Methods and Analysis

  • Kiran Vinod Bhatia
  • Manisha Pathak-Shelat


In this chapter, we provide a rich description of the research site and the methodology which guided this research. We have developed an ethnographic approach to participatory action research in this project, and this framework draws its theoretical force from the concept of communicative ecology. We argue that in examining children’s media engagements and how these influence them, it is important to develop culturally sensitive methodologies of data collection and intervention. We also reflect on the challenges of developing an ethnographic and participatory approach to conducting action research with children from vulnerable background. This chapter offers a methodological framework which can be deployed by other researchers and educators with minor modifications for conducting similar studies.


Ethnography Participatory practices Action research Communicative ecology Community immersion Media educators 


  1. Altheide, D. L. (1994). An ecology of communication: Toward a mapping of the effective environment. The Sociological Quarterly, 35(4), 665–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Avila-Saavedra, G. (2013). Neither here nor there: Consumption of US media among pre-adolescent girls in Ecuador. Interactions: Studies in Communication & Culture, 4(3), 136–152.Google Scholar
  3. Bakardjieva, M. (2010). The internet and subactivism: Cultivating young citizenship in everyday life. In T. Olsson & P. Dahlgren (Eds.), Young people, ICTs, and democracy: Theories, policies, identities and websites (pp. 129–146). Goteborg, Sweden: Nordicom, University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
  4. Banaji, S. (2015). Behind the high-tech fetish: Children, work and media use across classes in India. The International Communication Gazette, 77(6), 577–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davison, R. M., Ou, C., Martinsons, M., Zhao, A., & Du, R. (2014). The communicative ecology of Web 2.0 at work: Social networking in the workspace. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(10), 2035–2047.Google Scholar
  7. Fish, S. (1980). Is there a text in this class. Cambridge, UK: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Foth, M., & Hearn, G. (2007). Networked individualism of urban residents: Discovering the communicative ecology in inner-city apartment buildings. Information, Communication & Society, 10(5), 749–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York, NY: Seabury Press.Google Scholar
  10. Giroux, H. A. (1992). Border crossings: Cultural workers and the politics of education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Hill, J. (2011). Endangered childhoods: How consumerism is impacting child and youth identity. Media, Culture and Society, 33(3), 347–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hoechsmann, M., & Poyntz, S. (2012). Media literacies: A critical introduction. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jenkins, H., Shresthova, S., Gamber-Thompson, L., Kligler-Vilenchik, N., & Zimmerman, A. (2016). By any media necessary: The new youth activism. New York; NY: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Lankshear, C. (1997). Changing literacies, changing education. New York: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Lemish, D. (2015). Children and media: A global perspective. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  16. Lennie, J., & Tacchi, J. (2013). Evaluating communication for development: A framework for social change. Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Livingstone, S. (2009). Children and the internet: Great expectations, challenging realities. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  18. Livingstone, S., & Haddon, L. (2009). Young people in the European digital media landscape: A statistical overview. Goteborg, Sweden: International Clearinghouse on Children, Youth and Media.Google Scholar
  19. McLaren, P. (1995). Critical pedagogy and predatory culture: Oppositional politics in a postmodern era. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Meyrowitz, J. (1984). The adultlike child and the childlike adult: Socialization in an electronic world. Daedalus, 113(3), 19–48.Google Scholar
  21. Pathak-Shelat, M., & DeShano, C. (2013). Digital youth cultures in small town and rural Gujarat, India. New Media and Society, 16(6), 983–1001.Google Scholar
  22. Rangaswamy, N., Nair, S., & Toyama, K. (2008). “My TV is the family oven/toaster/grill”: Personalizing TV for the Indian audience. In Proceeding of the 1st International Conference on Designing Interactive User Experiences for TV and Video—uxtv ’08. Silicon Valley, CA, USA.Google Scholar
  23. Slater, D. (2013). New media, development and gobalization: Making connections in the global south. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  24. Velde, J. (2012). From liminal to liminoid: Eminem’s trickstering. Bergen: University of Bergen.Google Scholar
  25. Williamson, K. M., & Brown, K. (2014). Collective voices: Engagement of Hartford community residents through participatory action research. The Qualitative Report, 19(36), 1–14.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kiran Vinod Bhatia
    • 1
  • Manisha Pathak-Shelat
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Journalism and Mass CommunicationUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUnited States
  2. 2.MICAAhmedabadIndia

Personalised recommendations