Computing and Library Services - delivering an inspiring information environment

Contested voices? Methodological tensions in creative visual research with children

Lomax, Helen (2012) Contested voices? Methodological tensions in creative visual research with children. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 15 (2). pp. 105-117. ISSN 1364-5579

Metadata only available from this repository.


This paper contributes to the body of work within the social studies of childhood on creative visual methods and the emerging critique on the participatory assumptions of child-centred creative visual methodology. Drawing on ethnographically informed research with a group of children aged 8–12 years which utilised a range of creative methods including child-led video and photography, the paper provides a methodological focus on the children’s interactions with the adult research team, each other and with the children whom they filmed, interviewed and photographed. The paper suggests that attention to the dynamics between children as researchers and participants is essential for understanding how children’s voices are made (and diminished) in child-led creative visual methods. Methodological attention to the ways in which children’s voices are differently (and unequally) heard in the research encounter is essential for evaluating what such methods bring to research with children and challenges theorisations of a singular children’s voice suggested in the literature.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: knowledge production, children and young people, participatory creative visual methods, methodology
Subjects: H Social Sciences > H Social Sciences (General)
H Social Sciences > HM Sociology
Schools: School of Education and Professional Development
Related URLs:
References: Besten, O. 2010. Local belonging and ‘geographies of emotions’: Immigrant children’s experience of their neighbourhoods in Paris and Berlin. Childhood, 17(2): 181–195. [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Brent, J. 2009. Searching for community: Representation power and action on an urban estate, Bristol: The Policy Press. [Google Scholar] British Sociological Association. (2002). Statement of ethical practice. Retrieved November 18, 2010, from±Ethical±Practice.htm Buckingham, D. 1991. What are words worth? Interpreting children’s talk about television. Cultural Studies, 5(2): 228–245. [Taylor & Francis Online], [CSA], [Google Scholar] Connolly, M. and Ennew, J. 1996. Introduction: Children out of place. Childhood, 3(2): 131–146. [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®], [CSA], [Google Scholar] Cox, A. (2011, May 13). Photographic self-portraiture: Empowerment through user generated content? Paper presented at New Visual Technologies, Media and Practices: Visual Dialogues:New Agendas in Inequalities Research, The Open University. Fargas-Malet, M., McSherry, D., Larkin and Robinson, C. 2010. Research with children: Methodological issues and innovative techniques. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 8(2): 175–192. [CrossRef], [Google Scholar] Gallacher, L. and Gallagher, M. 2008. Methodological immaturity in childhood research? Thinking through ‘participatory methods’. Childhood, 15(4): 499–516. [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Gillies, V. and Robinson, Y. 2010. Managing emotions in research with challenging pupils. Ethnography and Education, 5(1): 97–110. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar] Haraway, D. 1991. Simians, cyborgs and women: The reinvention of nature, London: Free Association Books. [Google Scholar] Hanley, L. 2008. Estates: An intimate history, London: Granta Books. [Google Scholar] Haw, K. 2008. “Voice and video: Seen, heard and listened to?”. In Doing visual research with children and young people, Edited by: Thomson, P. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar] Hendrick, H. 2003. Child welfare: Historical dimensions, contemporary debate, Bristol: The Policy Press. [Google Scholar] Holland, S., Renold, E., Ross, N.J. and Hillman, A. 2010. Power, agency and participatory agendas: A critical exploration of young people’s engagement in participative qualitative research. Childhood, 17: 360–375. [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Holloway, S.L and Valentine, G. 2005. Children’s geographies: Playing, living, learning, London: Routledge. [Google Scholar] Horton, J., Kraftl, P. and Tucker, F. 2008. ‘The challenges of children’s geographies’: A reaffirmation. Children’s Geographies, 6(4): 335–348. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Hunleth, J. 2011. Beyond, on or with: Questioning power dynamics and knowledge production in ‘child-oriented’ research methodology. Childhood, 18(1): 81–93. [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Index of Multiple Deprivation. 2010. Districts in England (2011), London: Communities and Local Government. [Google Scholar] James, A., Jenks, C. and Prout, A. 1998. Theorising childhood, Cambridge: Polity. [Google Scholar] Jenkins, R. 2000. Categorization: Identity, social process and epistemology. Current Sociology, 48(3): 7–25. [CrossRef], [CSA], [Google Scholar] Kehily, M.J. 2010. Childhood in crisis: Tracing the contours of ‘crisis’ and its impact upon contemporary parenting practices. Media, Culture and Society, 32: 171–185. [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Kindon, S. 2003. Participatory video in geographic research: A feminist practice of looking?. Area, 35: 142–153. [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Lashua, B. 2010. ‘Crossing the line’: Addressing youth leisure, violence and socio-geographic exclusion through documentary film-making. Leisure Studies, 29(2): 193–206. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Layard, R. and Dunn, J. 2009. A good childhood: Searching for values in a competitive age, London: Penguin. [Google Scholar] Lomax, H., Fink, J., Singh, N. and High, C. 2011. The politics of performance: Methodological challenges of researching children’s experiences of childhood through the lens of participatory video. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14(3): 231–243. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Mannay, D. 2010. Making the familiar strange: Can visual research methods render the familiar setting more perceptible?. Qualitative Research, 10(1): 91–111. [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Marmot, M. 2010. Fairer society, healthy lives: Strategic review of health inequalities, London: The Marmot Review. [Google Scholar] Minton, A. 2009. Ground control: Fear and happiness in the twenty-first century city, London: Penguin. [Google Scholar] Morrow, V. 2000. Dirty looks’ and ‘trampy places’ in young people’s accounts of community and neighbourhood: Implications for health inequalities. Critical Public Health, 10(2): 141–152. [Taylor & Francis Online], [CSA], [Google Scholar] Morrow, V. 2008. Ethical dilemmas in research with children and young people about their social environments. Children’s Geographies, 6(1): 49–61. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Morrow, V. and Mayall, B. 2009. What is wrong with children’s well-being in the UK: Questions of meaning and measurement. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 31(3): 217–229. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar] Pinkster, F.M. 2009. Watch out for the neighbourhood trap! A case study on parental perceptions of and strategies to counter risks for childhood in a disadvantaged neighbourhood. Children’s Geographies, 7(3): 323–337. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Popay, J., Thomas, C., Williams, G., Bennett, S., Gatrell, A. and Bostock, L. 2003. A proper place to live: Health inequalities, agency and the normative dimensions of space. Social Science & Medicine, 57: 55–69. [CrossRef], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [CSA], [Google Scholar] Rogaly, B. and Taylor, B. 2011. Moving histories of class and community: Identity, place and belonging in contemporary England, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. [Google Scholar] Schafer, N. and Yarwood, R. 2008. Involving young people as researchers: Uncovering multiple power relations among youths. Children’s Geographies, 6(2): 121–135. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Shaw, J. 2007. “Including the excluded: Collaborative knowledge production through participatory video”. In Inclusion through media, Edited by: Dowmunt, T., Dunford, M. and van Hemert, N. 180–191. London: Goldsmiths. [Google Scholar] Silva, E.B. and Wright, D. 2005. The judgement of taste and social position in focus group research. Sociologia e ricerca sociale, 76–77: 1–15. [Google Scholar] Social Policy Research Unit. 2010. Child well-being index 2009: Lower super output area analysis, London: Communities and Local Government. [Google Scholar] Sutton, L. 2009. ‘They’d only call you a scally if you are poor’: The impact of socio-economic status on children’s identities. Children’s Geographies, 7(3): 227–290. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar] Sutton, L., Smith, N., Dearden, C. and Middleton, S. 2007. A child’s eye view of social difference, York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Retrieved from [Google Scholar] Thomson, P., ed. 2008. Doing visual research with children and young people, London: Routledge. [Google Scholar] Tinkler, P. 2008. A fragmented picture; reflections on the photographic practices of young people. Isual Studies, 23(3): 255–266. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar] Trell, E. and Van Hoven, B. 2010. Making sense of place: Exploring creative and (inter)active research methods with young people. FENNIA, 188(1): 91–104. [Google Scholar] Van Blerk, L. and Barker, J. 2008. The wider relevance of undertaking research with children. Children’s Geographies, 6(2): 117–120. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Waiton, S. 2001. Scared of the kids: Curfews, crime and the regulation of young people, Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University Press. [Google Scholar] Ward, C. 1977. The child in the city, London: The Architectural Press. [Google Scholar] Weinger, S. 2000. Economic status: Middle class and poor children’s views. Children and Society, 2(14): 135–136. [CrossRef], [Google Scholar] Wiles, R., Coffey, A., Robison, J., & Heath, S. (2010) Anonymisation and visual images: issues of respect, ’voice’ and protection. Anonymisation and visual images, (Unpublished) Wiles, R., Coffey, A., Robison, J., & Prosser J. (2010). Ethical regulation and visual methods: making visual research impossible or developing good practice? Retrieved from Wiles, R., Crow, G., Heath, S. and Charles, V. 2008. ‘The management of confidentiality and anonymity in research’. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(5): 417–428. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar] Wright, C.Y., Darko, N., Standen, P.J. and Patel, T.G. 2010. Visual research methods: Using cameras to empower socially excluded black youth. Sociology, 44: 541–555. [CrossRef], [Google Scholar]
Depositing User: Sally Hughes
Date Deposited: 15 Mar 2017 10:43
Last Modified: 28 Aug 2021 12:15


Downloads per month over past year

Repository Staff Only: item control page

View Item View Item

University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield, HD1 3DH Copyright and Disclaimer All rights reserved ©