Women's voices made visible: Photovoice in visual criminology

Abstract

20participants rather than researchers document the issues of inquiry by taking photographs. Photovoice 21 is grounded in the larger research tradition known as Action Research or Participatory Action 22Research, which broadly strives to increase knowledge and facilitate conscious-raising of the topic 23 and outcomes of research issues through democratic processes of involvement (Fals-Borda, and

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.…”

“…This shift towards the examination, as well as integration, of images raises a number of important questions-and cautions-for criminological researchers and the field of visual criminology itself (Brown, 2014;Carrabine, 2014;Schept, 2014;Young, 2014). Importantly, Fitzgibbon and Stengel (2017) caution that a method like photovoice does not magically remove power differentials in research nor inherently bring about social change.…”

“…A second rationale was that as a method, photovoice is more a participatory-oriented approach to research in which participants can take, select, and contribute their own images (Call-Cummings & Martinez, 2016;Fitzgibbon & Stengel, 2017;Fortune & Arai, 2014) to express what is going on in their post-detention lives. Indeed, one of the broader goals of incorporating images in this project was to help make visible the daily lived experiences of border control that go beyond the sensational or extreme that often dominate media and public discourses (Gilligan & Marley, 2010;Lenette & Miskovic, 2016), to the more intimate and every-day from the perspectives of those who live it.…”

“…As part of the methodology, a related aim was to then discuss the images participants submitted using photo-elicitation (see, e.g., Copes et al, 2018;Fitzgibbon & Stengel, 2017;Gariglio, 2016), an approach in which the images could be used as guides for participants' telling of their stories and experiences of life after detention. I developed a detailed consent form specifically for the visual images in which participants could select which materials (photographs or video) they agreed to contribute to the project as well as those that could be disseminated as part of communicating the findings.…”

“…During the interview, which was audio-recorded and transcribed, I also asked Hussain to indicate which images, if any, he gave permission to be used in the research. He stated that I could use all of them however I wanted, which was not an 'ideal' response in terms of the method and the idea that participants ought to select those images with meaning to them (Fitzgibbon & Stengel, 2017). As with other follow-up research interviews in this study, Hussain was given an honorarium of £15 for his time and expertise.…”