There are both pros and cons of the critical research methods to facilitating the goals of liberation and well-being within community psychology. On the one hand, critical paradigm is based upon pragmatic assumption that the system is biased to marginalized groups, which is close to the reality (Nelson & Prilleltensky, 2010). Critical research methods use rigorous methods and put an emphasis on positive social change, which makes research relevant and applicable to practice (Nelson & Prilleltensky, 2010). In other words, critical paradigm does only try to define the imbalances, but also tries to change them.
On the other hand, the approach is associated with two potential problems. First, the balance may be shifted too much to the marginalized group so they can become new oppressors (Nelson & Prilleltensky, 2010). Additionally, people’s values may contradict their actions. Thus, it is crucial for the researchers utilizing the critical paradigm be aware of possible problems.
Reference
Nelson, G., & Prilleltensky, I. (2010). Community psychology: In pursuit of liberation and well-being (2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.