Using photography in research with young migrants: addressing questions of visibility, movement and personal spaces

Abstract

This article discusses the experience of using photography in a research project with young (prospective) migrants in Ghana and Italy. Photography can be an empowering research tool, one that offers young participants a degree of control over the research process and thus allows their points of view to emerge. However, researchers need to consider that the choice of subjects may be influenced by the children's desire to avoid taking photographs in public, as they may attract attention and the act of pointing a camera may provoke unwanted questions and comments. Moreover, young people often lack the means to move independently, and this may further restrict the subjects they are able to photograph. Finally, they may resent adults' intrusion into their free time and therefore see taking photographs as a chore. I argue that all these factors need to receive greater attention when choosing photography in research with young participants. KeywordsVisual research; photography; children; young people 2 Using photography as a data collection technique in social research has grown increasingly common as equipment has become cheaper and simpler to use, and as participants' direct involvement in the process of inquiry has gained traction amongst investigators. Photography is used to gather insights into a wide range of subjects, and is utilised by both academic and non-academic researchers (Barker and Smith, 2012;Lal, Jarus and Suto, 2012). It is particularly favoured in research with children 1 , offering young participants the freedom to choose a response away from the researcher's direct presence and the consequent pressure this can entail (Barker and Weller, 2003). Photography is also selected in research with young people on the grounds that it is a pleasurable activity, one that can add a 'fun' dimension to a research project (Punch, 2002). Because of the greater degree of flexibility and creativity it can offer, photography is thus seen as a tool that can include young people as active participants in the research process (Luttrell, 2010), involving them directly in an enjoyable and engaging manner.While the positive aspects of photography as a data collection technique in social research are many, and while they have been repeatedly emphasised, many of the questions raised by the use of this technique have yet to find an answer (Luttrell and Chalfen, 2010). Engaging photography to capture the intentions and understandings of young people on their own terms has led to postulate its potential as a technique that allows researchers to '[see] through the eyes of children' (Banks, 2007, 5), and ensured the popularity of the technique. However, the enthusiasm for the potential of photography has also led to neglect regarding the complex dynamics which shape each image. Some authors have indeed stressed a need for caution, particularly with reference to the possible influences that other people -including the absent-yet-3 present researcher -may exercise on young participants' choice of subject (Barker and Smith, ...

Learning from failure: are practitioner researchers the answer when conducting research on sensitive topics with vulnerable children and young people?

“…It is also an engaging and creative method that appeals to children and young people of all ages and backgrounds (Cappello, 2005;Einarsdottir, 2005;Kolb, 2008). Photo-methods have been successfully used in research with very young children (Einarsdottir, 2005); young carers (Aldridge, 2012); children with disabilities (Phelan & Kinsella, 2013); young migrants (Fassetta, 2016) and on sensitive topics such as the sexual culture of schools (Allen, 2011) and children with chronic health conditions (Close, 2007).…”

The Uses and Limits of Photovoice in Research on Life After Immigration Detention and Deportation

“…Although initially developed within the field of health promotion, photovoice has been used in research with diverse populations including homeless people (Miller, 2006;Walsh et al, 2009;Wang, Cash, & Powers, 2000), formerly incarcerated women (Fortune & Arai, 2014), women migrants (Pearce, McMurray, Walsh, & Malek, 2017), young migrants (Fassetta, 2016), young adults (Rania, Migliorini, Cardinali, & Rebora, 2015), students (Call-Cummings & Martinez, 2016;Stack & Wang, 2018), drug users (Copes, Tchoula, Brookman, & Ragland, 2018;Fitzgibbon & Healy, 2017), women under community supervision (Fitzgibbon & Healy, 2017;Fitzgibbon & Stengel, 2017), indigenous peoples (Brooks & Poudrier, 2014), and displaced persons (Weber, 2018). As Call-Cummings and Martinez (2016, p. 798) observe, photovoice 'is a critical approach to empowering or "unsilencing" groups often unheard by hegemonic research processes and powerful policy circles', which helps to explain why the method is particularly prevalent in research with marginalised or vulnerable groups.…”

“…The issue of participant attrition is not unique to photovoice as a method, but rather relates to the broader challenge of following up with participants over time and across geographical space. Attending to the reasons why participants do not 'fully' participate or no longer stay involved in a research project, particularly involving a photographic element is, however, important (see Fassetta, 2016). According to Sharpe (2017, p. 240), '[r]efusal to participate in research can be interpreted as a self-protective strategy to avoid or minimize the potentially harmful emotional and material consequences of self-narration.'…”

“…Although I was unable to 'update' the technical aspect of the method, I raise it as a consideration for future photovoice research to potentially assist with participant recruitment and overcome possible barriers with participants who are widely dispersed. However, the technical aspect aside, the potential underlying disjuncture around participants' comfort level with taking photographs and the visual practice demanded by the method remain (see, e.g., Fassetta, 2016).…”

Attending to others: how digital technologies direct young people's nightlife

“…This generated fruitful discussions and reflections in the interviews. All interview partners were stimulated to explain their habitual use of their mobile phones while free from both study instructions and the "absent-yet-present researcher" (Fassetta, 2016:702; see also Langevang, 2007). Thus, "disorientating" (Ahmed, 2006) young people in their nightlife activities both raised their consciousness and empowered the research participants to talk about their practices with digital technologies in their nightlives.…”