Where words fail, visuals ignite

Qualitative tourism research: Opportunities in the emergent soft sciences

“…A small handful of reflexive, autoethnographical pieces are now appearing (Huang, 2010;Noy, 2007;Scarles, 2010;Small et al, 2011), but there is certainly scope to extend the application of autoethnography across the field of qualitative tourism research.…”

“…The use of autoethnography is growing within tourism studies, as is the potential for accounts of 'researcher-as-tourist' insight (Scarles, 2010). A small handful of reflexive, autoethnographical pieces are now appearing (Huang, 2010;Noy, 2007;Scarles, 2010;Small et al, 2011), but there is certainly scope to extend the application of autoethnography across the field of qualitative tourism research.…”

Co-creating knowledge in tourism research using the Ketso method

“…Tourism researchers have commented that " [d]espite this mass of research …we are failing to answer questions", calling for scholars to think creatively to problems, critique assumptions, analyse rhetoric and evaluate the broader power discourses to gain a deeper understanding of relationships (Singh, 2012, p. 23). To address this failure, critical researchers have advocated for methodological activities that move beyond the 'academic as epidemic' approach to, instead, adopting collaborative frameworks that disrupt these traditional methodological and academic assumptions in the field (Cockburn-Wootten, McIntosh, Smith, & Jefferies, 2018;Ramanayake, McIntosh, & Cockburn-Wootten, 2018;Rydzik, Pritchard, Morgan, & Sedgley, 2013;Scarles, 2010). As critical tourism researchers, we have sought to adopt methods that foster creative approaches, develop tactics for reciprocal knowledge transfer and to encourage ourselves and "our students to think against the grain" (Singh, 2012, p. 23).…”

Mess and method: Using ANT in tourism research

“…This paper contributes to the growing ANT literature in tourism by identifying five key dimensions, which it represents as character 'traits', of the researcher role, highlighting the way these relate to selection and use of method in the design and execution of ANT-oriented fieldwork, and arguing that the recognition of these traits in the narrative account is an important determinant of quality by demonstrating the trustworthiness of the study. This paper adopts an auto-ethnographic approach (Sparkes, 2000;Scarles, 2010) in analysing reflections on some issues arising from research design, method choice and data collection using personal experience of fieldwork in an ANT-based tourism case study carried out by the lead author in a tourism destination in North Wales. These reflections represent a 'set of empirical interferences' (Law and Singleton, 2013: 486), contextualised in relation to the current tourism literature, with recourse to the wider ANT literature in the social sciences in search of further guidance on research design and method choice.…”