coercive
control Stark (2012) argues that it exploits and reinforces sexual inequalities in larger
society.
The starting point of this thesis is an acknowledgment of that, the social housing sector
mirrors wider society in that it implicitly accepts male violence, that it does not robustly
respond to perpetrators of domestic abuse and at best; only provides a patchy
response to male violence and in some cases limited support to victims. As Butler
(1988, p.522) argues:
‘feminist theory has sought to understand the way in which systemic or pervasive political and cultural structures are enacted and reproduced through
individual acts and practices, and how the analysis of ostensibly personal
situations is clarified through situating the issues in a broader and shared
cultural context’.
Hess-Biber (2007) argues there is not a single methodology of feminist research,
rather there are multiple lenses. Lather (1991) notes that feminist researchers
consciously use research to help participants understand and change their situations,
whilst Reinharz (1993) argues research should be judged on the effect it has on
improving women's lives. The ultimate aim of the research is to improve the lives of
women and children by thematic analysis of two areas of research – namely domestic abuse and social housing.
31
This research seeks to increase knowledge and understanding of social housing
providers in identifying and responding to victims and perpetrators. Whilst this research
takes a feminist perspective in seeking to positively impact on the role of women and
children in social housing; it will also draw on my dual role of researcher/practitioner
as highlighted earlier in this chapter. Burrell and Morgan (1979) argue that the type of
data collected is more subjective where the experience and insights are of a unique
and personal nature. Burrell and Morgan (1979) assert that what people say and how
it is interpreted, what they do and say are important for an action researcher for
knowledge creation. The dual role as a researcher and practitioner and the desire to
improve the housing sector response to domestic abuse consequently means that this
research is, in essence, framed as feminist action research.
Action research is often cited as originating from social psychologist, Kurt Lewin
(Adelman, 1993). Lewin is thought to have first used the term ‘action research’ in 1944 and used it again in 1946 describing it as ‘a comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action and research leading to social action’. He is quoted asserting that ‘research that produces nothing but books will not suffice’ (Lewin 1946, p.35) and this resonates with my drive to influence the housing sector in
relation to domestic abuse and reflects the principles of feminist research in judging
the impact research has on women’s lives. One of the key points about Lewin’s approach to research was his consideration of the integration of theory and practice
(Kolb,1984, p.9). Coghlan and Brannic (2014) make an important point in defining
action research as the focus being on research in action rather than research about
action. Levin (2012) suggests that action research has a ‘Janus face’ in that it is a head which faces in two directions where one face is concerned in addressing specific
32
issues and the other is to be rigorously scientific is how these issues are investigated
and addressed. This highlights the complexities of researcher/practitioner values in
researching a field which the researcher is invested in.
Kincheloe (1995) makes the point that researchers should embrace this exchange
between personal and practical values and that critical action research does not intend
to merely set out to understand or describe the world of practice, but in fact to transform
it. The researcher’s role in practice in this action research is key in understanding the sector and thereby has a view in transforming it. Meyer (2000) points out that the
strength of action research is in producing solutions to actual issues and that such
research has the opportunity to empower practitioners within their role in engaging with
the research and the potential of the outcomes that have potential to be implemented
as a result. This study is concerned with empowering housing providers to improve
their practice which in turn, has the potential to have a positive impact on their
customers and hold perpetrators to account. Kemmis and McTaggart (2000) suggest
that in studying practice means to change it and that in turn practice itself is actually
changed in order to study it (Waterman et al., 2001). In empowering housing providers,
this dual role represents an opportunity to influence practice via my role as a housing
professional and co-founder of the Domestic Abuse Housing Alliance giving me the
opportunity to share the research with fellow housing practitioners.
In action research the role of researcher is obviously key, as Guba and Lincoln (1990)
assert, a consideration of the philosophical stance or worldview is important. In this
thesis I am clear that my worldview is from within the sector and the raison d’etre of the research is to improve the housing sector response to domestic abuse from within.
33
On completion of this doctoral thesis, I will take the opportunity to reflect on the practice
identified and seek to implement any changes to practice for the organisation I am
employed by. Koshy (2010) suggests, reiterating Meyer’s point, that action research is a method used for improving practice, involving not only action, but also evaluation
and critical reflection. This dual role of practitioner and researcher in action research
and its complexities is discussed in more detail in chapter five. The action part of this
research is discussed in the conclusion in relation to findings and the action deriving
from them.