Epistemic Privilege and Mental Health: The Case for Centering Lived Experience

Lived experience isn’t just a personal story—it’s a lens that can illuminate overlooked truths in mental health research.

A recent editorial in Qualitative Psychology by prominent qualitative researcher Heidi M. Levitt articulates a powerful philosophy for integrating lived experience into mental health research. This philosophy aligns closely with the long-held arguments of consumer, survivor, and ex-patient (CSX) researchers.

The editorial “A Consideration of the Influence of Researchers’ Lived Experiences” positions lived experience not as a secondary perspective but as a critical lens for uncovering overlooked truths in mental health research and practice. Levitt’s argument echoes and builds upon a growing body of scholarship advocating for the centrality of lived experience in mental health research.

Levitt focuses on epistemic privilege—the unique insights derived from lived experiences of harm or oppression—and its importance in advancing socially just and meaningful research.

“Critical researchers accord epistemic privilege to their responses regarding monosexism [or dominant ways of knowing] in health care, rather than seeing all researchers’ opinions as equal,” she writes. “This approach termed strong objectivity, has suggested that we deliberately recruit perspectives on the phenomena we study that are not just situated in mainstream experience. These perspectives allow us to gain insight that is not available from other participants.”