Definitions of indicators by intersectional dimension
| Dimension | Indicator | Scale |
|---|---|---|
| D1. Social demand for research | D1.i1 Lawsuit initiated by affected population (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D1. Social demand for research | D1.i2 Periodic Validation of Objectives (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D1. Social demand for research | D1.i3 Agenda and agreed times (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D2. Participation in definition of the problem | D2.i1 Co-design of the problem (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D2. Participation in definition of the problem | D2.i2 Community-defined instruments (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D2. Participation in definition of the problem | D2.i3 Decision Traceability (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D3. Epistemological plurality of conceptualization | D3.i1 Community/indigenous knowledge as a conceptual basis (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D3. Epistemological plurality of conceptualization | D3.i2 Legitimized Artistic/Ritual Languages (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D3. Epistemological plurality of conceptualization | D3.i3 Non-hierarchical co-existence of theoretical foundation (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D4. Population and territorial heterogeneity | D4.i1 Subgroup Segmentation (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D4. Population and territorial heterogeneity | D4.i2 Adapting Instruments and Supports (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D4. Population and territorial heterogeneity | D4.i3 Attention to territorial particularities (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D4. Population and territorial heterogeneity | D4.i4 Multilingualism/cultural mediation (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D5. Redistribution of epistemic power | D5.i1 Co-research (roles and attributions) (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D5. Redistribution of epistemic power | D5.i2 Methodological and Data Property (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D5. Redistribution of epistemic power | D5.i3 Situated devolution and community control (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D6. Relationality and affectivity | D6.i1 Care and Ethics of Encounter (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D6. Relationality and affectivity | D6.i2 Building Safe Spaces (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D6. Relationality and affectivity | D6.i3 Community rhythms/temporalities (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D7. Situated reflexivity and runout | D7.i1 Positioning of the research team (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D7. Situated reflexivity and runout | D7.i2 Recording Conflicts and Learning (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D7. Situated reflexivity and runout | D7.i3 Accountability mechanisms (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| Dimension | Indicator | Scale |
|---|---|---|
| D1. Social demand for research | D1.i1 Lawsuit initiated by affected population (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D1. Social demand for research | D1.i2 Periodic Validation of Objectives (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D1. Social demand for research | D1.i3 Agenda and agreed times (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D2. Participation in definition of the problem | D2.i1 Co-design of the problem (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D2. Participation in definition of the problem | D2.i2 Community-defined instruments (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D2. Participation in definition of the problem | D2.i3 Decision Traceability (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D3. Epistemological plurality of conceptualization | D3.i1 Community/indigenous knowledge as a conceptual basis (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D3. Epistemological plurality of conceptualization | D3.i2 Legitimized Artistic/Ritual Languages (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D3. Epistemological plurality of conceptualization | D3.i3 Non-hierarchical co-existence of theoretical foundation (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D4. Population and territorial heterogeneity | D4.i1 Subgroup Segmentation (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D4. Population and territorial heterogeneity | D4.i2 Adapting Instruments and Supports (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D4. Population and territorial heterogeneity | D4.i3 Attention to territorial particularities (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D4. Population and territorial heterogeneity | D4.i4 Multilingualism/cultural mediation (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D5. Redistribution of epistemic power | D5.i1 Co-research (roles and attributions) (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D5. Redistribution of epistemic power | D5.i2 Methodological and Data Property (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D5. Redistribution of epistemic power | D5.i3 Situated devolution and community control (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D6. Relationality and affectivity | D6.i1 Care and Ethics of Encounter (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D6. Relationality and affectivity | D6.i2 Building Safe Spaces (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D6. Relationality and affectivity | D6.i3 Community rhythms/temporalities (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D7. Situated reflexivity and runout | D7.i1 Positioning of the research team (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D7. Situated reflexivity and runout | D7.i2 Recording Conflicts and Learning (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| D7. Situated reflexivity and runout | D7.i3 Accountability mechanisms (0–2) | 0 = No; 1 = Partial; 2 = Yes |
| How to use |
|---|
| (1) For each study/project, answer the indicators with 0 = No, 1 = Partial, 2 = Yes, providing evidence (page, citation or file) |
| (2) Calculate the score per dimension by adding its indicators. Maximum score per dimension = 6 (if you have 3 indicators) or 8 (if you have 4) |
| (3) For the 7-dimensional matrix, assign an overall rating per dimension (0–2) based on the evidence of the indicators |
| (4) Add the 7 overall scores to the Total (0–14) and compute % integration = (Total/14)*100 |
| Suggested interpretation of the % integration |
| • 0–33%: Low integration (nominal presence) |
| • 34–66%: Medium integration (partial and/or irregular) |
| • 67–100%: High integration (structural and cross-sectional) |
| Methodological note (APA 7) |
| Brizuela (2024, January 29). Interseccionalitat en recerca: Possibilitats i límits [Seminario]. Doctoral School, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona |
| Empirical base: matrix derived from the analysis of 46 articles (2018–2024) in educational, health, territorial and cultural contexts, including PAR methodologies, social cartography, artistic practices and community devices, among others |
| How to use |
|---|
| (1) For each study/project, answer the indicators with 0 = No, 1 = Partial, 2 = Yes, providing evidence (page, citation or file) |
| (2) Calculate the score per dimension by adding its indicators. Maximum score per dimension = 6 (if you have 3 indicators) or 8 (if you have 4) |
| (3) For the 7-dimensional matrix, assign an overall rating per dimension (0–2) based on the evidence of the indicators |
| (4) Add the 7 overall scores to the Total (0–14) and compute % integration = (Total/14)*100 |
| Suggested interpretation of the % integration |
| • 0–33%: Low integration (nominal presence) |
| • 34–66%: Medium integration (partial and/or irregular) |
| • 67–100%: High integration (structural and cross-sectional) |
| Methodological note (APA 7) |
| Empirical base: matrix derived from the analysis of 46 articles (2018–2024) in educational, health, territorial and cultural contexts, including PAR methodologies, social cartography, artistic practices and community devices, among others |
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.