Photographs as a research tool in child studiesSome analytical metaphors and choices

  1. David Poveda 1
  2. Mitsuko Matsumoto 1
  3. Marta Morgade 1
  4. Esperanza Alonso 1
  1. 1 Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01cby8j38

Revista:
Qualitative Research in Education

ISSN: 2014-6418

Año de publicación: 2018

Volumen: 7

Número: 2

Páginas: 170-196

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.17583/QRE.2018.3350 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: Qualitative Research in Education

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

En este artículo metodológico analizamos cómo las fotografías pueden ser utilizadas en proyectos de investigación con infancia y familias que usan diferentes clases de datos. Planteamos las fotografías como un artefacto digital the "baja fidelidad" ("low-fi") versátil que puede utilizarse bajo una variedad de condiciones de investigación y discutimos críticamente esta herramienta visual, particularmente en el contexto de la creciente investigación visual y multimodal con infancia y familias. La discusión crítica se basa en una serie de proyectos de investigación en los que hemos empleado fotografías (los temas de los proyectos incluyen diversidad familiar o rutinas de la infancia). La comparación entre los proyectos sirve para resaltar algunas de las opciones analíticas y procedimentales que se abren cuando se usan fotografías. Específicamente, nos centramos en dos cuestiones: (a) las diferencias que surgen cuando los materiales fotográficos son creados por los participantes o son provocados por la investigación y; (b) las metáforas que se aplican para interpretar y trabajar con fotografías.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Barker, J. and Smith, F. (2012). What’s in focus? A critical discussion of photography, children and young people. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 15 (2), 91-103.
  • Bauman, R. (1986). Story, performance, and event: Contextual studies of oral narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Bohnsack, R. (2008) The interpretation of pictures and the documentary method. Forum: Qualitative Social Research 9 (3). http:// nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0803267.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1990). Photography: A middle-brow art. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  • Brown, S; Reavey, P. and Brookfield, H. (2014). Spectral objects: Material links to difficult pasts for adoptive families. In P. Harvey, E. Casella, G. Evans, H. Knox, C. McLean, E. Silva, N. Thoburn and K. Woodwards (eds.), Objects and materials: A Routledge companion (pp. 173-182). London: Routledge.
  • Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Bruner, J. S. (2003). Making stories: Law, literature, life. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  • Cappello, M. (2005). Photo interviews: Eliciting data through conversations with children. Field Methods, 17 (2), 170-182.
  • Clark, A. (2010). Young children as protagonists and the role of participatory, visual methods in engaging multiple perspectives. American Journal of Community Psychology, 46 (1-2), 115-123.
  • Clark, A. and Moss, P. (2011). Listening to young children: The mosaic approach. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Clark, C. D. (1999). The auto-driven interview: A photographic viewfinder into children's experience. Visual Studies, 14(1), 39-50.
  • Collier, J. (1957). Photography in anthropology: a report on two experiments. American Anthropologist, 59 (5), 843-859.
  • Cook, T. and Hess, E. (2007). What the camera sees and from whose perspective: Fun methodologies for engaging children in enlightening adults. Childhood, 14 (1), 29-45. Crivello, G; Camfield, L. and Woodhead, M. (2009). How can children tell us about their wellbeing? Exploring the potential of participatory research approaches within young lives. Social Indicators Research, 90 (1), 51-72.
  • Delgado, M. (2015). Urban youth and photovoice: Visual ethnography in action. New York: Oxford University Press. Edwards, E. (ed.) (1992). Anthropology and photography, 1860–1920. New Haven / London: Yale University Press / Royal Anthropological Institute.
  • Epstein, I; Stevens, B; McKeever, P. and Baruchel, S. (2006). Photo elicitation interview (PEI): Using photos to elicit children's perspectives. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5 (3), 1-11.
  • Eskelinen, K. (2012). Children's visual art and creating through photographs. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 45, 168-177.
  • Frekko, S; Leinaweaver, J. and Marre, D. (2015). How (not) to talk about adoption: On communicative vigilance in Spain. American Ethnologist, 42 (4), 703-719.
  • González-Patiño, J. (2011). Rutinas de la infancia urbana mediadas por la tecnología: Un análisis visual. Papeles de Trabajo sobre Cultura, Educación y Desarrollo Humano, 7 (2), 1-16.
  • Harper, D. (1998). An argument for visual sociology. In J. Prosser (ed.), Image-based research: A sourcebook for qualitative researchers (pp. 24-41). London: Routledge.
  • Heydon, R; McKee, L. and Phillips, L. (2016). The affordances and constraints of visual methods in early childhood education research: Talking points from the field. Journal of Childhood Studies, 41 (3), 5-17.
  • James, A; Jenks, C. and Prout, A. (1998). Theorizing childhood. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Johnson, G. (2011). A child’s right to participation: Photovoice as methodology for documenting the experiences of children living in Kenyan orphanages. Visual Anthropology Review, 27 (2), 141-161.
  • Johnson, G; Pfister, A. and Vindrola‐Padros, C. (2012). Drawings, photos, and performances: Using visual methods with children. Visual Anthropology Review, 28 (2), 164-178.
  • Kolb, B. (2008). Involving, sharing, analysing—Potential of the participatory photo interview. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9 (3). http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/fqs-9.3.1155
  • Kress, G. and Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd edition). London: Routledge.
  • Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city: Studies in the Black English vernacular. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
  • Latham, A. (2004). Researching and writing everyday accounts of the city: an introduction to the diary-photo diary-interview method. In C. Knowles and P. Sweetman (eds.), Picturing the Social Landscape: Visual methods and the sociological imagination (pp. 117-131). Routledge: London.
  • Mauthner, M. (1997). Methodological aspects of collecting data from children: Lessons from three research projects. Children and Society, 11 (1), 16-28.
  • Mayall, B. (2000). The sociology of childhood in relation to children's rights. The International Journal of Children's Rights, 8 (3), 243-259.
  • Mraz, J. (1999). Fotografía y familia. Desacatos, 2, 143-146.
  • Mitchell, C. (2011). Doing visual research. London: Sage. Mead, M. (1995). Visual anthropology in a discipline of words. In P. Hockings (ed.), Principles of visual anthropology (pp. 3-12). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Morphy, H. and Banks, M. (Eds.). (1997). Rethinking visual anthropology. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  • Ortiz, A; Prats, M. and Baylina, M. (2012). Métodos visuales y geografías de la infancia: dibujando el entorno cotidiano. Scripta Nova: Revista Electrónica de Geografía y Ciencias Sociales, 16 (400) . http://www.ub.edu/geocrit/sn/sn-400.htm
  • Parkinson, D. (2001). Securing trustworthy data from an interview situation with young children: Six integrated interview strategies. Child Study Journal 31 (3), 137-155
  • Pink, S. (2013). Doing visual ethnography. 3rd edition. London: Sage.
  • Punch, S. (2002). Research with children: the same or different from research with adults? Childhood, 9 (3), 321-341.
  • Rasmussen, K. (2004). Places for children–children’s places. Childhood, 11 (2), 155-173.
  • Rose, G. (2001). Visual methodologies: an introduction to the interpretation of visual methodologies. London: Sage Stirling, E. and D. Yamada-Rice, D. (eds.), (2016). Visual methods with children and young people: Academics and visual industries in dialogue. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Thomas, N. and O’Kane, C. (1998). The ethics of participatory research with children. Children and Society, 12, 336–348. Thomson, P. (ed.) (2008). Doing visual research with children and young people. London: Routledge.
  • Torre, D. and Murphy, J. (2015) A different lens: Changing perspectives using photo- elicitation interviews. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23 (111), http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v23.2051 Trost, J. (1988). Conceptualising the family. International Sociology, 3 (3), 301-308. Trost, J. (1999). Family as a set of dyads. Marriage and Family Review, 28 (3/4), 79-91.
  • van Leeuwen, T. and Jewitt, C. (Eds.). (2001). The handbook of visual analysis. London: Sage.
  • Wortham, S. and Reyes, A. (2015). Discourse analysis beyond the speech event. London: Routledge.
  • Yamada-Rice, D. (2017). Using visual research methods with young children. In P. Christensen and A. James, (eds.), Research with children: Perspectives and practices, 3rd edition (pp. 71-86). London: Routledge. Young, L. and Barrett, H. (2001). Adapting visual methods: action research with Kampala street children. Area, 33 (2), 141-152.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet