This paper engages with new materialist theory to reimagine transdisciplinary health research. In particular, we draw upon Karen Barad’s theory of agential realism and concept of apparatus to rethink the processes of doing transdisciplinary research. A Baradian inspired approach to transdisciplinarity encourages us to not only explore ways of knowing health phenomena differently by working across disciplines, but also to pay close attention to the politics and practices in such research. We offer a case study based on a two-year transdisciplinary research project focused on the health condition known as Low Energy Availability (LEA) in sportswomen. Through this case we highlight three key ways that Barad’s concept of apparatus helped us know transdisciplinarity differently: (1) Reading disciplines through each other, (2) Intra-actions and the everyday performativity of disciplinary boundaries, and (3) Troubling the boundaries of the apparatus. Ultimately this paper illustrates the value in feminist new materialist conceptual tools for encouraging different questions of transdisciplinary research as ethico-onto-epistemological practices, processes, and politics of knowledge production.
AlbrechtGFreemanSHigginbothamN (1998) Complexity and human health: The case for a transdisciplinary paradigm. Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry22(1): 55–92.
2.
AugustW (2005) Māori women: Bodies, spaces, sacredness and mana. New Zealand Geographer61(2): 117–123.
3.
AustinWParkCGobleE (2008) From interdisciplinary to transdisciplinary research: A case study. Qualitative Health Research18(4): 557–564.
4.
BaradK (2007) Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press.
BerbaryL (2020) Theorypracticing differently: Re-imagining the public, health and social research. Leisure Sciences. Epub ahead of print 30January. DOI: 10.1080/01490400.2020.1720872.
7.
BozalekVZembylasM (2017) Diffraction or reflection? Sketching the contours of two methodologies in educational research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education30(2): 111–127.
8.
ChoiBPakA (2006) Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: Definitions, objectives and evidence of effectiveness. Clinical and Investigative Medicine29(6): 351–364.
9.
CostelloJBieuzenFBleaklyC (2014) Where are all the women in sport and exercise research?European Journal of Sports Science14(8): 847–851.
10.
DaleyA (2010) Reflections on reflexivity and critical reflection as critical research practices. Affilia25(1): 68–82.
11.
DaviesB (2014) Reading anger in early childhood intra-actions: A diffractive analysis. Qualitative Inquiry20(6): 734–741.
12.
DusekT (2001) Influence of high intensity training on menstrual cycle disorders in athletes. Croatian Medical Journal42(1): 79–82.
13.
EvansJ (2014) Ideational border crossings: If the intellectual relations don’t get you, then the social and political will. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education35(1): 45–60.
14.
EvansJDaviesB (2011) New directions, new questions? Social theory, education and embodiment. Sport, Education and Society16(3): 263–278.
15.
Fausto-SterlingA (2003) The problem with sex/gender and nature/nurture. In: WilliamsSJBirkeLBendelowG (eds) Debating Biology: Sociological Reflections on Health, Medicine and Society. New York: Taylor and Francis, 123–132.
16.
FraserS (2020) Doing ontopolitically-oriented research: Synthesising concepts from the ontological turn for alcohol and other drug research and other social sciences. International Journal of Drug Policy82: 102610.
17.
FrostS (2016) Biocultural Creatures: Toward a New Theory of the Human. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
18.
FullagarS (2020) Diffracting mind-body relations: Feminist materialism and the entanglement of physical culture in women’s recovery from depression. In: NewmanJThorpeHAndrewsD (eds) Sport, Physical Culture and the Moving Body: Materialisms, Technologies, and Ecologies. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 170–192.
19.
HandforthRTaylorCA (2016) Doing academic writing differently: A feminist bricolage. Gender and Education28(5): 627–643.
20.
HarawayD (1991) Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. London: Free Association Books.
21.
HardingS (1996) Standpoint epistemology (a feminist version): How social disadvantage creates epistemic advantage. In: TurnerS (ed.) Social Theory and Sociology: The Classics and Beyond. Oxford: Blackwell, 146–160.
22.
HeywoodL (2011a) Affective infrastructures: Toward a neuropsychology of sport. Frontiers in Evolutionary Neuroscience3: 1–5.
23.
HeywoodL (2011b) Hunger, emotions, and sport: A biocultural approach. Symploke19(1–2): 119–142.
24.
HeywoodL (2015) ‘Strange borrowing’: Affective neuroscience, neoliberalism and the ‘cruelly optimistic’ gendered bodies of CrossFit. In: NallyCSmithA (eds) Twenty-First Century Feminism: Forming and Performing Femininity. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 17–40.
25.
HeywoodL (2017) Interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in physical cultural studies. In: SilkDAndrewsDThorpeH (eds) Routledge Handbook of Physical Cultural Studies. New York: Routledge, 42–50.
26.
HeywoodLGarciaJWilsonD (2010) Minding the gap: Appropriate evolutionary perspectives toward the integration of the sciences and humanities. Science and Education19: 505–522.
HultmanKTaguchiHL (2010) Challenging anthropocentric analysis of visual data: A relational materialist methodological approach to educational research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education23(5): 525–542.
29.
IrniS (2010) Ageing Apparatuses at Work: Transdiscilinary Negotiations of Sex, Age and Materiality. Åbo: Åbo Akademi University Press.
30.
IrniS (2013) The politics of materiality: Affective encounters in a transdisciplinary debate. European Journal of Women’s Studies20(4): 347–360.
31.
JacksonAMazzeiL (2013) Plugging one text into another: Thinking with theory in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry19(4): 261–271.
32.
JetteSVertinskyPNgC (2014) Biomedicine and balance: Chinese-Canadian women negotiate pregnancy-related lifestyle directives and risk. Health, Risk & Society16(6): 494–511.
33.
KaufmannJ (2017) Meaning and the measuring apparatus. Qualitative Inquiry23(5): 395–398.
34.
KirbyV (ed.) (2017) What If Culture Was Nature All Along?Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
35.
LawrenceRDespresC (2004) Futures of transdisciplinarity. Futures36: 397–405.
36.
LevyGHalseCWrightJ (2016) Down the methodological rabbit hole: Thinking diffractively with resistant data. Qualitative Research16(2): 183–197.
37.
LiberatiEGGorlisMScarattiG (2016) Invisible walls within multidisciplinary teams: Disciplinary boundaries and their effects on integrated care. Social Science and Medicine150(February): 31–39.
38.
LogueDMadiganSDelahuntE, et al. (2018) Low energy availability in athletes: A review of prevalence, dietary patterns, physiological health, and sports performance. Sports Medicine48(1): 73–96.
39.
LuptonD (2019) ‘Things that matter’: Poetic inquiry and more-than-human health literacy. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health. Epub ahead of print 13November. DOI: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1690564.
40.
LykkeN (2004) Women’s/gender/feminist studies: A post-disciplinary discipline? In: BraidottiRJustEMensinkR (eds) The Making of European Women’s Studies. Utrecht: Utrecht University/Athena, 91–102.
41.
Magill-EvansJHodgeMDarrahJ (2002) Establishing a transdisciplinary research team in academia. Journal of Applied Health31(4): 222–226.
42.
MarcasonW (2016) Female athlete triad or Relative Energy Deficiency in Sports (RED-S): Is there a difference?Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics116(4): 744.
43.
MarkulaP (2019) What is new about new materialism for sport sociology? Reflections on body, movement, and culture. Sociology of Sport Sociology36(1): 1–11.
44.
McDonaldB (2013) The reproduction of biological ‘race’ through physical education textbooks and curriculum. European Physical Education Review19(2): 183–198.
45.
McDougallAGoldszmidtMKinsellaE, et al. (2016) Collaboration and entanglement: An actor-network theory analysis of team-based intraprofessional care for patients with advanced heart failure. Social Science and Medicine164: 108–117.
46.
MountjoyMSundgot-BorgenJKBurkeL, et al. (2018) IOC consensus statement on Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S): 2018 update. British Journal of Sports Medicine52(11): 687–697.
47.
PhillipsDKLarsonML (2013) The teacher-student writing conference reimagined: Entangled becoming-writing-conferencing. Gender and Education25(6): 722–737.
48.
Pitts-TaylorV (ed.) (2016) Mattering: Feminism, Science, and Materialism. New York: New York University Press.
49.
ProphetJPritchardH (2015) Performative apparatus and diffractive practices: An account of Artificial Life art. Artificial Life21(3): 332–343.
50.
RoyD (2007) Somatic matters: Becoming molecular in molecular biology. Rhizomes: Cultural Studies in Emerging Knowledge14. Available at: http://www.rhizomes.net/issue14/roy/roy.html (accessed 2 February 2020).
51.
SchofieldKThorpeHSimsS (2020) Compartmentalised disciplines: Why low energy availability research calls for transdisciplinary approaches. Performance Enhancement and Health. Epub ahead of print 26July. DOI: 10.1016/j.peh.2020.100172.
52.
SehgalM (2014) Diffractive propositions: Reading Alfred North Whitehead with Donna Haraway and Karen Barad. Parallax20(3): 188–201.
53.
SlaterJMcLay-CookeRBrownR, et al. (2016) Female recreational exercisers at risk for low energy availability. International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism26(5): 421–427.
54.
SmithP (2007) A transdisciplinary approach to research on work and health: What is it, what could if contribute, and what are the challenges?Critical Public Health17(2): 159–169.
55.
SpeerS (2002) What can conversation analysis contribute to feminist methodologies? Putting reflexivity into practice. Discourse and Society13: 783–803.
56.
SymeS (2008) The science of team science: Assessing the value of transdisciplinary research. American Journal of Preventative Medicine31(2): S94–S95.
57.
TaguchiHL (2012) A diffractive and Deleuzian approach to analysing interview data. Feminist Theory13(3): 265–281.
TaylorCUlmerJHughesC (2020) Transdisciplinary Feminist Research: Innovations in Theory, Method and Practice. New York: Routlege.
60.
ThorpeH (2014) Moving bodies beyond the social/biological divide. Sport, Education and Society19(5): 666–686.
61.
ThorpeH (2016) Athletic women’s experiences of amenorrhea: Biomedical technologies, somatic ethics and embodied subjectivities. Sociology of Sport Journal33(1): 1–13.
62.
ThorpeHClarkM (2020) Gut feminism, new materialisms and sportswomen’s embodied health: The case of RED-S in endurance athletes. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health12(1): 1–17.
63.
ThorpeHBriceJRollestonA (2020) Decolonizing sport science: High performance sport, Indigenous cultures, and women’s rugby. Sociology of Sport Journal37(2): 73–84.
64.
ThorpeHClarkMBriceM (2019) Sportswomen and biocultural creatures: Understanding embodied health experiences across sporting cultures. Biosocieties. Epub ahead of print 28November. DOI: 10.1057/s41292-019-00176-2.
65.
van der TuinI (2011) ‘A different starting point, a different metaphysics’: Reading Bergson and Barad diffractively. Hypatia26(1): 22–42.
66.
WilsonE (2015) Gut Feminism. London: Duke University Press.
