Advertisement

Innovative Research Methods in Health Social Sciences: An Introduction

  • Pranee LiamputtongEmail author
Reference work entry

Abstract

Innovative, or creative research, methods have become increasingly popular in the last few decades. In this chapter, I will include several salient issues on which chapters in the section on “Innovative Research Methods in Health Social Sciences” can be situated. First, I discuss some ideas about innovative and creative methods. This is followed with the notion of those who practice innovative methods: the innovative researcher. I will then bring readers through a number of innovative and creative methods that researchers have adopted in their research. These include the theoretical lens, arts-based and visual research methods, the body and embodiment research, digital methods, and textual (plus visual) methods of inquiry. As an innovative researcher, our choice of innovative methods primarily depends on the questions we pose; the people who are involved; our moral, ethical, and methodological competence as researchers; and the sociocultural environment of the research. As we are living in the world that continue to change, it is likely that health and social science researchers will continue to experiment with their creative methods in order to ensure the success of their research. I anticipate that in the future, we will see even more creative methods that researchers will bring forth.

Keywords

Innovative methods Creative research methods The innovative researcher Arts-based research Visual research The body Embodiment research Digital methods Textual method of inquiry 

References

  1. Adriansen HK. Timeline interviews: a tool for conducting life history research. Qual Stud. 2012;3(1):40–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alasuutari P. The globalization of qualitative research. In: Seale C, Gobo G, Gubrium J, Silverman D, editors. Qualitative research practice. London: Sage; 2007. p. 507–20.Google Scholar
  3. Alaszewski A. Using diaries for social research. London: Sage; 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alexandra D. Are we listening yet? Participatory knowledge production through media practice: encounters of political listening. In: Gubrium A, Harper KG, Otañez M, editors. Participatory visual and digital research in action. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press; 2015. p. 41–56.Google Scholar
  5. Angell RJ, Angell C. More than just “snap, crackle, and pop” “draw, write, and tell”: an innovative research method with young children. J Advert Res. 2013:377–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Auriemma CL, Lyon SM, Strelec LE, Kent S, Barg FK, Halpern SD. Defining the medical intensive care unit in the words of patients and their family members: a freelisting analysis. Am J Crit Care. 2015;24(4):e47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Back L. Live sociology: social research and its futures. Sociol Rev. 2012;60:18–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baker NA, Willinsky C, Boydell KM. Just say know: engaging young people to explore the link between cannabis and psychosis using creative methods. World Cult Psychiatry Res Rev. 2015;10(3/4):201–20.Google Scholar
  9. Barone T. Science, art, and the pre-disposition of educational researchers. Educ Res. 2001;30(7):24–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Becker HS. Tricks of the trade: how to think about your research while you’re doing it. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Belli RF, Stafford FP, Alwin D, editors. Calendar and time diary methods in life course research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2009.Google Scholar
  12. Berends L. Embracing the visual: using timelines with in-depth interviews on substance use and treatment. Qual Rep. 2011;16(1):1–9. Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol16/iss1/1Google Scholar
  13. Bergeron J, Paquette S, Poullaouec-Gonidec P. Uncovering landscape values and micro-geographies of meanings with the go-along method. Landsc Urban Plan. 2014;122:108–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bowden C, Galindo-Gonzalez S. Interviewing when you’re not face-to-face: the use of email interviews in a phenomenological study. Int J Doctoral Stud. 2015;10:79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bowler GM. Netnography: a method specifically designed to study cultures and communities online. Qual Rep. 2010;15(5):1270–5.Google Scholar
  16. Bradley J, Ramesh BM, Rajaram S, Lobo A, Guravc K, Isac S, Gowda GCS, Pushpalath R, Moses S, Sunil KDR, Alary M. The feasibility of using mobile phone technology for sexual behaviour research in a population vulnerable to HIV: a prospective survey with female sex workers in South India. AIDS Care. 2012;24(6):695–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Brett-MacLean P. Body mapping: embodying the self living with HIV/AIDS. Can Med Assoc J. 2009;180(7):740–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Brondani M, MacEntee M, O'Connor D. Email as a data collection tool when interviewing older adults. Int J Qual Methods. 2011;10(3):221–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Brown L, Durrheim K. Different kinds of knowing: generating qualitative data through mobile interviewing. Qual Inq. 2009;15(5):911–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Bryant L. Introduction: taking up the call for critical and creative methods in social work research. In: Bryant L, editor. Critical and creative research methodologies in social work (Chapter 1). Hoboken: Taylor and Francis; 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Burns E. Developing email interview practices in qualitative research. Sociol Res Online. 2010;15(4). Retrieved 1 Feb 2014, from http://www.socresonline.org.uk/15/4/8.html
  22. Carpiano RM. Come take a walk with me: the “go-along” interview as a novel method for studying the implications of place for health and well-being. Health Place. 2009;15(1):263–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Casey E, Turnbull B. Digital evidence on mobile devices. In: Casey E, editor. Digital evidence and computer crime. 3rd ed. Waltham: Academic; 2011. p. 2–45.Google Scholar
  24. Castleden H, Garvin T, Huu-ay-aht First Nation. Modifying photovoice for community-based participatory indigenous research. Soc Sci Med. 2008;66(6):1393–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cater JK. Skype a cost-effective method for qualitative research. Rehabil Couns Educ J. 2011;4:10–7.Google Scholar
  26. Chenail RJ. Qualitative researchers in the blogosphere: using blogs as diaries and data. Qual Rep. 2011;16:249–54.Google Scholar
  27. Chilton G, Leavy P. Arts-based research practice: merging social research and the creative arts. In: Leavy P, editor. The Oxford handbook of qualitative research. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014. p. 403–22.Google Scholar
  28. Cole AL, Knowles JG. Qualities of inquiry: process, form, and “goodness”. In: Nielsen I, Cole AI, Knowles JG, editors. The art of writing inquiry. Halifax: Backalong Press; 2001. p. 211–9.Google Scholar
  29. Cook C. Email interviewing: generating data with a vulnerable population. J Adv Nurs. 2012;68(6):1330–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Coomber R. Using the Internet for survey research. Sociol Res Online. 1997;2(2). Internet acces http://www.socresonline.org.uk/socresonline/2/2/2.htmlCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. de Jager A, Tewson A, Ludlow B, Boydell KM. Embodied ways of storying the self: a systematic review of body-mapping. Forum Qual Soc Res. 2016;17(2). http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2526/3986
  32. Denzin NK. Aesthetics and the practices of qualitative inquiry. Qual Inq. 2000;6:256–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Denzin NK. Moments, mixed methods, and paradigm dialogs. Qual Inq. 2010;16(6):419–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Denzin NK. What is critical qualitative inquiry? In: Cannella G, Pérez M, Pasque P, editors. Critical qualitative inquiry: foundations and futures. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press; 2015. p. 31–50.Google Scholar
  35. Denzin NK. Critical qualitative inquiry. Qual Inq. 2017;23(1):8–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. Introduction: the discipline and practice of qualitative research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2005. p. 1–32.Google Scholar
  37. DeRenzi B, Borriello G, Jackson J. Mobile phone tools for field-based health care workers in low-income countries. Mt Sinai J Med. 2011;78(3):406–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Dillman DA. Mail and internet surveys – the tailored design method. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley; 2007.Google Scholar
  39. Dillon B. Using mobile phones to collect panel data in developing countries. J Int Dev. 2012;24:518–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Dunne GA. The different dimensions of gay fatherhood: exploding the myths. Report to the Economic and Social Research Council. London: London School of Economics; 1999.Google Scholar
  41. Ebersöhn L, Ferreira R, van der Walt A, Moen M. Bodymapping to step into your future: life design in a context of high risk and high diversity. In: Ronél F, editor. Thinking innovatively about psychological assessment in a context of diversity. Cape Town: Juta; 2016. p. 228–41.Google Scholar
  42. Egan J, Chenoweth L, Mcauliffe D. Email-facilitated qualitative interviews with traumatic brain injury survivors: a new and accessible method. Brain Inj. 2006;20(12):1283–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Eisner E. What artistically crafted research can help us to understand about schools. Educ Theory. 1995;45(1):1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Eisner E. Knowing. In: Knowles JG, Cole AI, editors. Handbook of the arts in qualitative research: perspectives, methodologies, examples, and issues. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2008. p. 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Elford J, Bolding G, Davis M, Sherr L, Hart G. The internet and HIV study: design and methods. BMC Public Health. 2004;4:39.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-4-39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Elliot H. The use of diaries in sociological research on health experience. Sociol Res Online. 1997;2(2). http://www.socresonline.org.ul/socresonline/2/2/7.html. Accessed 2 Mar 2005.
  47. Ellis C, Bochner A. Foreword: opening conversation. Creat Approach Res. 2008;1(2):1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Evans J, Jones P. The walking interview: methodology, mobility and place. Appl Geogr. 2011;31(2):849–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Evans JR, Mathur A. The value of online surveys. Int Res. 2005;15(2):195–219.Google Scholar
  50. Fiks AG, Gafen A, Hughes CC, Hunter KF, Barg FK. Using freelisting to understand shared decision making in ADHD: parents’ and pediatricians’ perspectives. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;84(2):236–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Finlay JM, Bowman JA. Geographies on the move: a practical and theoretical approach to the mobile interview. Prof Geogr. 2016:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2016.1229623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Finley S. Arts-based inquiry: performing revolutionary pedagogy. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The Sage handbook of qualitative research, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2005. p. 681–94.Google Scholar
  53. Finley S. Critical arts-based inquiry. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2011. p. 435–50.Google Scholar
  54. Galvin RD. Researching the disabled identity: contextualising the identity transformations which accompany the onset of impairment. Sociol Health Illness. 2005;27(3):393–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Garcia CM, Eisenberg ME, Frerich EA, Lechner KE, Lust K. Conducting go-along interviews to understand context and promote health. Qual Health Res. 2012;22(10):1395–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Gastaldo D, Magalhães L, Carrasco C, Davy C. Body-map storytelling as research: Methodological considerations for telling the stories of undocumented workers through body mapping. Facilitator Guide. 2012. http://www.migrationhealth.ca/undocumented-workers-ontario/body%20mapping. Accessed 10 Oct 2015.
  57. Gaunlett D, Holzwarth P. Creative and visual methods for exploring identities. Visual Stud. 2006;21(1):82–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Genoe MR, Liechty T, Marston HR, Sutherland V. Blogging into retirement: using qualitative online research methods to understand leisure among baby boomers. J Leis Res. 2016;48(1):15–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Gills J, Liamputtong P. Walk a mile in my shoes: researching lived experiences of mothers of children with autism. J Family Stud. 2009;15(3):309–19. Special issue on “Parenting around the world”.Google Scholar
  60. Gillies V, Robinson Y. Developing creative research methods with challenging pupils. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2012;15(2):161–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Gonzalez-Arnal S, Jagger G, Lennon K. Embodied selves. London: Palgrave; 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Gray J, Kontos P. Immersion, embodiment, and imagination: moving beyond an aesthetic of objectivity in research-informed performance in health. Forum Qual Soc Res. 2015;16(2). Art no. 29. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1502290. Accessed 7 Apr 2016.
  63. Greenlaw C, Brown-Welty S. A comparison of web-based and paper-based survey methods: testing assumptions of survey mode and response cost. Eval Rev. 2009;33(5):464–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Grosz E. Volatile bodies: towards a corporeal feminism. London: Routledge; 1994.Google Scholar
  65. Gubrium A, Harper KG, Otañez M, editors. Participatory visual and digital research in action. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press; 2015.Google Scholar
  66. Guenette F, Marshall A. Time line drawings: enhancing participant voice in narrative interviews on sensitive topics. Int J Qual Methodol. 2009;8(1):85–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Gwyther G, Possamai-Inesedy A. Methodologies à la carte: an examination of emerging qualitative methodologies in social research. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2009;12(2):99–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Haberer JE, Kiwanuka J, Nansera D, Wilson IB, Bangsberg DR. Challenges in using mobile phones for collection of antiretroviral therapy adherence data in a resource-limited setting. AIDS Behav. 2010;4(6):1294–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Halfpenny P, Proctor R. Innovations in digital research methods. London: Sage; 2015.Google Scholar
  70. Harper D. Working knowledge: skill and community in a small shop. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1987.Google Scholar
  71. Harper D. Talking about pictures: a case for photo elicitation. Visual Stud. 2002;17(1):13–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Harper D. Visual sociology. London: Routledge; 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Harricharan M, Bhopal K. Using blogs in qualitative educational research: an exploration of method. Int J Res Method Educ. 2014;37(3):324–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Hergenrather KC, Rhodes SD, Cowan CA, Bardhoshi G, Pula S. Photovoice as community-based participatory research: a qualitative review. Am J Health Behav. 2009;33(6):686–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Hesse-Biber SN. Handbook of emergent technologies in social research. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011.Google Scholar
  76. Hesse-Biber SN, Leavy P. Emergent methods in social research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Hessler R. The methodology of internet research: some lessons learned. In: Liamputtong P, editor. Health research in cyberspace: methodological, practical, and personal issues. New York: Nova Science Publishers; 2006. p. 105–20.Google Scholar
  78. Hewson C. Qualitative approaches in internet-mediated research: opportunities, issues, possibilities. In: Leavy P, editor. The Oxford handbook of qualitative research. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014. p. 423–51.Google Scholar
  79. Higginbottom G, Liamputtong P, editors. Participatory qualitative research methodologies in health. London: Sage; 2015.Google Scholar
  80. Holton M, Riley M. Talking on the move: place-based interviewing with undergraduate students. Area. 2014;46(1):59–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Huang S. Using freelisting to examine the destination image of China among Australian residents. Paper presented at the 4th advances in hospitality & tourism marketing & management conference, Mauritius. 2014. 25–27 June 2014.Google Scholar
  82. Hyers LL, Swim JK, Mallett RM. The personal is political: using daily diaries to examine everyday gender-related experiences. In: Hesse-Biber SN, Leavy P, editors. Emergent methods in social research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2006.Google Scholar
  83. Iacono VL, Symonds P, Brown DHK. Skype as a tool for qualitative research interviews. Sociol Res Online. 2016;21(2):12. http://www.socresonline.org.uk/21/2/12.htmlCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Jacelon CS, Imperio K. Participant diaries as a source of data in research with older adults. Qual Health Res. 2005;15(7):991–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Jackson KF. Participatory diagramming in social work research: utilizing visual timelines to interpret the complexities of the lived multiracial experience. Qual Soc Work. 2012;12(4):414–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Jonas JA, Davies EL, Keddem S, Barg FK, Fieldston ES. Freelisting on costs and value in health care by pediatric attending physicians. Acad Pediatr. 2015;15(4):461–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Jones K, Leavy P. A conversation between kip Jones and Patricia Leavy: arts-based research, performative social science and working on the margins. Qual Rep. 2014;19(19):1–7.Google Scholar
  88. Kara H. Creative research methods in the social sciences: a practical guide. Cambridge: Policy Press; 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Kendig H, Byles JE, O’Loughlin K, Nazroo JY, Mishra G, Noone J, Loh V, Forder PM. Adapting data collection methods in the Australian life histories and health survey: a retrospective life course study. BMJ Open. 2014;4:e004476.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Kolar K, Ahmad F, Chan L, Erickson PG. Timeline mapping in qualitative interviews: a study of resilience with marginalized groups. Int J Qual Methods. 2015;14(3):13–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Kozinets R. Netnography: doing ethnographic research online. London: Sage; 2010.Google Scholar
  92. Kozinets R. Netnography: redefined. 2nd ed. London: Sage; 2015.Google Scholar
  93. Kramer J, Rubin A, Coster W, Helmuth E, Hermos J, Rosenbloom D, ... Brief D. Strategies to address participant misrepresentation for eligibility in Web-based research. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2014;23(1):120–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Leavy P. Method meets art: arts-based research practice. London: Guilford Publications; 2015.Google Scholar
  95. Lennon K. Feminist perspectives on the body. In Zalta EN, editor. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. 2014. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2014/entries/feminist-body. Accessed 18 Nov 2015.
  96. Lepkowski JM, Tucker C, Brick JM, de Leeuw ED, Japec L, Lavrakas PJ, Link MW, Sangster RL, editors. Advances in telephone survey methodology. Hoboken: Wiley; 2008.Google Scholar
  97. Lévi-Strauss C. The savage mind. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1966.Google Scholar
  98. Liamputtong P, editor. Health research in cyberspace: methodological, practical and personal issues. New York: Nova Science Publishers; 2006.Google Scholar
  99. Liamputtong P. Researching the vulnerable: a guide to sensitive research methods. London: Sage; 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Liamputtong P. Qualitative research methods. 4th ed. Melbourne: Oxford University Press; 2013.Google Scholar
  101. Liamputtong P, Rumbold J. Knowing differently: arts-based and collaborative research methods. New York: Nova Science Publishers; 2008.Google Scholar
  102. Lieberman DZ. Evaluation of the stability and validity of participant samples recruited over the internet. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2008;11(6):743–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Lincoln YS, Denzin NK. Epilogue: the eighth and ninth moments-qualitative research in/and the fractured future. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2005. p. 1115–26.Google Scholar
  104. Lopez EDS, Eng E, Randall-David E, Robinson N. Quality-of-life concerns of African American breast cancer survivors within rural North Carolina: blending the techniques of photovoice and grounded theory. Qual Health Res. 2005a;15(1):99–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Lopez EDS, Eng E, Robinson N, Wang CC. Photovoice as a community-based participatory research method: a case study with African American breast cancer survivors in rural Eastern North Carolina. In: Israel B, Eng E, Schulz AJ, Parker E, Satcher D, editors. Methods for conducting community-based participatory research for health. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2005b.Google Scholar
  106. Mann C, Stewart F. Internet communication and qualitative research: a handbook for researching. Online. London: Sage; 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Mann BL, Stewart F. Internet interviewing. In: Gubrium JF, Holstein JA, editors. Handbook of interview research: context and method. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2002. p. 603–627.Google Scholar
  108. Maratos M, Huynh L, Tan J, Lui J, Jar T. Picture this: exploring the lived experience of high-functioning stroke survivors using photovoice. Qual Health Res. 2016;26(8):1055–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Markham A. Internet communication as a tool for qualitative research. In: Silverman D, editor. Qualitative research: theory, method and practice. London: Sage; 2004. p. 95–124.Google Scholar
  110. Mathers SA, Anderson H, McDonald S, Chesson RA. Developing participatory research in radiology: the use of a graffiti wall, cameras and a video box in a Scottish radiology department. Pediatr Radiol. 2010;40:309–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. McCosker A, Darcy R. Living with cancer: affective labour, self-expression and the utility of blogs. Inf Commun Soc. 2013;16:1266–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. McNiff S. Art-based research. In: Knowles JG, Cole AI, editors. Handbook of the arts in qualitative research: perspectives, methodologies, examples, and issues. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2008. p. 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Meho LI. E-mail interviewing in qualitative research: a methodological discussion. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2006;57(10):1284–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Mertens D, Holmes HM, Harris RL. Transformative research and ethics. In: Mertens DM, Ginsberg PE, editors. The handbook of social research ethics. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2009. p. 85–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Morselli D, Berchtold A, Granell J-CS, Berchtold A. On-line life history calendar and sensitive topics. J Comput Hum Behav. 2016;58:141–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Murray E, Khadjesari Z, White IR, Kalaitzaki E, Godfrey C, McCambridge J, Thompson SG, Wallace P. Methodological challenges in online trials. J Med Int Res. 2009;11(2):e9.  https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Nelson C, Treichler PA, Grossberg L. Cultural studies: an introduction. In: Grossberg L, Nelson C, Treichler PA, editors. Cultural studies. New York: Routledge; 1992. p. 1–16.Google Scholar
  118. Nelson MR, Otnes CC. Exploring cross-cultural ambivalence: a netnography of intercultural wedding message boards. J Bus Res. 2005;58(1):89–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Nezlek JH. Diary methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2012.Google Scholar
  120. O’Toole J, Sinclair M, Leder K. Maximising response rates in household telephone surveys. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8(71).  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-71.
  121. Orchard T, Smith T, Michelow W, Salters K, Hogg B. Imagining adherence: body mapping research with HIV-positive men and women in Canada. AIDS Res Hum Retrovir. 2014;30(4):337–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Otañez M, Guerrero A. Digital storytelling and the hepatitis C virus project. In: Gubrium A, Harper KG, Otañez M, editors. Participatory visual and digital research in action. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press; 2015. p. 57–70.Google Scholar
  123. Phillips BD. Qualitative disaster research. In: Leavy P, editor. The Oxford handbook of qualitative research. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014. p. 533–56.Google Scholar
  124. Ratislavová K, Ratislav. Asynchronous email interview as a qualitative research method in the humanities. Hum Aff. 2014;24(4):452–60.Google Scholar
  125. Rhodes SD, Hergenrather KC, Wilkin AM, Jolly C. Visions and voices: Indigent persons living with HIV in the southern United States use photovoice to create knowledge, develop partnerships, and take action. Health Promot Pract. 2008;9(2):159–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Rimkeviciene J, O’Gorman J, Hawgood J, Leo DD. Timelines for difficult times: use of visual timelines in interviewing suicide attempters. Qual Res Psychol. 2016;13(3):231–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Riper H, Spek V, Boon B, Conijn B, Kramer J, Martin-Abello K, Smit F. Effectiveness of e-self-help interventions for curbing adult problem drinking: a meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(2):e24.  https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Rogers R. Digital methods. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Rose G. Visual methodologies: an introduction to the interpretation of visual materials, 2nd ed. London: Sage; 2007.Google Scholar
  130. Rose G. Visual methodologies: an introduction to the interpretation of visual materials, 3rd ed. London: Sage; 2012.Google Scholar
  131. Rose T, Shdaimah C, de Tablan D, Sharpe TL. Exploring wellbeing and agency among urban youth through photovoice. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2016;67(2016):114–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Russell AC, Diaz ND. Photography in social work research: using visual image to humanize findings. Qual Soc Work. 2013;12(4):433–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Ryan G, Nolan J, Yoder S. Successive free listing: using multiple free lists to generate explanatory models. Field Methods. 2000;12(2):83–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Saiki LS, Cloyes KG. Blog text about female incontinence. Nurs Res. 2014;63:137–42.Google Scholar
  135. Sanon MA, Evans-Agnew RA, Boutain DM. An exploration of social justice intent in photovoice research studies from 2008 to 2013. Nurs Inq. 2014;21(3):212–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Seymour W, Lupton D. Holding the line online: exploring wired relationships for people with disabilities. Disab Soc. 2004;19(4):291–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Simons H, McCormack B. Integrating arts-based inquiry in evaluation methodology: challenges and opportunities. Qual Inq. 2007;13(32):292–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Sinner A, Leggo C, Irwin RL, Gouzouasis P, Grauer K. Arts-based educational research dissertations: reviewing the practices of new scholars. Can J Educ. 2006;29(4):1223–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Snee H, Roberts S, Watson H, Morey Y, Hine C. Digital methods as mainstream methodology: an introduction. In: Snee H, Roberts S, Watson H, Morey Y, Hine C, editors. Digital methods for social science. London: Palgrave Macmillan; 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Sue VM, Ritter LA. Conducting online surveys. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Switzer S, Guta A, de Prinse K, Chan Carusone S, Strike C. Visualizing harm reduction: methodological and ethical considerations. Soc Sci Med. 2015;133:77–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Synnot A, Hill S, Summers M, Taylor M. Comparing face-to-face and online qualitative research with people with multiple sclerosis. Qual Health Res. 2014;24(3):431–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Tarr J, Thomas H. Mapping embodiment: methodologies for representing pain and injury. Qual Res. 2011;11(2):141–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Taylor C, Coffey A. Innovation in qualitative research methods: possibilities and challenges. Cardiff: Cardiff University; 2008.Google Scholar
  145. Teti M, Murray C, Johnson L, Binson D. Photovoice as a community based participatory research method among women living with HIV/AIDS: ethical opportunities and challenges. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2012;7(4):34–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Thomas S. Reimagining inquiry, envisioning form. In: Nielsen L, Cole AL, Knowles JG, editors. The art of writing inquiry. Halifax: Backalong Books; 2001. p. 273–82.Google Scholar
  147. Todres L. Embodied enquiry: phenomenological touchstones for research, psychotherapy and spirituality. New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Tomlinson M, Solomon W, Singh Y, Doherty T, Petrida Ijumba C, Tsai AC, Jackson D. The use of mobile phones as a data collection tool: a report from a household survey in South Africa. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2009;9:51.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-9-51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Turney L, Pocknee C. Virtual focus groups: New frontiers in research. Int J Qual Methods. 2005;4(2). Available at http://www.ualberta.ca/~ijqm/backissues/4_2/pdf/turney.pdfCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. van Heerden AC, Norris SA, Tollman SM, Richter LM. Collecting health research data comparing mobile phone-assisted personal interviewing to paper-and-pen data collection. Field Methods. 2014;26(4):307–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Vanhoutte B, Nazroo J. Life-history data. Publ Health Res Pract. 2016;26(3):e2631630.  https://doi.org/10.17061/phrp2631630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Viega M. Aesthetic sense and sensibility: arts-based research and music therapy. Music Ther Perspect. 2016;34:1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Wakeford N, Cohen K. Field notes in public: using blogs for research. In: Fielding N, Lee R, Blank G, editors. The Sage handbook of online research methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2008. p. 307–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. Wang C. Photovoice: a participatory action research strategy applied to women’s health. J Womens Health. 1999;8(2):185–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Wang C, Burris MA. Empowerment through photo novella: portraits of participation. Health Educ Q. 1994;2(2):171–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. Wang C, Burris MA. Photovoice: concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs assessment. Health Educ Behav. 1997;24(3):369–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. Wang C, Morrel-Samuels S, Hutchison PM, Bell L, Pestronk RM. Flint Photovoice: community building among youths, adults, and policymakers. Am J Public Health. 2004;94(6):911–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. Warkentin E. Writing competitions as a new research method. Int J Qual Methods. 2002;1(4):10–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. Weber S. Visual images in research. In: Knowles JG, Cole AI, editors. Handbook of the arts in qualitative research: perspectives, methodologies, examples, and issues. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2008. p. 41–53.Google Scholar
  160. Wiles R, Crow G, Pain H. Innovation in qualitative research methods: a narrative review. Qual Res. 2011;11(5):587–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. Wilson N. Social creativity: re-qualifying the creative economy. Int J Cult Policy. 2010;16(3):367–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Wilson E, Kenny A, Dickson-Swift V. Using blogs as a qualitative health research tool: a scoping review. Int J Qual Methods. 2015:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406915618049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Wright KB. Researching internet-based populations: advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services. J Comput Mediated Commun. 2005;10, Article 11. Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue3/wright.htmlCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Xenitidou M, Gilbert N. Innovations in social science research methods. Surrey: ESRC National Centre for Research Methods, University of Surrey; 2009.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Science and HealthWestern Sydney UniversityPenrithAustralia

Personalised recommendations