Photo Elicitation in Psychology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Researchers, Study notes of Psychology

Download Photo Elicitation in Psychology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Researchers and more Study notes Psychology in PDF only on Docsity! Running Head: PHOTO ELICITATION IN PSYCHOLOGY “Beyond Words”: A researcher’s guide to using photo elicitation in psychology Elizabeth A. Bates1*, Joseph J. McCann1, Linda K. Kaye2 and Julie C. Taylor1. *Corresponding Author at: 1Department of Applied Psychology, University of Cumbria, Fusehill Street, Carlisle, Cumbria, CA1 2HH Tel: +44 1228 616328 Email: Elizabeth.Bates@cumbria.ac.uk 2 Abstract The use of photo elicitation is limited within the field of psychology despite its theoretical and practical potential. It offers significant benefits as a qualitative method that could present a new and interesting way of exploring previously understood topics within the discipline. Within our discussions, we present a Step-by-Step guide in which we outline the key practical stages, as well as ethical assurances involved in photo elicitation research, using our ongoing research as an illustrative example. It is intended that this could be used as a model of good practice for developing research paradigms beyond those typically used within the psychology discipline. Keywords: Photo elicitation; qualitative; interviews; psychology 5 structured interviews require researcher-led direction but the use of the prefix ‘semi’ does infer a level of flexibility and responsivity which may aid the development of rapport. Despite claims of enhanced rapport building the interview process remains largely under the control of the researcher (Sorrell and Redmond, 1995). Critical scholars are disparaging of claims that semi- structured interviews facilitate rapport building suggesting instead that what is actually being reflected is the participant’s acceptance of the interviewer’s goals and their attempts to provide appropriate information (Oakley, 1981). It is precisely this tension between researcher control and participant voice that the photo elicitation interview seeks to address. By allowing the introduction of participant-driven photographs, or other visual stimuli, the researcher attempts to understand the experiences (including emotions, feelings, ideas) of the participants, rather than imposing their own framework or perception of a topic (Holloway and Wheeler, 2013). The purpose of the images would be to promote dialogue and potentially introduce new dimensions to the research that the researcher had not considered. As an activity photo-elicitation can create a “comfortable space for discussion” (Epstein, Stevens, McKeever and Baruhel, 2006; p 8) and involve participants in a way that does not limit responses which may be especially important for groups such as children. By using photo elicitation within interviews, the researcher gains a “phenomenological sense” (Harper, 1986; p. 23) of what the content of the photos means to the participants; it allows people to share and define issues or concerns they have (Berg and Lune, 2013). As a method, it was first used by Collier (1957) whilst examining mental health in changing Canadian communities; it made it possible for the research team to challenge their previous assumptions about the communities. Within photo elicitation, photos (taken by either the researchers or the participant) are used as a stimulus to elicit richer accounts of the topic or phenomena under study (Frith and Harcourt, 2007). Photos have also been suggested to keep 6 the interview stimulating and can help keep the interview structured but not repetitive (Collier, 1957). The use of photos in the interview setting is not just to steer the discussion, but to also stimulate memory in a way that standardised questions may not. The difference between interviews solely reliant on words and those including pictures is thought to be around the way people respond to these two forms of symbolic representation; images are thought to connect with a deeper sense of the human consciousness than words (Harper, 2002). Researchers have claimed that the photo-elicitation technique has a number of benefits, including: an increase in participant-led dialogue producing rich data (Meo, 2010), the elicitation of data that in some cases has challenged traditional explanations of the phenomenon of interest (Hurworth, 2003) and the facilitation of rapport building (Collier, 1957). Indeed, our own ongoing research which uses photo-elicitation to explore university students’ experiences highlights the utility of this method, particularly for providing a “student- centred” approach to understand student satisfaction (Bates, Kaye and McCann, 2017). That is, whilst it is typical for the phenomenon of student satisfaction to be largely understood by Nationally-derived metrics such as the National Student Survey (NSS) within UK Higher Education, we question the extent to which this captures all aspects of students’ experiences which are important to their satisfaction at university. As such, photo-elicitation provides the opportunity to visually explore participants’ psychological connections to their physical and social environment at university, from which to more fully understand the components of their positive experiences. Whilst quantitative metrics such as the NSS can start to draw out the endorsements of students’ ratings of their university environment, this does not necessarily explore the more emotional underpinnings of these, which photo-elicitation is better enabled to provide. 7 Additionally, the use of photo-elicitation can perhaps have a more generic benefit to the discipline of psychology, which extends beyond individual research agendas. Indeed, the accessibility and advancement of visual technology and communication, through systems such as social networking sites and platforms such as Smartphone cameras, means that much of contemporary phenomena are experienced and recorded visually. As such, it is perhaps a relevant and timely opportunity from which to explore psychological issues using these visual means which are becoming increasingly prevalent and integrated as a part of the human experience. Indeed, photo-elicitation, as well as other methodological approaches which make use of electronic data, such as netnography (Kozinets, 2002), have a key benefit for advancing insight into the lived experience through use of this recorded, real-world data. But what is Photo Elicitation? Multiple terms have been used to describe what appears to be, broadly speaking, the same method. For example, Collier (1957), in his original paper, discussed the use of photography within interviews and referred to them as photo-interviews. Harper (1986, 2002) was one of the first to use the term 'photo elicitation', describing it simply as using photos in a research interview. It has also been referred to as photo interviewing (e.g. Dempsey and Tucker, 1991) reflexive photography (e.g. Harrington and Lindy, 1998) and hermeneutic photography (Hagedon, 1994). The diversity in terminology perhaps reflects its use across multiple disciplines and this ubiquity could serve as a testament to its appeal. The lack of clarity around implementation does reinforce our aim to support the development of an approach that can be clearly identified and consistently applied for use within psychological research. We present this paper therefore as the first of its kind to explicitly articulate the practical steps 10 challenge the researcher’s implicit assumptions about a topic. Through this process of choice and explanation the researcher is able to refine and clarify the participants meaning (Oliffe and Bottorff, 2007). As a method it has the potential to reduce some of perceived differences in power and knowledge, making people feel that they are meaningful collaborators (Van Auken, Frisvoll and Stewart, 2010). In essence, the photo serves as an opportunity for researchers to explore and examine the way the participant understands and interprets their world (Bigante, 2010). In our own ongoing research, we achieved this by asking our participants (final year undergraduate students) to select a number of photos which they felt best represented their experiences at university. Within this, we were careful to avoid imposing any specific requirements on when or where these photos were taken. We simply allowed participants a couple of weeks from the initial briefing, to compile photos on what they felt was relevant and meaningful to them in their experiences at university. The nature of the interview content therefore was very much determined by what photos they had brought in with them (discussed in more detail later in Step 4: Interviews). In this sense, participants are active collaborators in developing insight into the concept/s of the research issue, rather than being “subjects” upon which research is conducted. Reflections on Ethics The use of photos in interviews does raise some ethical issues, regardless of whether the method is participant or researcher-driven. Ethical issues include concerns around the nature of the questions posed, the photos selected and consent. Studies have previously used this methodology to explore ethically-sensitive topics, for example orphaned adolescents (Thupayagale-Tshweneagae and Mokomane, 2012), people with HIV (Mitchell, DeLange, Moletsane, Stuart, and Buthelezi, 2005) and young people with cancer (Yi and Zebrack, 2010). The potential for distress is high when asking people to gather photos of, and discuss an 11 upsetting and unpleasant experience. The potential is heightened further when using a method intended to exploit emotional connections to memories and experiences (e.g. Kunimoto, 2004), caution is advised when choosing photo-elicitation if their topic is particularly sensitive. This does not rule out the use of such a method with some topics, only that methodological decisions should reflect such sensitivity. For example, Frohmann (2005) studied “battered women” using this method. This study involved participants bringing photos that represented their experiences to group discussions. The choice of photos and the level of disclosure in the discussions remained entirely in the power of the participants. Their photos did not reflect the brutality of the violence they had experienced and were more reflective of “ordinary” day-to-day life. This example challenged researchers’ assumptions about the subject. A topic could be sensitive and challenging in its nature but it should not rule out exploration or use of expressive and visual methods. Indeed, there is an implicit assumption here that the emotional response evoked through the use of photos is a negative experience. However, this is not always necessarily the case; Oliffe and Bottorff (2007) found when using it in their interviews of men’s experiences of health and illness that it helped men talk more openly about their experiences some participants reported finding the act of talking about their photo’s to be quite therapeutic. By moving an interview of a topic from something concrete (e.g. the photos) to something more abstract, it helps create a different level of understanding (Harper, 1986). A participant in this situation could be confronted by a new and previously considered understanding of their social world, perhaps challenging a taken for granted aspect of their experience, a realisation that their experience could be different to the researcher’s or anyone else’s. There is the potential for this to be a positive and somewhat reflective experience. However, there is also the potential for this to be reflected on negatively, participants may experience an uncomfortable realisation about their own position or stance on an issue. The power differentials present could lead a participant to believe their view or experience is 12 somehow wrong or inferior. Whilst this could be a criticism of any qualitative method where data is collected in person, it may be more sensitive as an issue with the use of photos. Care and sensitivity is required here to ensure that participants do not feel judged and are not left distressed. Consent presents another significant ethical issue, Close (2007) felt when the images were specifically only to be seen by the research team, it seemed to increase the sense of ownership that the participants had for their task and their photos. She tried to empower her participants by giving the photos (once processed) back to the participants to allow them to decide which were to come to the interview and which were most important. They chose the photos which meant they controlled the interview and the research agenda of their participation. This is something that can be reflected on differently in the age of digital technology making it easier for participants only to select the images they are willing to share. A practical and ethical consideration here would be to ensure informed consent is explicit and takes into consideration power/accessibility issues of the sample being targeted. For example, Close (2007) recommends seeking separate consent for use of the data in analysis and use of the visual imagery in the dissemination of the research. It is of critical importance that when utilising a method that could be considered to be emotionally provocative and exposing, that a participant is fully aware of how their photos will be used. It is also important to advise participants that photos including other people or easily identifiable places would not be included in any publication. Alignment of Power, Interview Format and Analytic Strategy The rise of ‘point and shoot’ digital photograph technologies has been paralleled by the emergence and adoption of several visual research methodologies (Biggerstaff, 2012). By illustration, the photo elicitation interview (PEI) has proven to be an attractive and broadly 15 Practical Considerations- A Step-by-Step Guide for Researchers Step 1: Epistemological Decision Prior to any practical steps, the researcher must first decide on the nature of the phenomenon and the extent to which participants should be selecting their own photos and what role he/she is playing in the direction of the discussion. Thus, the nature of the phenomenon and how reflective this should be of the participant’s own experience (and by implication, where the power lies between the researcher and participant) determines this decision. The motivation to choose a qualitative method, such as a traditional semi-structured or unstructured interview, is often underpinned by phenomenological or interpretivist assumptions and a desire to understand the individual experience. Similar motivations would draw people towards using photo-elicitation especially when combined with the advantages described above. That being said, as a method it is flexible in that the guidance and instructions can fit different epistemological positions. For example, the photos could be used as a tool in a structured researcher-driven PEI and analysed in a controlled way, more reflective of traditional positivist assumptions. If, in contrast, epistemological beliefs lay more in a social constructionist sphere then the research process should be driven and understood much more from the participant’s perspective. Therefore, the choice of photos should be strongly participant-driven and the interview format should be largely unstructured to allow the story and experience of the participant to emerge without influence or contamination by the researcher’s pre-existing beliefs. In our research on student experiences, we acknowledge that most student experience measures are quantitative. For example, in the NSS, there is a single overall satisfaction question that generates the percentage which is used as the national metric of satisfaction. We wanted to understand the various experiences that students drew upon when responding to that question, rather than assume that it reflected an aggregate of the questions that preceded. This 16 meant appreciating and understanding their individual experiences, focusing on latent interpretation rather than specific underlying meanings or motivations. We aligned our method with this position, not to reject the notion that satisfaction could be measured, but to identify the range of factors that might influence a student’s score. Through this process of identification, the objective was to identify common themes that may be useful at an institutional level in terms of enhancing the student experience. For these reasons we adopted a position that sought participant involvement in the interview structure, in which students were asked to bring photos that represented their experience and talk us through them. Step 2: Participant Briefing As with any research that is ethically assured, briefing participants in photo-elicitation research is no different in respect of ensuring they are informed of the nature of the research. However, the main distinction is the phasing of this briefing. Specifically, if the researcher has chosen to undertake participant-driven photo elicitation, there are two phases of briefing. The initial briefing takes place at one time-point to inform the collection of the photos alongside the main purpose and ethics of the research. Following an appropriate period to permit photo collection (see Step 3 below), participants are then invited back to take part in the interview in which they are asked to bring in their photos. The second briefing takes place at this point which includes a fuller account of the purpose and ethical assurances of the research. Should the researcher wish to conduct a more structured interview in which he/she selects the photos him/herself, only one standard briefing would be required and Step 3 below is not applicable. The power and structure that has been chosen will be reflected here in the instructions to participants. For a researcher-driven photo elicitation interview, there are no requirements here for instructions around gathering the photos for the participants. For a participant-driven semi-structured approach, participants may be instructed on the topic of interest (e.g. the 17 student experience) and explicit areas that should be captured (e.g. around home life, life on campus, assessment and time management). For a more open/unstructured format this would require the least guidance on what the content of the photos should be. For example, with the authors’ ongoing research project, participants were asked to gather photos that represented or reflected their student experience. They were not given specific areas that should be considered and we left it with the participants to choose the areas that were most important in their own experiences as students. A further consideration at this stage relates to consent. As discussed earlier, there are additional ethical considerations with the use of photos and what exactly participants are consenting to. Close (2007) recommends gaining consent for the use of the photos in the interviews/data collection and the use in any dissemination separately. This decision will be dictated by the researcher’s dissemination plan and the strategy around using the photos. For example, the participants’ photos may only be used in the interview as a tool to aid gathering the data and so this would be the only consent required. Alternatively, there may be a desire to include the photos in publications or conference presentations. Consent should be sought for these in addition to their consent to the interview itself. As per the British Psychological Society (2014) ethical guidelines, there are additional requirements around the use of audio or visual material that may be in some way identifiable. They stipulate that researchers should gain additional verbal consent during the audio-recording of an interview. In the case of PEIs this should be extended to reiterating consent to take part in the interview and also the use of the photos. From an ethical perspective, within the initial briefing stage, it is important that researchers are clear and explicit that the content of photos should not depict anything illegal, or be deemed sensitive in nature. Additionally, it should be noted that if participants choose to select photos which depict another person/people, they should first obtain consent from the 20 Therefore, the questions themselves are not directing the nature of the discussion, but instead the photos are framing the structure of the interview process; it is the photos themselves which determine what and why issues are discussed. This is leaving the control and power of the interview process as much as possible with the participant1. Participant-Driven Semi-Structured Interviews Semi-structured interviews using visual imagery would be reflective largely of semi-structured interviews in any other setting; the researcher has areas of interest but the flexibility of the interview should allow for “unexpected” topics to surface (e.g. Smith and Osborn, 2007). In this setting, participants may be given some guidance on sub-topics of the broader area of interest and so the interview will consequently have a loose structure to it. The researchers may still use some broader opening questions (as above) but the content of the photos will be less spontaneous. Researcher-Driven Interviews Following the briefing, the researcher would present the photos they had previously selected to frame the direction of the interview. In this way, the photos are simply being used as stimuli in the research discussion process. This has often been undertaken by presenting one photo in turn and directing discussions in respect of individual photos (e.g. Smith and Woodward, 1999), but could also be done by presenting all at the beginning with questions associated with them. Methodologically speaking, whilst this is not necessarily as empowering, it is still likely to generate rich and interesting data due to the power the photos have within the interview context. 1 The discussion here is focused on individual interviews but the advice and guidelines could be applied to group interviews or focus groups. Additional considerations should be noted around confidentiality and levels of anonymity but it could still be utilised effectively. 21 Step 5: Analysis As previously mentioned, due to the imprecise approach to data analysis, many researchers may be wary by the prospect of PEIs, given that previous photo elicitation research is often vague on the specific analytic decisions and strategies used. We aim to rectify this by discussing the appropriateness of using photo-elicitation with various qualitative research analysis, providing a starting point for researchers. Whilst each analysis is varied in nature, we believe each is appropriate for every type of PEI (Participants and Researcher Driven) and will be adjusted accordingly. Content Analysis and Thematic Analysis. Content analysis (CA; Hsieh and Shannon, 2005) and thematic analysis (TA; Braun and Clarke, 2006) are widely used and flexible methods of analysis within qualitative research. Both methods are widely used in health settings (Grana and Ling, 2014; Hudon et al., 2012; West, Rudge, and Mapedzahama, 2016). There are several different kinds of CA and TA, however generally both methods seek to quantify textual data, by summarising and categorising themes encountered in data (Biggerstaff, 2012). However, TA goes further and interprets several aspects of the research topic (Boyatzis, 1998). Choosing PEI’s over verbal-only interviews, gives greater context to the interview as photographs are used in conjunction with the participants’ dialogue, yielding deeper and more elaborate accounts of participants lives compared to verbal-only interviews (See Tran Smith, Padgett, Choy-Brown, and Henwood, 2015). Discursive and Discourse analysis. Discourse analysis (DA) is focused on the specific nuances of language, it explores the role language plays in a participants’ description of their world (Parker, 1990; Potter and Wetherell, 1987). Specifically, DA is concerned with how we ‘socially construct’ the world around us, through language (Holt, 2011). A fundamental aspect 22 of DA is that the researcher can appreciate and enter the participant’s cognitive world (Resta, 2009). PEIs are particularly suited for the study of language, as through the description of photographs by participants, researchers are given a unique representation of the participant’s worldview as the photographs act as a medium to ‘bridge communication gaps’ (Collier and Collier, 1986, pp.99). The introduction of photographs into the interview schedule, allows researchers access to the participant’s subjective realities through the discursive language they use to describe their photos (Harper, 2002; Oliffe and Bottorff, 2007). It is this interplay between participant and researcher that informs the analysis, and it is this interplay which allows participants to communicate their sensory experience, which can be difficult to articulate (Bryant, Tibbs, and Clark, 2011; See Ortega-Alcazar and Dyck, 2012 for example; Radley and Taylor, 2003). Narrative Analysis. Narrative analysis (NA) aims to explore the lived narratives of participants’ lives or social cultural stories (Emden, 1998; Sarbin, 1986). PEIs are particularly useful in NA as they connect “core definitions of the self” to society, culture and history (Harper, 2002). Additionally, PEIs, in line with the principles of NA create an interactive transactional process between the researcher and the participant, as the photographs used in the study take a constructive role in the interview, in a same way the dialogue between the ‘narrator’ and ‘listener’ does in NA (Bryant et al., 2011; Bryne, 2014; Marsh, Shawe, Robinson, and Leamon, 2016). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA), aims to place the experience of the participant at the core of the interview dialogue, by exploring how they assign meaning to their experience when interacting with their environment (Biggerstaff, 2012; Smith, Flowers, and Larkin, 2009; Smith, Harré, and Van Langenhove, 1995).There are several different methodologies that can be used to ascertain an individual’s 25 The diversity that exists within qualitative psychological research should be celebrated as a substantial strength of the discipline, yet it is the disparity and often inconsistencies which arise from this that serve to reemphasise the dominance of quantitative methods which have been relatively coherent and unified (Madill and Gough, 2008). This suggests a need for some agreement around the qualitative methods being used in order to emphasise similarity in approach without lapsing into “over homogenization” (Madill and Gough, 2008; p. 267). It is hoped this paper goes some way to addressing this issue for this specific method, thus providing a benchmark for more consistent and informed research practice. References Aldridge, J., and Sharpe, D. 2007 Pictures of young caring. Loughborough: Young Carers Research Group. Atkinson, P., and Silverman, D. 1997. Kundera's Immortality: The interview society and invention of the self. Qualitative inquiry, 3(3), 304-325. Bates, E. A., Kaye, L. K. & McCann, J. J. (2017) A snapshot of the student experience: Exploring student satisfaction through the use of photographic elicitation. Manuscript submitted for publication. Beilin, R. 2005. Photo‐ elicitation and the agricultural landscape: ‘seeing’ and ‘telling’ about farming, community and place. Visual studies, 20(1), 56-68. Berg, B. L. and Lune, H. 2013. Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. London: Pearson. Biggerstaff, D. 2012. Qualitative research methods in psychology. Psychology Book, 38. Bignante, E. 2010. The use of photo-elicitation in field research. Exploring Maasai representations and use of natural resources. EchoGéo, (11). 26 Braun, V., and Clarke, V. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101. Braun, V., and Clarke, V. 2013. Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. Sage. British Psychological Society 2014. Code of research ethics. Retrieved from: http://www.bps.org.uk/system/files/Public%20files/code_of_human_research_ethics_ dec_2014_inf180_web.pdf Boyatzis, R. E. 1998. Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Sage. Briggs, L. P., Stedman, R. C., and Krasny, M. E. (2014). Photo-Elicitation Methods in Studies of Children’s Sense of Place. Children, Youth and Environments, 24(3), 153– 172. Bryant, W., Tibbs, A., and Clark, J. 2011. Visualising a safe space: the perspective of people using mental health day services. Disability and Society, 26(5), 611–628. Byrne, E. 2014. Visual data in qualitative research: The contribution of photography to understanding the mental health hospital environment (Doctoral dissertation, University of the West of England). Carlsson, B. 2001. Depicting experiences. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 45(2), 125-143. Clark-Ibáñez, M. 2004. Framing the social world with photo-elicitation interviews. American behavioral scientist, 47(12), 1507-1527. Clark-Ibáñez, M. 2007. Inner-city children in sharper focus: Sociology of childhood and photo elicitation interviews. Visual research methods: Image, society, and representation, 167-196. 27 Close, H. 2007. The use of photography as a qualitative research tool: With reference to her own study of children with long-term conditions, Helen Close considers whether photography as a research method can be both valuable and ethical. Nurse researcher, 15(1), 27-36. Collier, J. J. 1957. Photography in anthropology: a report on two experiments. American Anthropologist, 59, 843–859. Collier, J., and Collier, M. 1986. Visual anthropology: Photography as a research method. UNM Press. Croghan, R., Griffin, C., Hunter, J., and Phoenix, A. 2008. Young people's constructions of self: Notes on the use and analysis of the photo‐ elicitation methods. International journal of social research methodology, 11(4), 345-356. Dempsey, J. V., and Tucker, S. A. 1991. Using Photo-Interviewing as Tool for Research and Evaluation, 167-189 Dowdall, G. W., and Golden, J. 1989. Photographs as data: an analysis of images from a mental hospital. Qualitative Sociology, 12(2), 183-213. Duckett, P. S., and Fryer, D. 1998. Developing empowering research practices with people who have learning disabilities. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 8(1), 57-65. Emden, C. 1998. Conducting a narrative analysis. Collegian (Royal College of Nursing, Australia), 5(3), 34–39. 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. Fox, D., Prilleltensky, I., and Austin, S. (Eds.). 2009. Critical psychology: An introduction. Sage. 30 Justesen, L., Mikkelsen, B. E., and Gyimóthy, S. 2014. Understanding hospital meal experiences by means of participant-driven-photo-elicitation. Appetite, 75, 30–39. Kozinets, R. V. 2002. The field behind the screen: using netnography for marketing research in online communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 39, 61-72. Kunimoto, N. 2004. Intimate Archives: Japanese‐ Canadian family photography, 1939– 1949. Art History, 27(1), 129-155. Lapenta, F. 2011. Some theoretical and methodological views on photo-elicitation. The sage handbook of visual research methods. Los Angeles: Sage Publications. Loeffler, T. A. 2004. A photo elicitation study of the meanings of outdoor adventure experiences. Journal of Leisure Research, 36(4), 536. Lopez, K. A., and Willis, D. G. 2004. Descriptive versus interpretive phenomenology: Their contributions to nursing knowledge. Qualitative Health Research, 14(5), 726-735. Madill, A., and Gough, B. 2008. Qualitative research and its place in psychological science. Psychological methods, 13(3), 254. Marsh, W., Shawe, J., Robinson, A., and Leamon, J. 2016. Moving pictures: the inclusion of photo-elicitation into a narrative study of mothers' and midwives' experiences of babies removed at birth. Evidence Based Midwifery, 14(2), 44. Meo, A. I. 2010. Picturing students' habitus: The advantages and limitations of photo-elicitation interviewing in a qualitative study in the city of Buenos Aires. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9(2), 149-171. Mitchell, C., DeLange, N., Moletsane, R., Stuart, J., and Buthelezi, T. 2005. Giving a face to HIV and AIDS: On the uses of photo-voice by teachers and community health care 31 workers working with youth in rural South Africa. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2(3), 257-270. Oakley, A. 1981. Interviewing women: A contradiction in terms. Doing feminist research, 30(6), 1. Oliffe, J. L., and Bottorff, J. L. 2007. Further than the eye can see? Photo elicitation and research with men. Qualitative Health Research, 17(6), 850-858. Ortega-Alcazar, I., and Dyck, I. 2012. Migrant narratives of health and well-being: Challenging “othering” processes through photo-elicitation interviews. Critical Social Policy, 32(1), 106–125 Parker, I. 1990. Discourse: Definitions and contradictions. Philosophical Psychology, 3(2–3), 189–204. Potter, J., and Hepburn, A. 2005. Qualitative interviews in psychology: Problems and possibilities. Qualitative research in Psychology, 2(4), 281-307. Potter, J., and Wetherell, M. 1987. Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour. Sage Publications Ltd. Radley, A., and Taylor, D. 2003. Images of recovery: A photo-elicitation study on the hospital ward. Qualitative Health Research, 13(1), 77-99. Rapport, F., Doel, M. A., and Wainwright, P. 2008. The doctor’s tale: Enacted workspace and the general practitioner. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung, 9(2). Rennie, D. L., Watson, K. D., and Monteiro, A. M. 2002. The rise of qualitative research in psychology. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 43(3), 179. 32 Resta, D. (2009). Cognitive Science and Literature. A Cognitive Analysis of the Metaphoric Processes in Shalimar the Clown by Salman Rushdie. Cognitive Philology, 2. Rose, G. 1996. Teaching visualised geographies: towards a methodology for the interpretation of visual materials. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 20, 281–294. Rose, G. 2016. Visual methodologies: An introduction to researching with visual materials. Sage. Samuels, J. 2004. Breaking the ethnographer’s frames reflections on the use of photo elicitation in understanding Sri Lankan monastic culture. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(12), 1528-1550. Sarbin, T. R. 1986. The narrative as a root metaphor for psychology. In Narrative psychology: The storied nature of human conduct. (pp. 3–21). Shaw, D. 2013. A New Look at an Old Research Method: Photo-Elicitation. TESOL Journal, 44, 785–799. Smith, F., and Barker, J. 2000. Out of school. Children’s geographies: playing, living, learning, London: Routledge, 245-256. Silver, J., and Farrants, J. 2016. ‘I Once Stared at Myself in the Mirror for Eleven Hours.’Exploring mirror gazing in participants with body dysmorphic disorder. Journal of health psychology, 21(11), 2647-2657. Smith, J. A. and Osborn, M. 2007. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. In J. Smith (Ed) Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (53-80) London: Sage. Smith, C. Z., and Woodward, A. M. 1999. Photo-elicitation method gives voice and reactions of subjects. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 53(4), 31.