Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Visual Methods in Simulation-Based Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Healthcare Simulation Research

  • 2290 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter we discuss theoretical and practical considerations when using visual methods for research. We outline the nature and origin of visuals, describe the research process around visuals, and the purpose and possible output formats of visual methods. Visuals can be produced for a research project, or a project can be built around existing visuals. The visual itself can be the data of interest, or it can be used to elicit verbal or other responses in study participants. With ever more powerful technology it is important to consider the ethical aspects in using visuals for research: during planning of the study, during its conduct, and dissemination. Considerations need to include the context in which the visual was produced and in which it is shown, as framing of the visual can substantially change its meaning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Lahlou S. Installation theory. The societal construction and regulation of behaviour. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dieckmann P, Gaba D, Rall M. Deepening the theoretical foundations of patient simulation as social practice. Simul Healthc. 2007;2(3):183–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bezemer J, Cope A, Korkiakangas T, Kress G, Murtagh G, Weldon SM, et al. Microanalysis of video from the operating room: an underused approach to patient safety research. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017;26(7):583–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lahlou S, Le Bellu S, Boesen-Mariani S. Subjective evidence based ethnography: method and applications. Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2015;49(2):216–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cristancho S. Eye opener: exploring complexity using rich pictures. Perspect Med Educ. 2015;4(3):138–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Banks M, Zeitlyn D. Visual methods in social research. 2nd ed. London/Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bezemer J. Visual research in clinical education. Med Educ. 2017;51(1):105–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Rees CE. Identities as performances: encouraging visual methodologies in medical education research. Med Educ. 2010;44(1):5–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Doberne JW, He Z, Mohan V, Gold JA, Marquard J, Chiang MF. Using high-fidelity simulation and eye tracking to characterize EHR workflow patterns among hospital physicians. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2015;2015:1881–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Pauwels L. The SAGE handbook of visual research methods. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2011. Available from: http://methods.sagepub.com/book/sage-hdbk-visual-research-methods. 2018/03/06

    Google Scholar 

  11. Jewitt, C. An Introduction to Using Video for Research. 2012. NCRM Working Paper. NCRM. (Unpublished). Available online: http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/2259/; Accessed: 02. August 2019.

  12. Derry SJ, editor. Guidelines for video research in education. Recommendations from an expert panel. 2007. Available online: http://drdc.uchicago.edu/what/video-research-guidelines.pdf, Accessed 06 Mar 2018.

  13. Preston C, Carter B, Jack B, Bray L. Creating authentic video scenarios for use in prehospital research. Int Emerg Nurs. 2017;32:56–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jepsen RM, Dieckmann P, Spanager L, Lyk-Jensen HT, Konge L, Ringsted C, et al. Evaluating structured assessment of anaesthesiologists’ non-technical skills. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2016;60(6):756–66.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Sadideen H, Weldon SM, Saadeddin M, Loon M, Kneebone R. A video analysis of intra- and interprofessional leadership behaviors within “The Burns Suite”: identifying key leadership models. J Surg Educ. 2016;73(1):31–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Iedema R, Mesman J, Carroll K. Visualising health care practice improvement: Innovation from within. London: Radcliffe Publishing; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Harte JD, Homer CS, Sheehan A, Leap N, Foureur M. Using video in childbirth research. Nurs Ethics. 2017;24(2):177–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. MacWhinney B. Talkbank. Available from: https://talkbank.org.

  19. Saadi L. How can we capture the subject’s perspective? An evidence-based approach for the social scientist. Soc Sci Inf. 2011;50(3–4):607–55.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Mok TM, Cornish F, Tarr J. Too much information: visual research ethics in the age of wearable cameras. Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2015;49(2):309–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Wiles R, Prosser J, Bagnoli A, Clark A, Davies K, Holland S, et al. Visual ethics: ethical issues in visual research. Review paper. London: ESRC National Centre for Research Methods; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dieckmann P, Patterson M, Lahlou S, Mesman J, Nyström P, Krage R. Variation and adaptation: comment on learning from good performance in simulation training. Adv Simul. 2017;2(21). Open Access: https://advancesinsimulation.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41077-017-0054-1

  23. Lahlou S. Observing cognitive work in offices. In: Streitz NA, Siegel J, Hartkopf V, Konomi S, editors. Cooperative buildings integrating information, organizations, and architecture CoBuild 1999, Lecture notes in computer science. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Holmqvist K. Eye tracking: a comprehensive guide to methods and measures. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wang C, Burris MA. Photovoice: concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs assessment. Health Educ Behav. 1997;24(3):369–87.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Edwards B, Edwards B. Drawing on the right side of the brain. Definitive. 4th ed. New York: Tarcher/Penguin; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lahlou S, Le Bellu S, Boesen-Mariani S. Subjective evidence based ethnography: method and applications. Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2015;49(2):216–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Collier A, Wyer M. Researching reflexively with patients and families: two studies using video-reflexive ethnography to collaborate with patients and families in patient safety research. Qual Health Res. 2016;26(7):979–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hillen MA, van Vliet LM, de Haes HC, Smets EM. Developing and administering scripted video vignettes for experimental research of patient-provider communication. Patient Educ Couns. 2013;91(3):295–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Evans SC, Roberts MC, Keeley JW, Blossom JB, Amaro CM, Garcia AM, et al. Vignette methodologies for studying clinicians’ decision-making: validity, utility, and application in ICD-11 field studies. Int J Clin Health Psychol. 2015;15(2):160–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Clark L, Birkhead AS, Fernandez C, Egger MJ. A transcription and translation protocol for sensitive cross-cultural team research. Qual Health Res. 2017;27(12):1751–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. MacMurchy M, Stemler S, Zander M, Bonafide CP. Research: acceptability, feasibility, and cost of using video to evaluate alarm fatigue. Biomed Instrum Technol. 2017;51(1):25–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hart Y, Czerniak E, Karnieli-Miller O, Mayo AE, Ziv A, Biegon A, et al. Automated video analysis of non-verbal communication in a medical setting. Front Psychol. 2016;7:1130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Copenhagen Academy of Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Capital Region of Denmark, Center for Human Resources, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Peter Dieckmann

  2. Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Peter Dieckmann

  3. Department of Quality and Health Technology, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway

    Peter Dieckmann

  4. Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK

    Saadi Lahlou

Authors
  1. Peter Dieckmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Saadi Lahlou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Dieckmann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Monash Institute for Health and Clinical Education, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia

    Debra Nestel

  2. Emergency Medicine, Kaiser Permanente, Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Joshua Hui

  3. Department of Surgery, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Kevin Kunkler

  4. Department of Psychology, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA

    Mark W. Scerbo

  5. Department of Pediatrics, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY, USA

    Aaron W. Calhoun

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Dieckmann, P., Lahlou, S. (2019). Visual Methods in Simulation-Based Research. In: Nestel, D., Hui, J., Kunkler, K., Scerbo, M., Calhoun, A. (eds) Healthcare Simulation Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26837-4_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation