Disability as Method: Researching Intracranial Hypertension through Crip-Chronic Time

Book chapter

Kelly Moes
Lynette Pretorius, Basil Cahusac de Caux, The Researcher's Compass: Choosing Your Paradigm, Finding Your Voice, [in press]

Cite

APA Click to copy
Moes, K. Disability as Method: Researching Intracranial Hypertension through Crip-Chronic Time. In L. Pretorius & B. C. de Caux (Eds.), The Researcher's Compass: Choosing Your Paradigm, Finding Your Voice.

Chicago/Turabian Click to copy
Moes, Kelly. “Disability as Method: Researching Intracranial Hypertension through Crip-Chronic Time.” In The Researcher's Compass: Choosing Your Paradigm, Finding Your Voice, edited by Lynette Pretorius and Basil Cahusac de Caux, n.d.

MLA Click to copy
Moes, Kelly. “Disability as Method: Researching Intracranial Hypertension through Crip-Chronic Time.” The Researcher's Compass: Choosing Your Paradigm, Finding Your Voice, edited by Lynette Pretorius and Basil Cahusac de Caux.

BibTeX Click to copy

@incollection{kelly-a,
  title = {Disability as Method: Researching Intracranial Hypertension through Crip-Chronic Time},
  chapter = {[in press]},
  author = {Moes, Kelly},
  editor = {Pretorius, Lynette and de Caux, Basil Cahusac},
  booktitle = {The Researcher's Compass: Choosing Your Paradigm, Finding Your Voice}
}

Abstract:

This chapter reflects on a doctoral study that employed a transformative paradigm to explore the lived experience of Intracranial Hypertension, using Critical Disability Studies as a methodological approach. Centring the question 'whose knowledge counts?' shifted research questions away from pathologised framings towards exploring how people with Intracranial Hypertension make their lived experience visible, knowable, and valued.

This paradigm accommodated the multiplicity and fluidity inherent to chronic illness experience. Drawing on Price and Kerschbaum's disability as method, the research applies a qualitative approach incorporating a survey and asynchronous Facebook-mediated discussion designed around the crip time of both researcher and participants.

The chapter addresses the challenges of navigating insider positionality, balancing experiential and clinical perspectives, and reaching completeness when researching experiences that are continuous and ever-changing. It concludes by reflecting on how working within this paradigm shaped researcher identity, deepened understandings of cripistemology, and reoriented research as collective knowledge-building through methodological fluidity.