Summary Self-managed shelters claim that participants who have been homeless, are better able to run a shelter than regular providers. Little research has investigated self-managed shelters. In this paper we described the experiences of participants and peer workers with empowerment processes in Je Eigen Stek (Your own place, JES), a self-managed shelter, based on an eight year qualitative responsive evaluation. FindingsWe distinguish three clusters of individual experiences: 1) enthusiastic, 2) moderate to critical, and 3) negative, respectively associated with decreasing engagement with social life in and management of JES. Those not engaged can still benefit materially and from the freedom of choice JES offers, which is generally appreciated. Empowerment provides a useful framework and JES in turn offers new insights into the dialectical nature of empowerment. Empowerment consists of freedom of choice and capacity development and neither should be emphasized over the other. The emphasis in JES is on freedom of choice, which does not automatically lead to developing capacities. Social workers try to balance both aspects of empowerment.Applications Our analysis shows how offering freedom of choice can contribute to empowerment, although social workers need to be aware that participants might opt not to work on capacity development.
DOCUMENT
Participant empowerment is a foundational goal of selforganisedhomeless care. We aim to understand how a selforganisedsetting contributes to participants' empowerment.The data we analysed (56 interviews, both open and semistructured)were generated in a longitudinal participatorycase study into Je Eigen Stek (Your own place, JES), a lowcostshelter for people experiencing homelessness in theNetherlands. JES participants experienced the freedom ofchoice and influence on their living environment. JES' fluidstructure allowed participants to adapt the program to theirdesires and needs, though participants were sometimes aspects to be either enabling or entrapping. We found someaspects (e.g., size, freedom of choice) could be entrapping orenabling, depending on personal factors. Our analysis revealedindividual freedom of choice, balancing freedom of choicewith support, offering opportunities for engagement andmaintaining fluidity in program management as core aspectsof how JES contributed to participants' empowerment.negative about having to live together. Most participantspreferred JES over regular shelters. Unlike empowermentliterature, participants mostly emphasised freedom of choiceover capacity development. JES offered opportunities forsocial and organisational engagement, through which participantsdeveloped roles, skills and self-image. However, alimited number of participants developed leadership rolesthrough self-management. Literature suggests setting
DOCUMENT
Despite assumptions that wearable self-care technologies such as smart wristbands and smart watches help users to monitor and self-manage health in daily life, adherence rates are often quite low. In an effort to better understand what determines adherence to wearable self-care technologies, researchers have started to consider the extent to which a technology is perceived as being part of the user (i.e., technology embodiment) and the extent to which users feel they can influence reaching their health goals (i.e., empowerment). Although both concepts are assumed to determine adherence, few studies have empirically validated their influence. Furthermore, the relationships between technology embodiment, empowerment, and adherence to wearable self-care technology have also not been addressed. Drawing upon embodied theory and embodiment cognition theory, this research paper introduces and empirically validates ‘embodied empowerment’ as a predictor of adherence to wearable self-care technology. Using partial least squares structural equation modeling and multigroup analysis on a dataset of 317 wearable self-care technology users, we find empirical evidence of the validity of embodied empowerment as a determinant of adherence. We also discuss the implications for research and practice.
DOCUMENT
