ABSTRACT
Visual images evoke elements of human consciousness that words alone cannot; images evoke both more information and different kinds of information (Harper, 2002). Not surprisingly, images are being utilized in research to access meaning. Visual research methods can be broadly defined as encompassing systematic ways in which visual materials are gathered or generated and worked with to understand, explain, or express phenomena – a process that is in constant development (Pink, 2012). For example, research can draw upon pre-existing photos or videos; alternatively photos and videos can be generated as a result of the research process. Moreover, visual materials can be generated by researchers, informants, or in collaboration (Prosser & Schwartz, 1998). Visual methods can be used for varying purposes such as documenting observations, capturing processes as they occur, or for facilitating dialog (Prosser, 2011; Prosser, Clark, & Wiles, 2008; Wang & Burris, 1997). The number of approaches to, and terminology for, visual methods has developed over the years to include photo elicitation, photo tour, video diaries, photo story, body mapping, film elicitation, photo novella, and photovoice. All these terms can be taken to reflect a set of assumptions about visual literacy – that visual artifacts can be “read” as a text (Catalani & Minkler, 2009; Elkins, 2008; Hartman, Mandich, Magalhaes, & Orchard, 2011; Lal, Jarus, & Suto, 2012; van Nes, Jonsson, Hirschier, Abma, & Deeg, 2012). James Elkins (2008), an art historian, wrote in his introduction to Visual Literacy:
Since the 1980s the rhetoric of images has become far more pervasive, so that it is now commonplace in the media to hear that we live in a visual culture, and get our information through images. It is time, I think, to take those claims seriously. (p. 4)
