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

Aldizkaria:
Qualitative Research in Education

ISSN: 2014-6418

Argitalpen urtea: 2018

Alea: 7

Zenbakia: 2

Orrialdeak: 170-196

Mota: Artikulua

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

Beste argitalpen batzuk: Qualitative Research in Education

Garapen Iraunkorreko Helburuak

Laburpena

This methodological paper discusses how photographs can be used in multi-layered data projects with children and families. We present photographs as a versatile low-fi digital artifact that can be used under a variety of research circumstances and critically discuss this particular visual tool in the context of the growing body of visual and multimodal research with children and families. The critical discussion draws on a series of research projects in which we have employed photographs (topics of the projects include family diversity or children's routines). The comparisons between projects highlights some of the procedural and analytical choices that are opened up when using photographs. In particular, we focus on two issues: (a) differences that emerge when materials are created by participants or are elicited by researchers, and; (b) the metaphors that are applied to interpret and work with photographs.

Erreferentzia bibliografikoak

  • 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.
Datuen iturria: Dialnet