Photographic Analysis

  • Sten Langmann
  • David Pick


The main aim of this chapter is to introduce different analytical positions and directions that researchers can take when analysing photographs. We cover the theoretical concepts of various analytical methods and extract the Grundgedanke (German: foundational thought) of each method. The different analytical approaches chosen draw researchers’ attention to different analytical aspects and data layers of a photograph. In other words, a photograph can look different—mean different—depending on what analytical approach has been chosen. To illustrate this, a single photograph is analysed employing different analytical approaches. This shows that applying different methods to the same image draws the researcher’s attention in various directions that produce differing analytical outcomes. The chapter concludes with a discussion of positionality in visual analysis and the possibilities of combining analytical methods to unfold the multilevel meanings of photographs.


Analytical methods Positionality 


  1. Aiello, G. (2006). Theoretical advances in critical visual analysis: Perception, ideology, mythologies, and social semiotics. Journal of Visual Literacy, 26(2), 89–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alex, G. (2009). Learning and embodying caste, class and gender. Chennai: National Folklore Support Centre.Google Scholar
  3. Altheide, D. L. (1987). Reflections: Ethnographic content analysis. Qualitative Sociology, 10(1), 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barthes, R. (1972). Mythologies. 1957 (Annette Lavers, Trans.) (pp. 302–306). New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
  5. Bell, P. (2011). Content analysis of visual images. In T. van Leeuwen & C. Jewitt (Eds.), The handbook of visual analysis (pp. 10–34). London: Sage Publication.Google Scholar
  6. Bengtsson, M. (2016). How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. NursingPlus Open, 2, 8–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communications research. Glencoe: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  8. Blumer, H. (1956). Sociological analysis and the “variable”. American Sociological Review, 21(6), 683–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bock, A., Isermann, H., & Knieper, T. (2011). The sage handbook of visual research methods. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  10. Boréus, K., & Bergström, G. (2017). Content analysis. In Analyzing text and discourse: Eight approaches for the social sciences (pp. 23).Google Scholar
  11. Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  12. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2016). (Mis) conceptualising themes, thematic analysis, and other problems with Fugard and Potts’(2015) sample-size tool for thematic analysis. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(6), 739–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cho, J. Y., & Lee, E.-H. (2014). Reducing confusion about grounded theory and qualitative content analysis: Similarities and differences. The Qualitative Report, 19(32), 1.Google Scholar
  15. Christmann, G. B. (2008). The power of photographs of buildings in the Dresden urban discourse. Towards a visual discourse analysis. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9(3), Art. 11.Google Scholar
  16. Collier, M. (2001). Approaches to analysis in visual anthropology. In T. van Leeuwen & C. Jewitt (Eds.), Handbook of visual analysis (pp. 35–60). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  17. Deutsch, N. L. (2004). Positionality and the pen: Reflections on the process of becoming a feminist researcher and writer. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(6), 885–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Drew, S., & Guillemin, M. (2014). From photographs to findings: Visual meaning-making and interpretive engagement in the analysis of participant-generated images. Visual Studies, 29(1), 54–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Duriau, V. J., & Reger, R. K. (2004). Choice of text analysis software in organization research: Insight from a multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) analysis. In 7th International Conference on the Textual Data Statistical Analysis, March, 2004 (Vol. 1012, pp. 382–389).Google Scholar
  20. Edwards, E. (2012). Objects of affect: Photography beyond the image. Annual Review of Anthropology, 41, 221–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Emmel, N. (2015). Themes, variables, and the limits to calculating sample size in qualitative research: A response to Fugard and Potts. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(6), 685–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Finfgeld-Connett, D. (2014). Use of content analysis to conduct knowledge-building and theory-generating qualitative systematic reviews. Qualitative Research, 14(3), 341–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fugard, A. J., & Potts, H. W. (2015). Supporting thinking on sample sizes for thematic analyses: a quantitative tool. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(6), 669–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gauntlett, D., & Holzwarth, P. (2006). Creative and visual methods for exploring identities. Visual Studies, 21(01), 82–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Green, J., & Thorogood, N. (2013). Analysing qualitative data. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative methods for health research (pp. 198–203). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  27. Hao, X., Wu, B., Morrison, A. M., & Wang, F. (2016). Worth thousands of words? Visual content analysis and photo interpretation of an outdoor tourism spectacular performance in Yangshuo-Guilin, China. Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 27(2), 201–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jenkings, N. K., Woodward, R., & Winter, T. (2008). The emergent production of analysis in photo elicitation: Pictures of military identity. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9(3), Art. 30.Google Scholar
  30. Knoblauch, H., Baer, A., Laurier, E., Petschke, S., & Schnettler, B. (2008). Visual analysis. New developments in the interpretative analysis of video and photography. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9(3), Art. 14.Google Scholar
  31. Kolb, B. (2008). Involving, sharing, analysing—Potential of the participatory photo interview. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9(3), Art. 12.Google Scholar
  32. Kracauer, S. (1952). The challenge of qualitative content analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 631–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Krippendorff, K. (2012). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  34. Krishna, S. (2011). Hidden face of violence: Dynamics of intra-household discrimination and inequalities in India. In S. Prasad (Ed.), Women in India: Trials and triumphs (pp. 53–71). New Delhi: Viva Books Private Limited.Google Scholar
  35. Lenette, C. (2016). Writing with light: An iconographic-iconologic approach to refugee photography. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 17(2).Google Scholar
  36. MacKay, K. J., & Couldwell, C. M. (2004). Using visitor-employed photography to investigate destination image. Journal of Travel Research, 42(4), 390–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Maratos, M., Huynh, L., Tan, J., Lui, J., & Jarus, T. (2016). Picture this: Exploring the lived experience of high-functioning stroke survivors using photovoice. Qualitative Health Research, 26(8), 1055–1066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1, 1–10.Google Scholar
  39. Mayring, P. (2015). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical background and procedures. Approaches to qualitative research in mathematics education (pp. 365–380). Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.Google Scholar
  40. Mehta, A. K., & Shah, A. (2003). Chronic poverty in India: Incidence, causes and policies. World Development, 31(3), 491–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Meijer, V. (2011). Iconography, iconology and style analysis. G53 Rethinking ‘Classical’ Art. Google Scholar
  42. Müller, M. G. (2011). Iconography and iconology as a visual method and approach. In The SAGE handbook of visual research methods (pp. 283–297).Google Scholar
  43. Neuendorf, K. A. (2016). The content analysis guidebook. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  44. Noland, C. M. (2006). Auto-photography as research practice: Identity and self-esteem research. Journal of Research Practice, 2(1), 1.Google Scholar
  45. Panofsky, E. (1939). Studies in iconology. Humanistic themes in the art of the renaissance. New York: Harper Torchbooks.Google Scholar
  46. Panofsky, E. (1955). Iconography and iconology: An introduction to the study of renaissance art. In E. Panofsky (Ed.), Meaning in the visual arts (pp. 51–81). Middlesex: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  47. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  48. Penn, G. (2000). Semiotic analysis of still images. Qualitative Researching with Text, Image and Sound, 227–245.Google Scholar
  49. Pennington, D. (2017). Coding of non-text data. In L. S. A. Quan-Haase (Ed.), The sage handbook of social media research methods (pp. 232–250). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  50. Piper, H., & Frankham, J. (2007). Seeing voices and hearing pictures: Image as discourse and the framing of image-based research. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 28(3), 373–387.Google Scholar
  51. Richard, V. M., & Lahman, M. K. (2015). Photo-elicitation: Reflexivity on method, analysis, and graphic portraits. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 38(1), 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rose, G. (2000). Practising photography: An archive, a study, some photographs and a researcher. Journal of Historical Geography, 26(4), 555–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rössler, P. (2005). Inhaltsanalyse. Konstanz: UVK-Verlag.Google Scholar
  54. Ruck, N., & Slunecko, T. (2008). A portrait of a dialogical self: Image science and the dialogical self. International Journal for Dialogical Science, 3(1), 261–290.Google Scholar
  55. Schreier, M. (2014). Qualitative content analysis. In U. Flick (Ed.), The sage handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 170–183). London: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Siegesmund, R., & Freedman, K. (2013). Images as research: Creation and interpretation of the visual. In F. Hernandez-Hernandez & R. Fendler (Eds.), 1st Conference on Arts-Based and Artistic Research (pp. 18-26). Barcelona: University of Barcelona.Google Scholar
  57. Sonesson, G. (2015). Semiotics of photography: The state of the art. In International handbook of semiotics (pp. 417–483). Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. St Pierre, E. (2009). Decentering voice in qualitative inquiry. In Voice in qualitative inquiry: Challenging conventional, interpretive, and critical conceptions in qualitative research (pp. 221–236).Google Scholar
  59. Starosta, W. J. (1984). Qualitative content analysis: A Burkeian perspective. In W. B. Gudykunsy & Y. Y. Kim (Eds.), Methods of intercultural communications research (pp. 185–194). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  60. Stepchenkova, S., & Zhan, F. (2013). Visual destination images of Peru: Comparative content analysis of DMO and user-generated photography. Tourism Management, 36, 590–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Subedi, B. (2013). Photographic images of refugee spatial encounters: Pedagogy of displacement. Qualitative Research in Education, 2(3), 277–301.Google Scholar
  62. Torre, D., & Murphy, J. (2015). A different lens: Using photo-elicitation interviews in education research. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(111), n111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Vaismoradi, M., Jones, J., Turunen, H., & Snelgrove, S. (2016). Theme development in qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 6(5), 100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing & Health Sciences, 15(3), 398–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Van House, N. A. (2006). Interview viz: Visualization-assisted photo elicitation. In CHI’06 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montreal, Quebac, Canada, 2006 (pp. 1463–1468). ACM.Google Scholar
  66. Van Leeuwen, T. (2004). Semiotics and iconography. In T. van Leeuwen, & C. Jewitt (Eds.), The handbook of visual analysis (pp. 92–118). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  67. Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis (Vol. 49). London: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. White, J., & Drew, S. (2011). Collecting data or creating meaning? Qualitative Research Journal, 11(1), 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. White, M. D., & Marsh, E. E. (2006). Content analysis: A flexible methodology. Library Trends, 55(1), 22–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zaidman-Zait, A. (2014). Content analysis. In A. Michalos (Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Zimmer, L. (2006). Qualitative meta-synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(3), 311–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Curtin UniversityPerthAustralia
  2. 2.Curtin Business SchoolPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations