The Ethics of Visual Research and Participant Empowerment

Chapter

Abstract

The ethics of research is integral to all studies involving people and communities. However, studies involving photographs, or other visual representations, present a unique set of ethical considerations. Those considerations present themselves through legal standards, institutional and professional guidelines, as well as personal morals. This chapter explores the different levels of ethical decision-making visual researchers face in designing and implementing photo-elicitation studies, as well as the dissemination of findings. The first portion of the chapter describes the ethical obligations and challenges associated with gaining research approval through institutional ethics committees. The second portion of the chapter addresses the more complicated realm of ethical decision-making that relies on researchers’ personal principles aimed at protecting what is in the best interest of participants.

References

  1. Alderson, P. (2000) Children as researchers. The effect on participation rights on research methodology. In P. Christensen & A. James (Eds.), Research with children (pp. 241–257). New York: Falmer.Google Scholar
  2. Alderson, P. (2004). Ethics. In S. Fraser, V. Lewis, S. Ding, M. Kellett, & C. Robinson (Eds.), Doing research with children and young people (pp. 97–111). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Banks, M. (2001). Visual methods in social research. London, United Kingdom: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barker, J., & Weller, S. (2003). “Is it fun?” Developing children centered research methods. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23(1/2), 33–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beauchamp, T., & Childress, J. (2013). Principles of biomedical ethics (7th ed.). New York: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  6. Brady, G., & Brown, G. (2013). Rewarding but let’s talk about the challenges: Using arts based methods in research with young mothers. Methodological Innovations Online, 8(1), 99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boucher, M. L. (2016). More than an ally: How a successful White teacher builds solidarity with his African American students. Urban Education, 51(1), 82–107. doi: 10.1177/0042085914542982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boxall, K., & Ralph, S. (2009). Research ethics and the use of visual images in research with people with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 34, 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bugos, E., Frasso, R., FitzGerald, E., True, G., Adachi-Mejia, A. M., & Cannuscio, C. (2014). Practical guidance and ethical considerations for studies using photo-elicitation interviews. Preventing Chronic Disease, 11, E189. doi: 10.5888/pcd11.140216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Connors, C., & Stalker, K. (2007). Children’s experiences of disability—pointers to a social model of childhood disability. Disability & Society, 22(1), 19–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coomber, R. (2002). Signing your life away?: Why Research Ethics Committees (REC) shouldn’t always require written confirmation that participants in research have been informed of the aims of a study and their rights—the case of criminal populations (Commentary). Sociological Research Online, 7(1). Available at http://www.socresonline.org.uk/7/1/coomber.html.
  12. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Cox, S., Drew, S., Guillemin, M., Howell, C., Warr, D., & Waycott, J. (2014). Guidelines for ethical visual research methods. Melbourne: The University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
  14. Edwards, S. J., Ashcroft, R., & Kirchin, S. (2004). Research ethics committees: Differences and moral judgment. Bioethics, 18(5), 408–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Einarsdóttir, J. (2007). Research with children: Methodological and ethical challenges. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 15(2), 197–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Flewitt, R. (2005). Conducting research with young children: Some ethical considerations. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), 553–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gregory, I. (2003). Ethics in research. London: MPG Books.Google Scholar
  18. Gunsalus, C. K., Bruner, E. M., Burbules, N. C., Dash, L., Finkin, M., Goldberg, J. P., et al. (2007). The Illinois white paper improving the system for protecting human subjects: Counteracting IRB “Mission creep”. Qualitative Inquiry, 13(5), 617–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gurevitch, Z. D. (1998). The other side of dialogue: On making the other strange and the experience of otherness. American Journal of Sociology, 93(5), 1179–1199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Harper, D. (2002). Talking about pictures: A case for photo elicitation. Visual Studies, 17(1), 13–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Heath, S., & Cleaver, E. (2004). Mapping the spatial in shared household life: A missed opportunity? In C. Knowles & P. Sweetman (Eds.), Picturing the social landscape: Visual methods and the sociological imagination. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Kallio, K. P. (2008). The body as a battlefield: Approaching children’s politics. Human Geography, 90(3), 285–297.Google Scholar
  23. Lidz, C., Appelbaum, P.S., Arnold, R., Candillis, P., Gardner, W., Myers, S., & Simon, L. (2012). How closely do Institutional Review Boards follow the Common Rule? Academic Medicine, 87(7), 969–974.Google Scholar
  24. Lincoln, Y. (2008). Institutional review boards and methodological conservatism: The challenge to and from phenomenological paradigms. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research (pp. 221–243). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Lomax, H. (2011). Shifting the focus: Children’s image-making practices and their implications for analysis. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 35(3), 227–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Luttrell, W. (2010a). Qualitative educational research: Readings in reflexive methodology and transformative practice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Luttrell, W. (2010b). ‘A camera is a big responsibility’: A lens for analyzing children’s visual voices. Visual Studies, 25(3), 224–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Macintosh, T. (2006). Ethical considerations for clinical photography in the global south. Developing World Bioethics, 6(2), 81–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mannay, D. (2016). Visual, narrative and creative research methods: Application, reflection and ethics. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Mannay, D., & Morgan, M. (2015). Doing ethnography or applying a qualitative technique? Reflections from the “Waiting Field”. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 166–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mauthner, M., Birch, M., Jessop, J., & Miller, T. (2002). Ethics in qualitative research. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Miller, K. (2015). Dear critics: Addressing concerns and justifying the benefits of photography as a research method. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 16(3), 1–17.Google Scholar
  33. Miller, T., & Bell, L. (2002). Consenting to what? Issues of access, gate-keeping, and ‘informed’ consent. In M. Mauthner, M. Birch, J. Jessop, & T. Miller (Eds.), Ethics in qualitative research (pp. 53–69). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  34. Murphy, E., & Dingwall, R. (2007). Informed consent, anticipatory regulation and ethnographic practice. Social Science and Medicine, 65(11), 2223–2234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. O’Brien, D. (2013). Visual research with young deaf people—An investigation of the transitional experiences of deaf young people from mainstream schools using auto-driven photo-elicitation interviews. Graduate Journal of Social Science, 10(2), 152–175.Google Scholar
  36. Pain, H. (2012). A literature review to evaluate the choice and use of visual methods. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 11(4), 303–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Papademas, D. (2009). IVSA code of ethics and guidelines. Visual Studies, 24(3), 250–257.Google Scholar
  38. Pink, S. (2003). Interdisciplinary agendas in visual research: Re-situating visual anthropology. Visual Studies, 18(2), 179–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pink, S. (2006). The future of visual anthropology: Engaging the senses. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  40. Pitt, P. (2014). “The project cannot be approved in its current form”: Feminist visual research meets the human research ethics committee. Australian Educational Researcher, 41, 311–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Powers, W. R. (1996). Images across boundaries: History, use and ethics of photographs of American Indians. American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 20(3), 129–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Prosser, J., & Loxley, A. (2007). Enhancing the contribution of visual methods to inclusive education. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 7(1), 55–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Redshaw, M. E., Harris, A., & Baum, J. D. (1996). Research ethics committee audit: Differences between committees. Journal of Medical Ethics, 22(2), 78–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rose, G. (2007). Visual methodologies: An introduction to researching with visual materials. London, United Kingdom: Sage.Google Scholar
  45. Rowe, J. (2011). Legal issues of using images in research. In E. Margolis & L. Pauwels (Eds.), The sage handbook of visual research methods (pp. 707–722). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schimek, G. (2016, May). Using photo elicitation to reframe the student experience. Paper presented at the meeting of International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Champaign, IL.Google Scholar
  47. Shah, S., Whittle, A., Wilfond, B., Gensler, G., & Wendler, D. (2004). How do institutional review boards apply the federal risk and benefit standards for pediatric research? JAMA, 291(4), 476–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shaw, D. (2013). A new look at an old research method: Photo-elicitation. TESOL Journal, 4(4), 785–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shohel, M., & Mahruf, C. (2012). Nostalgia, transition and the school: An innovative approach of using photographic images as a visual method in educational research. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 35(3), 269–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Simmons, H., & Usher, R. (2000). Situated ethics in educational research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Smyth, M. (2004). Using participative action research with war-affected populations: Lessons from research in Northern Ireland and South Africa. In M. Smyth & E. Williamson (Eds.), Researchers and their ‘subjects’: Ethics, power, knowledge and consent. Bristol: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stutey, D. M., Helm, H. M., LoSasso, H., & Kreider, H. D. (2016). Play therapy and photo elicitation: A narrative examination of children’s grief. International Journal of Play Therapy, 25(3), 154–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sweetman, P. (2009). Just anybody? Images, ethics and recognition. In J. Gillett (Ed.), Just anybody (pp. 7–9). Winchester: The Winchester Gallery.Google Scholar
  54. Thompson, P. (2003). Towards ethical practice in the use of archived transcripted interviews: A response. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 6(4), 357–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Thompson, P. (2008). Doing visual research with children and young people. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Torre, D., & Murphy, J. (2015). A different lens: Changing perspectives using photo-elicitation interviews. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(111), 1–26.Google Scholar
  57. Tshweneagae, G., & Mokomane, Z. (2013). Needs of South African adolescents orphaned by AIDS: Evidence from photography and photo-elicitation. International Nursing Review, 60, 88–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Truman, C. (2003). Ethics and the ruling relations of research production. Sociological Research Online, 8(1). <http://www.socresonline.org.uk/8/1/truman.html>.
  59. Vidich, A. J., & Bensman, J. (1958). Small town in mass society: Class power and religion in a rural community. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Wiles, R., Clark, A., & Prosser, J. (2011). Visual research ethics at a crossroads. In E. Margolis & L. Pauwels (Eds.), The Sage handbook of visual research methods (pp. 685–706). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wiles, R., Coffey, A., Robinson, J., & Heath, S. (2012). Anonymisation and visual images Issues of respect, “voice” and protection. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 15(1), 41–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wiles, R., Prosser, J., Bagnoli, A., Clark, A., Davies, K., Holland, S., et al. (2008). Visual ethics: Ethical issues in visual research. Southampton: National Centre for Research Methods.Google Scholar
  63. Yates, L. (2010). The story they want to tell, and the visual story as evidence: Young people, research authority and research purposes in education and health domains. Visual Studies, 25(3), 280–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Zartler, U., & Richter, R. (2014). My family through the lens. Photo interviews with children and sensitive aspects of family life. Children and Society, 28(1), 42–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Illinois State UniversityNormalUSA

Personalised recommendations