Participatory Photography in Qualitative Research: A Methodological Review.

E Byrne, Norma Daykin, J Coad

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This paper reviews the use of participatory photography in qualitative research, drawing on papers published between 1995 and 2011. The review sought to provide an overview of photographic methods used in research. Studies using Photovoice methodology were not included. The search identified 53 reports of empirical studies in which participants were asked to take photographs as part of a research process. The review drew on systematic review methodology but its objective was not to synthesise evidence, rather to generate a narrative critique of the use of photographic methods. Whilst the benefits of using participatory photography were clearly articulated in the literature, there was a lack of detailed reporting of how the methods were used in relation to data analysis and relatively little critical discussion of the limitations of photographic methods. Hence researchers are expending significant efforts to engage with visual methods through photography, but they may not be using photographic data to its best potential.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-12
JournalVisual Methodologies
Volume4
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 16 May 2016

Keywords

  • Participatory photography
  • visual methods
  • photographs
  • review
  • methods
  • visual data
  • photo-elicitation

Cite this

Byrne, E., Daykin, N., & Coad, J. (2016). Participatory Photography in Qualitative Research: A Methodological Review. 4(2), 1-12.
Byrne, E ; Daykin, Norma ; Coad, J. / Participatory Photography in Qualitative Research: A Methodological Review. 2016 ; Vol. 4, No. 2. pp. 1-12.
@article{b2521af38ead4785b30b84b481632971,
title = "Participatory Photography in Qualitative Research: A Methodological Review.",
abstract = "This paper reviews the use of participatory photography in qualitative research, drawing on papers published between 1995 and 2011. The review sought to provide an overview of photographic methods used in research. Studies using Photovoice methodology were not included. The search identified 53 reports of empirical studies in which participants were asked to take photographs as part of a research process. The review drew on systematic review methodology but its objective was not to synthesise evidence, rather to generate a narrative critique of the use of photographic methods. Whilst the benefits of using participatory photography were clearly articulated in the literature, there was a lack of detailed reporting of how the methods were used in relation to data analysis and relatively little critical discussion of the limitations of photographic methods. Hence researchers are expending significant efforts to engage with visual methods through photography, but they may not be using photographic data to its best potential.",
keywords = "Participatory photography, visual methods, photographs, review, methods, visual data, photo-elicitation",
author = "E Byrne and Norma Daykin and J Coad",
year = "2016",
month = "5",
day = "16",
language = "English",
volume = "4",
pages = "1--12",
number = "2",

}

Byrne, E, Daykin, N & Coad, J 2016, 'Participatory Photography in Qualitative Research: A Methodological Review.' vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 1-12.

Participatory Photography in Qualitative Research: A Methodological Review. / Byrne, E; Daykin, Norma; Coad, J.

Vol. 4, No. 2, 16.05.2016, p. 1-12.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Participatory Photography in Qualitative Research: A Methodological Review.

AU - Byrne, E

AU - Daykin, Norma

AU - Coad, J

PY - 2016/5/16

Y1 - 2016/5/16

N2 - This paper reviews the use of participatory photography in qualitative research, drawing on papers published between 1995 and 2011. The review sought to provide an overview of photographic methods used in research. Studies using Photovoice methodology were not included. The search identified 53 reports of empirical studies in which participants were asked to take photographs as part of a research process. The review drew on systematic review methodology but its objective was not to synthesise evidence, rather to generate a narrative critique of the use of photographic methods. Whilst the benefits of using participatory photography were clearly articulated in the literature, there was a lack of detailed reporting of how the methods were used in relation to data analysis and relatively little critical discussion of the limitations of photographic methods. Hence researchers are expending significant efforts to engage with visual methods through photography, but they may not be using photographic data to its best potential.

AB - This paper reviews the use of participatory photography in qualitative research, drawing on papers published between 1995 and 2011. The review sought to provide an overview of photographic methods used in research. Studies using Photovoice methodology were not included. The search identified 53 reports of empirical studies in which participants were asked to take photographs as part of a research process. The review drew on systematic review methodology but its objective was not to synthesise evidence, rather to generate a narrative critique of the use of photographic methods. Whilst the benefits of using participatory photography were clearly articulated in the literature, there was a lack of detailed reporting of how the methods were used in relation to data analysis and relatively little critical discussion of the limitations of photographic methods. Hence researchers are expending significant efforts to engage with visual methods through photography, but they may not be using photographic data to its best potential.

KW - Participatory photography

KW - visual methods

KW - photographs

KW - review

KW - methods

KW - visual data

KW - photo-elicitation

M3 - Article

VL - 4

SP - 1

EP - 12

IS - 2

ER -

Byrne E, Daykin N, Coad J. Participatory Photography in Qualitative Research: A Methodological Review. 2016 May 16;4(2):1-12.