Abstract This article is premised on the understanding that arts‐based research (ABR) has a twofold relationship with peace: the future of ABR is dependent upon conditions of scholarly peace (constructive critique and ethical practice)—a dependency that holds implications for ABR itself to serve wider movements towards peace (socially, ecologically and politically). This article presents a critical analysis of a specific mode of ABR aligned with the onto‐epistemological orientations of post‐qualitative inquiry. We contend that the anti‐methodological stance of this ABR has inadvertently fostered informal conventions and shielded ABR from constructive critique. Through an analysis of five UK‐based ABR examples, we identify three informal conventions—troublemaking, playmaking and jargon‐making—and argue that their focus neglects aesthetic quality, compromises research integrity and raises ethical concerns. In response, we offer an evaluation framework for ABR to emphasise the importance of (i) aesthetic quality, (ii) research integrity and (iii) ethical responsibility. Our critique is positioned not as an act of hostility, but as a necessary agitation, aimed at pushing ABR to more effectively live up to the claims of its radical potential.
Wood et al. (Wed,) studied this question.