Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Wiley Open Access Collection logoLink to Wiley Open Access Collection
. 2026 Jun 15;54(5):e70120. doi: 10.1002/jcop.70120

Fostering Critical Consciousness Through Theater of the Oppressed: A Mixed‐Methods Study With Gay, Bisexual, Queer, and Transgender Men in Singapore

David Puvaneyshwaran 1,2,✉, Abbrielle Jiamin Low 3, Shao Yuan Chong 3,4, Ye Xuan Wee 3,5, Jungup Lee 1,6, Peilin Liang 7
PMCID: PMC13268652  PMID: 42296484

ABSTRACT

This convergent mixed‐methods study explores how Theater of the Oppressed (TO) fosters critical consciousness among gay, bisexual, queer, and transgender men (n = 16) in Singapore. Grounded in Freirean praxis, the study assessed pre‐ and post‐intervention changes across four domains: perceived inequality, egalitarianism, critical motivation, and support networks. Quantitative findings showed a significant improvement in support networks and positive shifts in motivation. Qualitative insights revealed how TO's embodied and dialogic methods promoted reflection, solidarity, and agency. Furthermore, this study operationalizes support networks as a distinct, measurable component of critical consciousness within a TO framework. Findings highlight the potential of arts‐based, relational interventions to advance psychosocial resilience and collective empowerment among marginalized queer communities in non‐Western contexts.

Keywords: arts‐based methods, critical consciousness, mixed‐methods, queer youth, Singapore, support networks, theater of the oppressed

1. Introduction

Members of the LGBTQ+ community in Singapore face complex, intersectional challenges, including societal stigmatization, housing discrimination, and mental health inequities (Tan et al. 2021, 2023; Teh et al. 2018). Gay, bisexual, queer, and trans (GBQT) men, in particular, report heightened experiences of self‐harm and psychological distress linked to structural homophobia (Closson and Comeau 2021). These experiences reflect not merely personal struggles but systemic inequalities—highlighting the need for frameworks that help individuals name and resist the structures that shape their marginalization. In this paper, we use the term “GBQT men” as an inclusive category to refer to individuals engaged with or socially positioned within masculinities, while recognizing the diversity of gender identities within this group.

One promising theoretical framework for understanding and addressing such oppression is critical consciousness. First developed by Paulo Freire (2000), critical consciousness refers to a person's ability to reflect on the structural roots of inequality and take action toward social change. It comprises three dimensions: critical reflection (awareness of systemic inequity), critical motivation (belief in one's capacity to create change), and critical action (individual or collective steps to challenge oppression) (Diemer et al. 2017; Watts et al. 2011). Recent extensions to this model emphasize the importance of relational and collective dimensions, such as peer support, solidarity, and access to affirming spaces, in sustaining critical consciousness (Burson and Godfrey 2020; Hatcher et al. 2011; Puvaneyshwaran 2024).

While critical consciousness has been explored in various marginalized populations, few empirical studies have investigated how it develops among GBQT communities in Southeast Asia. Intersectionality, as fronted by Black feminist scholars (Collins 2017; Collins et al. 2021; Crenshaw 1991), further highlights how sexuality interacts with race, gender, and class to produce unique experiences of marginalization. In the Singaporean context, such dynamics are particularly salient for gender‐diverse or racialized queer individuals who often face intra‐community marginalization in addition to broader structural exclusion (Ang et al. 2021; Prankumar et al. 2021). These layered realities underscore the urgency of interventions that not only increase awareness but also build collective capacity for resistance and healing (Logie et al. 2019; Parker et al. 2018).

Augusto Boal (1985) Theater of the Oppressed (TO) is an arts‐based, participatory pedagogy grounded in Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed (2000), and operationalizes Freirean concepts of dialog, praxis, and conscientization into embodied theatrical practice. TO uses games, role‐play, and performance to surface lived experiences of oppression and rehearse possibilities for change (Bhukhanwala et al. 2017; Desai 2017; Freire 2000; Puvaneyshwaran, Lee, and Tan 2025; Puvaneyshwaran, Liang, and Lee 2025). Research grounded in Freire's pedagogy has demonstrated how dialogic, participatory approaches can foster critical reflection and sociopolitical engagement across marginalized populations (Budig et al. 2018; Jemal 2017; Pinto et al. 2025). TO builds on this work by translating Freire's principles into embodied and performative practice.

Emerging empirical work has suggested that theater‐based and arts‐based interventions with queer populations have been shown to foster critical reflection and collective awareness (Wernick et al. 2014), reduce stigma and enhance resilience and self‐efficacy (Alessi et al. 2023; Logie et al. 2019), and highlight how participants resist dominant norms (Thompson and Santiago‐Jirau 2011). However, despite its global use with queer populations, existing research on TO is limited in empirical evaluation and is predominantly Western in focus (Puvaneyshwaran, Lee, and Tan 2025). This points to the need for empirically grounded studies that examine how TO fosters critical consciousness in non‐Western contexts.

1.1. Study Objectives

This study addresses two gaps in the literature: the limited empirical evaluation of TO and the lack of research examining how TO fosters critical consciousness among GBQT communities in Southeast Asia. To do so, this study employs a convergent mixed‐methods, quasi‐experimental design to evaluate the effects of TO on the development of critical consciousness among GBQT men in Singapore. Specifically, this study seeks to: (1) assess changes in critical reflection, critical motivation, and perceived support networks using validated pre‐ and post‐intervention measures, and (2) explore participants' lived experiences of TO through reflective essays, transcripts, and focus group discussions. To our knowledge, this is the first known study to adapt and apply the Critical Consciousness Scale (CCS) and Short Critical Consciousness Scale (ShoCCS) in Singapore, and the first to formally operationalize perceived support networks as a subdomain of critical consciousness.

Grounded in a Freirean understanding of critical consciousness and a transformative paradigm (Erel et al. 2017; Thambinathan and Kinsella 2021), this study responds to calls for more rigorous and culturally situated evaluations of TO‐based interventions, especially in a non‐Western queer context. By integrating quantitative and qualitative data, this study offers new insights into how participatory theater can promote psychosocial resilience and solidarity among marginalized queer communities in non‐Western contexts (Fetters et al. 2013; Guetterman et al. 2015).

2. Methods

2.1. Study Design

This study employed a convergent mixed‐methods, quasi‐experimental design to evaluate how TO develops critical consciousness among GBQT men in Singapore. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected in parallel, analyzed independently, and integrated during interpretation to provide a comprehensive understanding of the intervention's effects.

2.2. Participants and Recruitment

Participants were recruited through purposive sampling in partnership with a local LGBTQ+ organization, Kayos Kollective (previously known as RainbowAsia+ ). Eligibility criteria included identifying as gay, bisexual, queer, or transgender and aligning with or being socially positioned within masculinities, being between 21 and 35 years old, and being proficient in English. This age range was selected to capture young adults navigating identity development and heightened experiences of minority stress (Meyer 2003), while aligning with national definitions of youth in Singapore (Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth 2025).

While the study uses the term “GBQT men” to align with existing literature, the sample included cisgender men, transgender men, and nonbinary participants; these groups were included based on shared alignment with masculinities and common experiences of marginalization within GBQT communities. Given the exploratory nature of this study and the small sample size, analyses were conducted at the group level to examine shared patterns, while remaining attentive to differences reflected in participants' narratives. A total of 16 participants were assigned to either an intervention or a comparison group, based on scheduling availability. To ensure ethical parity, comparison group participants were offered a similar TO workshop following the post‐survey period, though no data were collected during that session.

2.3. Intervention Description

The intervention consisted of five 2‐h workshop sessions facilitated by the first author, who is a trained TO practitioner. Workshop activities drew from Boal's Games for Actors and Non‐Actors (2002) and Rohd's Theatre for Community, Conflict and Dialogue (1998), including image theater, role‐play, and trust‐building games. Sessions were designed to progressively build trust and safety, explore personal experiences of marginalization, and culminate in dialogue on dilemmas of being queer in Singapore. Specific activities were intentionally aligned with study outcomes: image theater and dialogic exercises supported critical reflection; forum theater‐based and reimagining activities fostered critical motivation; and trust‐building and group‐sharing activities strengthened perceived support networks. A detailed session‐by‐session outline of the intervention, including activities and their alignment with targeted critical consciousness constructs, is provided in Supporting Information S1: Appendix A. Sessions were delivered using a pre‐planned structure to ensure consistency across delivery, while allowing flexibility for participant‐led dialogue. Designated safety persons were present throughout to support participants' emotional wellbeing.

2.4. Individual Reflections and Focus Group Discussion

Additionally, participants in the intervention group completed brief written reflections at the end of each workshop session in response to guided prompts. These prompts were designed to elicit participants' experiences of the session, emotional responses, evolving sense of identity, and reflections on marginalization and connection with others. For example, participants were asked to reflect on what stood out during the session, moments in which they felt seen or heard, how the activities shaped their understanding of oppression or privilege, and their overall learning and takeaways across the workshop.

A semi‐structured focus group discussion was conducted immediately following the final session and facilitated by the first and third authors. The focus group discussion explored participants' overall experiences of the Theater of the Oppressed workshop, including key insights, perceived impacts, and reflections on specific activities. The discussion was audio‐recorded and transcribed for analysis.

2.5. Survey Measures

Quantitative data were collected using a 14‐item instrument adapted from the 22‐item Critical Consciousness Scale (CCS) and the 13‐item Short Critical Consciousness Scale (ShoCCS) (Diemer et al. 2017, 2022). The CCS was originally validated with low‐income, racially marginalized youth in the U.S., and is widely used in educational and community psychology contexts.

The adapted scale assessed four domains: perceived inequality (five items), egalitarian values (three items), critical motivation (four items), and perceived support networks (two items), using a 5‐point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Sample items include: “Certain racial groups have fewer chances to get good jobs” (perceived inequality), “It would be good if groups could be equal” (egalitarianism), “It is my responsibility to get involved and make things better for society” (critical motivation), and “I know people who are going through the same struggles as I do” (support networks). The support network domain was developed for this study, drawing on scholarship emphasizing relational agency and collective identity (Burson and Godfrey 2020; Hatcher et al. 2011; Puvaneyshwaran 2024). Internal consistency reliability was assessed post hoc and yielded a Cronbach's alpha of 0.73, indicating acceptable reliability.

2.6. Procedures

Surveys were administered at baseline and after the final session to all participants. Responses to open‐ended demographic questions (e.g., gender identity, sexuality, nationality) were later coded for analysis. The intervention group also completed reflective essays after each session and participated in a focus group discussion on the final session of the workshop.

2.7. Data Analysis

Quantitative data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Version 29. Due to the small sample size and non‐randomized group assignment, non‐parametric tests were employed. The Mann–Whitney U test was used to assess between‐group differences, and the Wilcoxon signed‐rank test examined within‐group changes.

Qualitative data were transcribed and analyzed using NVivo 12, guided by Braun and Clarke's (2006) six‐phase approach to thematic analysis. As part of the first author's Master's thesis, initial coding was conducted independently, generating preliminary codes from the reflective essays, workshop transcripts, and focus group discussion. Codes were then discussed with supervisors (fifth and sixth authors) across a period of 2 months, where discrepancies were reviewed, refined, and consolidated into a coding framework. Through iterative discussions, codes were grouped into broader themes, which were refined to ensure coherence across themes. Integration was conducted through team‐based discussions in which quantitative results and qualitative themes were compared to identify areas of convergence (e.g., increase in perceived support networks aligning with themes of peer affirmation), complementarity (e.g., qualitative accounts providing context for shifts in motivation), and divergence (Denzin 2012; Turner et al. 2017). Reflexivity was prioritized throughout. The first author, who facilitated the workshops, maintained a reflective journal and engaged in regular discussions with co‐authors to mitigate potential bias (Grenier 2016; Kinitz 2022).

3. Findings

The findings are presented in alignment with the study's convergent mixed‐methods design, offering both statistical and interpretive insight into how TO shaped participants' critical consciousness. Quantitative results detail the pre‐ and post‐ intervention changes across the four domains of critical consciousness. These are complemented by qualitative findings that illuminate the descriptive critical reflections of participants' engagement with TO. Finally, we draw connections across both strands of data, to holistically understand patterns associated with participation in TO on GBQT men in Singapore.

3.1. Participant Characteristics

The demographic information of the 16 GBQT participants is outlined in Table 1. Ages ranged from 21 to 34 years (mean = 26). The majority identified as cisgender men (n = 13), with additional participants identifying as a transgender man (n = 1) and nonbinary (n = 2). Most participants identified as gay (n = 9) and of Singaporean nationality (n = 13). Ethnically, participants primarily identified as Chinese (n = 10) with smaller representations of Malay (n = 2) and Indian (n = 2) participants.

Table 1.

Demographic characteristics of participants.

Characteristic Intervention (n = 8) n (%) Comparison (n = 8) n (%)
Gender identity
Cis‐male 6 (75.0) 7 (87.5)
Trans‐male 1 (12.5) 0 (0.0)
Non‐binary 1 (12.5) 1 (12.5)
Sexuality
Gay 3 (37.5) 6 (75.0)
Bisexual 3 (37.5) 1 (12.5)
Queer 2 (25.0) 1 (12.5)
Age
Mean (SD) 24.25 (3.66) 27.63 (4.17)
Median 22.5 26.5
Ethnicity
Chinese 5 (62.5) 5 (62.5)
Malay 2 (25.0) 0 (0.0)
Indian 1 (12.5) 1 (12.5)
Other 0 (0.0) 2 (25.0)
Nationality
Singaporean 7 (87.5) 6 (75.0)
Non‐Singaporean 1 (12.5) 2 (25.0)
Open in a new tab

3.2. Quantitative Findings

Descriptive statistics for the four domains of critical consciousness are presented in Table 2. The range displayed indicates the minimum and maximum scores for each domain, based on the sample (N = 16).

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics for critical consciousness domains.

CC component Number of items Range (n = 16) Intervention pretest Intervention posttest Comparison pretest Comparison posttest
Critical reflection— perceived inequality 5 40–200 165 170 150 154
Critical reflection— egalitarianism 3 24–120 106 102 104 95
Critical motivation 4 32–160 135 139 133 132
Support network 2 16–80 55 63 59 58
Open in a new tab

At baseline, there were no statistically significant differences between the intervention and comparison groups across any of the critical consciousness domains (see Table 3), suggesting initial comparability. The largest difference was in perceived inequality, where the intervention group had slightly higher mean rank scores (mean rank = 10.38) compared to the comparison group (mean rank = 6.63). The other domains were closely matched.

Table 3.

Baseline group comparison.

CC components pre‐test scores Intervention (n = 8) mean rank Comparison (n = 8) mean rank U
Critical reflection—perceived inequality 10.38 6.63 17.0
Critical reflection—egalitarianism 8.50 8.50 32.0
Critical motivation 8.69 8.31 30.5
Support network 7.75 9.25 38.0
Open in a new tab

Post‐intervention comparisons showed modest improvements in the intervention group across all domains except egalitarianism, though none reached statistical significance (see Table 4). For instance, support networks showed a mean rank of 8.69 in the intervention group versus 8.31 in the comparison group, and critical motivation showed a favorable trend (intervention mean rank = 9.63; comparison).

Table 4.

Post‐test group comparison.

CC components post‐test scores Intervention (n = 8) mean rank Comparison (n = 8) mean rank U
Critical reflection—perceived inequality 10.44 6.56 16.5
Critical reflection—egalitarianism 8.44 8.56 32.5
Critical motivation 9.63 7.38 23.0
Support network 8.69 8.31 30.5
Open in a new tab

A Mann–Whitney U test on change scores (post–pre) revealed greater improvement in support networks (U = 24.0) and critical motivation (U = 25.0) in the intervention group compared to the comparison group, though these differences were not statistically significant (see Table 5).

Table 5.

Shifts in critical consciousness.

CC components (posttest–pretest) Intervention (n = 8) mean rank Comparison (n = 8) mean rank U
Critical reflection—perceived inequality 8.56 8.44 31.5
Critical reflection—egalitarianism 8.56 8.44 31.5
Critical motivation 9.38 7.63 25.0
Support network 9.50 7.50 24.0
Open in a new tab

However, within‐group analysis using the Wilcoxon signed‐rank test revealed a statistically significant improvement in support networks among participants in the intervention group (Z = −2.06, p < 0.05), with five participants showing positive change and none reporting a decline (see Table 6). While critical motivation did not show a statistically significant change, the direction of change was positive, with three participants improving and two showing no change. Similarly, perceived inequality showed a small non‐significant positive shift, while egalitarianism slightly declined overall.

Table 6.

Within‐group shifts in intervention group.

CC components difference N Positive mean rank N Negative mean rank Ties (N) Z
Critical reflection—perceived inequality 4 4.38 3 3.50 1 −0.60
Critical reflection—egalitarianism 1 4.00 4 2.75 3 −0.97
Critical motivation 3 5.00 3 2.00 2 −0.96
Support network 5 3.00 0 0.00 3 −2.06*
Open in a new tab
*

Indicates significant result (p < 0.05).

In contrast, the comparison group did not show meaningful shifts in any domain (see Table 7). Wilcoxon signed‐rank tests revealed no statistically significant changes across all domains. Two participants in the comparison group did show minor improvements in critical motivation and support networks, respectively, but these gains were not indicative of a consistent trend.

Table 7.

Within‐group shifts in comparison group.

CC components difference N Positive mean rank N Negative mean rank Ties (N) Z
Critical reflection—perceived inequality 3 4.33 3 2.67 2 −0.53
Critical reflection—egalitarianism 0 0.00 3 2.00 5 −1.60
Critical motivation 2 4.25 4 3.13 2 −0.43
Support network 3 4.00 3 3.00 2 −0.32
Open in a new tab

Taken together, these results suggest that participation in the TO workshops was associated with a statistically significant increase in perceived support networks and a meaningful positive shift in critical motivation, though the latter was not statistically significant. These patterns were not observed in the comparison group, suggesting that participation in TO may be associated with the observed changes. The findings offer preliminary quantitative evidence consistent with TO's potential to strengthen perceived support networks and a growing sense of motivation toward social change among GBTQ men in Singapore.

3.3. Qualitative Findings

Themes generated from the reflective essays, workshop transcripts, and focus group discussions highlighted how participation in TO was experienced as supporting the development of critical consciousness among GBQT participants. Consistent with the study's conceptual framework, findings are organized around four interrelated domains: critical reflection of perceived inequality, egalitarianism, critical motivation, and support networks. Given the small sample in the intervention group, reflections were analyzed collectively, while remaining attentive to distinctions in lived experiences. Individuals across different genders and sexual identities described similar experiences of reflection, relational support, and emerging agency, suggesting common dynamics shaped by marginalization within GBQT communities. Quotations below represent distinct participants, unless otherwise noted, and are used to illustrate these shared patterns while remaining attentive to variation.

3.3.1. Critical Reflection—Perceived Inequality

During the workshop sessions, participants described gaining awareness of the structural forces that shape queer experiences. In the very first activity that was played, “Name Exchange” (Session 1), where participants walked around and exchanged names with others, they discussed how names and pronouns carry layers of social meaning. In a discussion, they highlighted how there was a tendency for people to “assume and categorize others without respecting or acknowledging their actual identity” (P18, Session 1), reflecting visibility of queer identities in society.

Similarly, during the “Power Shuffle” activity (Session 4), where participants moved in response to questions about access, safety, or support, a visual map of uneven privilege emerged. Post‐activity, one participant shared, “I fall into thoughts of perceived gender, and what I identify as. So, I'm non‐binary, but the way I dress, my mannerisms and everything can be perceived as cis‐gender” (P07, Session 4). This insight underscores the complexity of structural inequality that manifests through embodiment, presentation, and perception.

However, some participants also expressed critical reservations about the clarity and contextual framing of certain activities. For example, one participant observed that while the activities invited introspection, they occasionally felt abstract or misaligned with lived queer experiences, “I don't think it's the activity per se… that dealt with me in LGBTQ space… I think what helped was the community building.” (P12, focus group discussion [FGD]). These reflections underscore that while many activities catalyzed recognition of inequality, others required stronger contextual anchoring to facilitate deeper critical reflection specific to their marginalized experiences.

3.3.2. Critical Reflection—Egalitarianism

Participants also demonstrated increased awareness of diversity and power within the queer community, recognizing privilege and intersectionality. One of the most poignant examples of egalitarian consciousness emerged during an Image Theatre exercise in Session 5, where participants created collective tableaux to represent how they perceived others. In one image where participants embodied P09's story, the only transgender male participant in that group, they mimicked gestures of support and strength. During the debrief, one participant articulated the message behind his image,

I was focusing more on when you shared about your struggles of being transgender and then having to go through all of that processes and all of that phase of having to hear from other people and then you have to research your own stuff

(P19, Session 5)

His image was an attempt to visually communicate resilience, revealing an effort to amplify P09's experience with empathy and intention.

Reflecting on the entire workshop process, another participant reflected on varying degrees of safety and support, “When [P18] was talking about how hard it is to even come out to yourself, it really made me think… I've always taken that for granted. Like, for me, I had support. That's not true for everyone” (P23, FGD). These reflections illustrate how participating in TO fostered a growing awareness that even within shared queer identities, individuals carry different degrees of visibility, vulnerability, and privilege for the GBQT participants.

3.3.3. Critical Motivation

Beyond reflection, participants described how TO activities fostered a sense of personal agency. In an activity that followed a discussion about coming out, “Cop in the Head” (Session 3), participants verbalized the internalized voices of judgment, shame, or fear that often constrain queer expression. One participant reflected on that activity,

To say that one line that hurt me the most…kind of killed me a bit inside at first. But the more I said them, the more power I gained over those words…Not that it solves it. But I can be more grounded by doing it:) facing what hurts me rather than turning my back against it.

(P23, Reflection 5)

This reflection demonstrates a critical motivational shift from emotional avoidance to confronting pain as a strategy of ownership. For another participant, reclaiming their own voice marked another turn toward self‐definition,

There was a moment where I said I agreed with something I didn't actually agree with…I realized no one really cared if I contradicted them with my own opinions…I have to learn to be aware of where my own boundaries lie.

(P09, Reflection 5)

Together, these reflections illustrate how TO techniques prompted participants to not only reflect on disempowerment but to rehearse new emotional postures and experiment with boundaries, hallmarks of growing critical reflection.

3.3.4. Support Networks

Many participants articulated that the TO workshop became more than a space for reflection, it was a site for cultivating queer kinship, affirmation, and emotional safety. While the closed group setting and shared identity as GBQT men offered an entry point, the embodied, relational activities helped transform strangers into a felt sense of community. One participant reflected on the collaborative constructing of embodied images through the “Image Theatre” activity (Session 2), “it was very comforting to know that everyone is willing to build onto each's suggestions which made me feel supported within the group” (P21, Reflection 2).

Other reflections suggest that the physical engagement in TO activities also played a vital role in affirming presence, “being touched by someone else made me feel seen, even if it is a hand on my back or a handshake. Somehow, that helped me warm up and eventually open up” (P04, Reflection 5). These gestures of contact, embedded in activities like “Name Exchange” (Session 1) and “Blind Car” (Session 2) created conditions of embodied affirmation, particularly powerful for those who may have experienced touch aversion in heteronormative spaces.

In the final session, P09 reflected on what the experience meant to him as a transgender participant, “prior to this I felt detached from the wider queer community…but instead I see my own feelings and experiences reflected in them” (P09, FGD). This highlights that it was not only one activity, but the cumulative effect of being seen, held, and affirmed in a group that made critical support networks visible.

Taken together, these findings illustrate how engaging with TO's embodied, dialogic, and relational methods supported GBQT participants to navigate and deepen their critical consciousness. While the activities elicited varying levels of resonance, the overall structure enabled participants to name structural inequities, recognize intra‐community differences, experiment with self‐advocacy, and co‐create networks of support.

4. Discussion

This study contributes new empirical insight into how participation in TO may support the development of critical consciousness among GBQT men in a non‐Western context. Drawing on a convergent mixed‐methods design, findings suggest that participants in the TO workshop showed statistically significant improvement in perceived support networks and a positive shift in critical motivation. Qualitative insights further revealed how participants came to recognize systemic inequality, intra‐community power dynamics, and embodied their agency through theatrical exercises. Notably, this is the first known study to our knowledge to operationalize perceived support networks as a distinct and measurable component of critical consciousness within a TO framework. Situated in Singapore's unique sociopolitical and cultural landscape, these findings provide early evidence that TO not only fosters individual reflection but also cultivates solidarity among GBQT men navigating marginalization.

To illustrate how quantitative and qualitative findings were integrated in this convergent mixed‐methods design, Figure 1 presents a joint display mapping both data strands across shared domains of critical consciousness. Integration occurred at the level of interpretation, highlighting points of convergence, complementarity, and divergence between survey trends and participants' accounts. Given the exploratory nature of this study and the small, non‐randomized sample, findings should be interpreted as preliminary and indicative of patterns that warrant further investigation.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Joint display illustrating convergent integration of quantitative and qualitative findings across critical consciousness domains. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected and analyzed in parallel and integrated at the level of interpretation to examine convergence, complementarity, and divergence across domains.

These findings are consistent with and extend Freirean notions of critical consciousness as a dialectical process involving critical reflection and action (Freire 2000). A substantial body of research grounded in Freire's praxis has demonstrated how dialogic, participatory approaches can foster critical reflection, collective awareness, and sociopolitical engagement across marginalized populations (Budig et al. 2018; Jemal 2017; Pinto et al. 2025). Using TO, this study builds on that tradition by translating Freire's principles into embodied and performative practice. Participants engaged in collaborative activities that allowed them to surface internalized experiences of marginalization, interrogate them alongside others, and begin envisioning alternative ways of responding—echoing Carlson et al. (2006) emphasis on conscientization as a cognitive and affective “awakening”.

Quantitatively, the observed improvements in perceived support networks and motivation mirror earlier research suggesting how participating in TO may foster awareness and emotional engagement (Bhukhanwala et al. 2017; Kina and Fernandes 2017; Puvaneyshwaran 2024), though none of these studies employed pre‐post measures or explicitly situated their work within a critical consciousness framework. Qualitatively, this study offers additional evidence that TO creates dialogic environments conducive to fostering empathy and introspection (Desai 2017; Erel et al. 2017; Wrentschur 2021), while illuminating how these processes may unfold through embodied, arts‐based engagement.

This study also addresses a major gap in TO and critical consciousness literature by offering preliminary empirical insights into how support networks—through relational trust, peer affirmation, and collective belonging—may act as a foundational condition for the development of other critical consciousness dimensions. While Diemer et al. (2017) and Watts et al. (2011) frame critical motivation action as a sequel to reflection, more recent theorists have highlighted the importance of relational agency as a precursor to critical action (Burson and Godfrey 2020; Hatcher et al. 2011). The integration of support networks as a distinct domain reflects this emerging view. Our findings suggest that for LGBTQ+ participants in stigmatizing environments like Singapore, the experience of being affirmed and seen by others may not only be an outcome of TO, but also a potential mechanism that enabled critical reflection and motivation to take shape. A sense of solidarity and social support may be a critical prerequisite, and not merely a byproduct, of developing critical consciousness.

Many of the TO exercises used in this study appeared to support surfacing embodied awareness, disrupting internalized biases, and prompting introspection. For instance, Image Theatre created opportunities for collective interpretation and meaning‐making through gestures and poses, while Cop in the Head enabled participants to verbalize internalized oppressions. Yet, what appeared to deepen the impact of these exercises was not the form alone, but the critical dialogue that followed, where participants processed their experiences and engaged in a collective reflection of larger structures that gave rise to their marginalization. As a cornerstone of Freirean praxis (Caldas 2020; Freire 2000), dialogue moves beyond discussion into a co‐constructive process that catalyzes transformation. Jemal et al. (2022) and O'Sullivan (2001) further emphasize that it is through such dialogic exchange, that individuals begin to articulate their sociopolitical identities and imagine possibilities for change. In this study, TO served as a vehicle, but it was Freirean dialogue that offered the terrain on which critical consciousness was developed.

Although shared queer identities fostered resonance around experiences of invisibility and marginalization, differences across lived experiences and intersecting identities meant that there were moments where values, beliefs and experiences diverged. Intersectionality necessitates researchers to account for how context, relationality and interlocking systems of oppression shape individuals' experiences differently (Collins et al. 2021; Crenshaw 1991). Within the workshop, participants recognized that they did not always interpret or experience privilege and oppression in the same ways. However, the dialogic structure of TO offered a space for such nuances to surface and be reflected upon. Instead of fragmenting the group, these moments became opportunities for deeper mutual understanding. Engaging in TO thus enabled the enactment of an intersectionality‐informed praxis, allowing participants to interrogate difference as a catalyst for collective growth and relational accountability (Chong et al. 2025).

4.1. Limitations

This study has some noteworthy limitations that can inform future research. First, the small sample size and non‐randomized design limit the generalizability of the quantitative findings. While the use of a matched comparison group offered some rigor, participants were assigned based on availability rather than random allocation, which may have introduced selection bias. Second, although validated scales were used to measure critical consciousness, the inclusion of a new subdomain (perceived support networks) was not pilot‐tested prior to implementation, and its psychometric properties warrant further validation in future research. Third, although the sample reflected some diversity in ethnicity and gender orientation, the most structurally marginalized voices, particularly non‐cis male, racialized, and transgendered participants remained numerically underrepresented. This may have limited the range of intersectional insights that could affect the resonance of the intervention for those with more complex marginalizations. Finally, the short timeframe of the intervention precludes conclusions about the longer‐term sustainability of observed changes in critical consciousness.

4.2. Implications and Future Directions

Future research must balance the need for larger sample sizes with the psychological safety afforded by small‐group formats. This equilibrium can be attained through a multi‐arm trial (Juszczak et al. 2019), enabling multiple small‐group implementations of the intervention while aggregating a larger sample for pre‐ and post‐assessment. Such a design would enhance statistical power without compromising the relational depth and emotional safety of TO workshops. Community‐based organizations implementing TO may benefit from embedded evaluation strategies that preserve participant trust while building rigorous outcome data.

Future studies could also expand on the role of support networks as a critical consciousness domain, rigorously assessing how it can influence the development of reflection, motivation, and action. Such an investigation would deepen our understanding of the relational foundations of critical consciousness and inform scalable models of peer‐based resilience. Additionally, longitudinal research incorporating 3‐, 6‐, and 12‐month follow‐up points could examine the durability of TO's effect (Caruana et al. 2015) and track shifts in critical consciousness over time. Including measures of critical action would further illuminate the extent to which participants translate insights from TO into concrete, justice‐oriented behaviors.

5. Conclusion

This study offers early empirical evidence for the efficacy of TO in cultivating critical consciousness among GBQT men in Singapore. By combining validated quantitative measures with rich qualitative insights, it demonstrates how embodied, dialogical practices can deepen participants' awareness of systemic inequality, motivation for change, and a sense of community support. The integration of support networks as a measurable domain expands current understandings of critical consciousness and affirms the significance of relational and affective dimensions in conscientization. Situated in a non‐Western, intersectional context, this study contributes to a growing body of scholarship calling for arts‐based, transformative interventions that center reflection, solidarity, and agency. In doing so, it also underscores the potential of participatory methods to enhance psychosocial functioning and community cohesion in under‐resourced LGBTQ+ settings.

Author Contributions

David Puvaneyshwaran: conceptualization, methodology, investigation, writing – original draft, and project administration. Abbrielle Jiamin Low: writing – original draft. Shao Yuan Chong, Ye Xuan Wee: writing – review and editing. Jungup Lee, Peilin Liang: supervision and provision of feedback.

Ethics Statement

This study received ethical approval from the National University of Singapore Institutional Review Board (Reference Code: NUS‐IRB‐2023‐50).

Consent

All participants provided informed consent prior to participation.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Supporting information

Supporting File: jcop70120‐sup‐0001‐Appendix_A.docx.

JCOP-54-0-s001.docx (19.1KB, docx)

Acknowledgments

We extend our deepest gratitude to the 16 participants who generously shared their experiences and insights throughout this study. We are also thankful to the audiences at the 2024 Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) Annual Program Meeting and the 2025 Society for Social Work and Research (SSWR) Conference, whose thoughtful feedback helped refine the study's framing and analysis. All authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript. This research was conducted as part of a Master's thesis at the National University of Singapore and was supported by institutional resources. No additional external funding was received.

Data Availability Statement

The authors have nothing to report.

References

  1. Alessi, E. J. , Lee Y. G., Chikalogwe V. P., et al. 2023. “Pilot Study of an Arts‐ and Theatre‐Based HIV Prevention Intervention for Men Who Have Sex With Men and Transgender Women Migrants in South Africa: Acceptability, Feasibility and Preliminary Efficacy.” Health Education Research 38, no. 5: 392–411. 10.1093/her/cyad021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ang, M. W. , Tan J. C. K., and Lou C.. 2021. “Navigating Sexual Racism in the Sexual Field: Compensation for and Disavowal of Marginality by Racial Minority Grindr Users in Singapore.” Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication 26, no. 3: 129–147. 10.1093/jcmc/zmab003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bhukhanwala, F. , Dean K., and Troyer M.. 2017. “Beyond the Student Teaching Seminar: Examining Transformative Learning Through Arts‐Based Approaches.” Teachers and Teaching 23, no. 5: 611–630. 10.1080/13540602.2016.1219712. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Boal, A. 1985. Theatre of the Oppressed. Theatre Communications Group. [Google Scholar]
  5. Boal, A. 2002. Games for Actors and Non‐Actors. Routledge. (Original work published 1992). [Google Scholar]
  6. Braun, V. , and Clarke V.. 2006. “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology.” Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, no. 2: 77–101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Budig, K. , Diez J., Conde P., Sastre M., Hernán M., and Franco M.. 2018. “Photovoice and Empowerment: Evaluating the Transformative Potential of a Participatory Action Research Project.” BMC Public Health 18, no. 1: 432. 10.1186/s12889-018-5335-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Burson, E. , and Godfrey E. B.. 2020. “Intraminority Solidarity: The Role of Critical Consciousness.” European Journal of Social Psychology 50, no. 6: 1362–1377. 10.1002/ejsp.2679. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Caldas, B. 2020. “The Boal‐Freire Nexus: Rehearsing Praxis, Imagining Liberation in Bilingual Teacher Education.” L2 Journal 12, no. 2: 55–71. 10.5070/L212245926. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Carlson, E. D. , Engebretson J., and Chamberlain R. M.. 2006. "Photovoice as a Social Process of Critical Consciousness." Qualitative health research 16, no. 6: 836–852. 10.1177/1049732306287525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Caruana, E. J. , Roman M., Hernández‐Sánchez J., and Solli P.. 2015. “Longitudinal Studies.” Journal of Thoracic Disease 7, no. 11: E537–E540. 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2015.10.63. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Chong, S. Y. , Goh L. S., Lye G. W. Y., et al. 2025. “Embedding Intersectionality Values in Citizen Science Research: The Socio‐Scientific Progression by Leveraging on Intersectionality and Citizen‐Led Equity‐Driven (SPLICE) Research Framework.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 24: 16094069251337936. 10.1177/16094069251337936. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Closson, L. M. , and Comeau E.. 2021. “Youth's Experiences With Inclusion, Isolation, and Discrimination in the LGBTQ+ Community.” Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 31, no. 6: 782–795. 10.1002/casp.2525. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Collins, P. H. 2017. “Intersectionality and Epistemic Injustice.” In The Routledge Handbook of Epistemic Injustice, edited by Kidd I. J., Medina J. and Pohlhaus G., 115–124. 1st ed. Routledge. 10.4324/9781315212043-11. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Collins, P. H. , Da Silva E. C. G., Ergun E., Furseth I., Bond K. D., and Martínez‐Palacios J.. 2021. “Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory: Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory, Patricia Hill Collins, Duke University Press, 2019.” Contemporary Political Theory 20, no. 3: 690–725. 10.1057/s41296-021-00490-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Crenshaw, K. 1991. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review 43, no. 6: 1241. 10.2307/1229039. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  17. Denzin, N. K. 2012. “Triangulation 2.0.” Journal of Mixed Methods Research 6, no. 2: 80–88. 10.1177/1558689812437186. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Desai, S. R. 2017. “Utilizing Theatre of the Oppressed Within Teacher Education to Create Emancipatory Teachers.” Multicultural Perspectives 19, no. 4: 229–233. 10.1080/15210960.2017.1347875. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Diemer, M. A. , Frisby M. B., Pinedo A., et al. 2022. “Development of the Short Critical Consciousness Scale (ShoCCS).” Applied Developmental Science 26, no. 3: 409–425. 10.1080/10888691.2020.1834394. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Diemer, M. A. , Rapa L. J., Park C. J., and Perry J. C.. 2017. “Development and Validation of the Critical Consciousness Scale.” Youth & Society 49, no. 4: 461–483. 10.1177/0044118X14538289. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Erel, U. , Reynolds T., and Kaptani E.. 2017. “Participatory Theatre for Transformative Social Research.” Qualitative Research 17, no. 3: 302–312. 10.1177/1468794117696029. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Fetters, M. D. , Curry L. A., and Creswell J. W.. 2013. “Achieving Integration in Mixed Methods Designs—Principles and Practices.” Health Services Research 48, no. 6 Pt 2: 2134–2156. 10.1111/1475-6773.12117. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Freire, P. 2000. Pedagogy of the Oppressed (30th anniversary ed). Continuum. [Google Scholar]
  24. Grenier, F. 2016. “How Can Reflexivity Inform Critical Pedagogies? Insights From the Theory Versus Practice Debate 1.” International Studies Perspectives 17, no. 2: 154–172. 10.1093/isp/ekv006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Guetterman, T. C. , Fetters M. D., and Creswell J. W.. 2015. “Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Results in Health Science Mixed Methods Research Through Joint Displays.” Annals of Family Medicine 13, no. 6: 554–561. 10.1370/afm.1865. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Hatcher, A. , de Wet J., Bonell C. P., et al. 2011. “Promoting Critical Consciousness and Social Mobilization in HIV/AIDS Programmes: Lessons and Curricular Tools From a South African Intervention.” Health Education Research 26, no. 3: 542–555. 10.1093/her/cyq057. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Jemal, A. 2017. “Critical Consciousness: A Critique and Critical Analysis of the Literature.” Urban Review 49, no. 4: 602–626. 10.1007/s11256-017-0411-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Jemal, A. , Windsor L., Inyang C., and Pierre‐Noel C.. 2022. “The Critical Dialogue Cornerstone: Suggested Practices to Guide Implementation, Facilitation and Evaluation.” Journal of Progressive Human Services 33, no. 3: 244–270. 10.1080/10428232.2022.2056866. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Juszczak, E. , Altman D. G., Hopewell S., and Schulz K.. 2019. “Reporting of Multi‐Arm Parallel‐Group Randomized Trials: Extension of the CONSORT 2010 Statement.” Journal of the American Medical Association 321, no. 16: 1610–1620. 10.1001/jama.2019.3087. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Kina, V. J. , and Fernandes K. C.. 2017. “Augusto Boal's Theatre of the Oppressed: Democratising Art for Social Transformation.” Critical and Radical Social Work 5, no. 2: 241–252. 10.1332/204986017X14951776937239. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  31. Kinitz, D. J. 2022. “The Emotional and Psychological Labor of Insider Qualitative Research Among Systemically Marginalized Groups: Revisiting the Uses of Reflexivity.” Qualitative Health Research 32, no. 11: 1635–1647. 10.1177/10497323221112620. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Logie, C. H. , Dias L. V., Jenkinson J., et al. 2019. “Exploring the Potential of Participatory Theatre to Reduce Stigma and Promote Health Equity for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) People in Swaziland and Lesotho.” Health Education & Behavior: Official Publication of the Society for Public Health Education 46, no. 1: 146–156. 10.1177/1090198118760682. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Meyer, I. H. 2003. “Prejudice, Social Stress, and Mental Health in Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Populations: Conceptual Issues and Research Evidence.” Psychological Bulletin 129, no. 5: 674–697. 10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.674. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Ministry of Culture, Community & Youth . (2025). “Youth.” Ministry of Culture, Community & Youth. https://www.mccy.gov.sg/sectors/youth/.
  35. O'Sullivan, C. 2001. “Searching for the Marxist in Boal.” Research in Drama Education: Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance 6, no. 1: 85–97. 10.1080/13569780020031816. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Parker, C. M. , Hirsch J. S., Philbin M. M., and Parker R. G.. 2018. “The Urgent Need for Research and Interventions to Address Family‐Based Stigma and Discrimination Against Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Youth.” Journal of Adolescent Health 63, no. 4: 383–393. 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.05.018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Pinto, R. M. , Lee C. A., Arthur M., and Windsor L. C.. 2025. “Iconic Illustrations Initiate Critical Dialogues Among Heterosexual Men Who then Develop Critical Consciousness Around Homophobia and Sexism: A Qualitative Study.” Sexual and Gender Diversity in Social Services 37, no. 1: 116–140. 10.1080/29933021.2024.2354358. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Prankumar, S. K. , Aggleton P., and Bryant J.. 2021. “Belonging, Citizenship and Ambivalence Among Young Gay, Bisexual and Queer Indian Singaporean Men.” Asian Studies Review 45, no. 1: 155–174. 10.1080/10357823.2020.1773762. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  39. Puvaneyshwaran, D. 2024. “Empowering the Marginalised: Exploring the Potential of Theatre of the Oppressed as an Intervention for Youth Offenders in Social Work Practice.” Journal of Social Work 24, no. 3: 375–396. 10.1177/14680173231222614. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Puvaneyshwaran, D. , Lee J., and Tan R. K. J.. 2025. “Theatre of the Oppressed as a Strategy Against LGBTQ‐Based Aggression: A Scoping Review.” Sexuality & Culture 29: 2772–2794. 10.1007/s12119-025-10391-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  41. Puvaneyshwaran, D. , Liang P., and Lee J.. 2025. “The Impacts of Forum Theatre in Social Work Practice: A Scoping Review.” British Journal of Social Work 55: 2441–2463. 10.1093/bjsw/bcaf055. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  42. Rohd, M. (with Hope is Vital (Organization)) . 1998. Theatre for Community, Conflict & Dialogue: The Hope is Vital Training Manual. Heinemann. [Google Scholar]
  43. Tan, R. K. J. , Low T. Q. Y., Le D., et al. 2021. “Experienced Homophobia and Suicide Among Young Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Men in Singapore: Exploring the Mediating Role of Depression Severity, Self‐Esteem, and Outness in the Pink Carpet Y Cohort Study.” LGBT Health 8, no. 5: 349–358. 10.1089/lgbt.2020.0323. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Tan, R. K. J. , Yang D. W. J., Le D., et al. 2023. “Minority Statuses and Mental Health Outcomes Among Young Gay, Bisexual and Queer Men in Singapore.” Journal of LGBT Youth 20, no. 1: 198–215. 10.1080/19361653.2021.1940414. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  45. Teh, Y. Y. , Munisamy Y., Wong P. Y. J., Tan K., Huang J., and Au Yong J.. 2018. “Singapore Social Work Practice With Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Clients.” International Social Work 61, no. 1: 51–65. 10.1177/0020872815603785. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  46. Thambinathan, V. , and Kinsella E. A.. 2021. “Decolonizing Methodologies in Qualitative Research: Creating Spaces for Transformative Praxis.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 20: 16094069211014766. 10.1177/16094069211014766. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Thompson, S. L. , and Santiago‐Jirau A.. 2011. “Performing Truth: Queer Youth and the Transformative Power of Theatre of the Oppressed.” In “Come Closer”: Critical Perspectives on Theatre of the Oppressed, vol. 416. edited by Cohen‐Cruz J., 97–108. Peter Lang. [Google Scholar]
  48. Turner, S. F. , Cardinal L. B., and Burton R. M.. 2017. “Research Design for Mixed Methods: A Triangulation‐Based Framework and Roadmap.” Organizational Research Methods 20, no. 2: 243–267. 10.1177/1094428115610808. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Watts, R. J. , Diemer M. A., and Voight A. M.. 2011. “Critical Consciousness: Current Status and Future Directions.” New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development 2011, no. 134: 43–57. 10.1002/cd.310. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Wernick, L. J. , Kulick A., and Woodford M. R.. 2014. “How Theater Within a Transformative Organizing Framework Cultivates Individual and Collective Empowerment Among LGBTQQ Youth.” Journal of Community Psychology 42, no. 7: 838–853. 10.1002/jcop.21656. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  51. Wrentschur, M. 2021. “Forum Theatre and Participatory (Action) Research in Social Work: Methodological Reflections on Case Studies Regarding Poverty and Social In‐Equity.” Educational Action Research 29, no. 4: 636–655. 10.1080/09650792.2021.1916552. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supporting File: jcop70120‐sup‐0001‐Appendix_A.docx.

JCOP-54-0-s001.docx (19.1KB, docx)

Data Availability Statement

The authors have nothing to report.

Articles from Journal of Community Psychology are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES