Video: modalities and methodologies

In this article, we set out to explore what we describe as the use of video in various modalities. For us, modality is a synthesizing construct that draws together and differentiates between the notion of ‘video’ both as a method and as a methodology. It encompasses the use of the term video as both product and process, and as a data collection tool and a cultural phenomenon. The idea of video modalities has been developed by us in our own research and writing in order to help researchers and research participants critically reflect on the potential of video as a resource for making meaning and generating knowledge. In this article, we argue that discussing modalities of video is helpful in exploring the nature of video-based data, the use of video within mixed methods research, and the links between such methods and a range of methodologies. In doing so, our intention is to consider two interlinked questions: firstly, the relationships between video and methodological assumptions and the potential of video to open up the way to mixed methods approaches, and secondly, the potential contribution of video to epistemological frameworks. Our overall aim in doing this is to help researchers think through how they might use and integrate video into their research designs.

[1]  Christian Heath,et al.  Social Interaction in museums and galleries: a note on video-based field studies , 2006 .

[2]  M. Hammersley Post mortem or post modern? Some reflections on British sociology of education , 1996 .

[3]  Tom Boyle,et al.  Discussion Understanding and using technological affordances: a commentary on Conole and Dyke , 2004 .

[4]  K. Haw,et al.  ‘Voice’, young people and action research , 2001 .

[5]  Mark Hadfield,et al.  Video in Social Science Research: Functions and Forms , 2011 .

[6]  William W. Gaver,et al.  AFFORDANCES FOR INTERACTION: THE SOCIAL IS MATERIAL FOR DESIGN , 1996 .

[7]  Video Epistemology In- and Outside the Box: Traversing Attentional Spaces , 2006 .

[8]  T. Arad,et al.  Voice , 2005 .

[9]  S. Greenberg,et al.  The Psychology of Everyday Things , 2012 .

[10]  человека. По мнению,et al.  A priori , 1998, BMJ.

[11]  Horst Niesyto Youth research on video self‐productions reflections on a social‐aesthetic approach , 2000 .

[12]  M. Buchy,et al.  Insights into Participatory Video: A Handbook for the Field by Nick and Chris Lunch , 2008 .

[13]  John Elliott,et al.  Action research for educational change , 1991 .

[14]  D. Schoen Educating the reflective practitioner , 1987 .

[15]  D. Reay,et al.  A Sociology of Pedagogic Voice: Power, inequality and pupil consultation , 2007 .

[16]  Donald Matheson Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication , 2002 .

[17]  R. Iedema Multimodality, resemiotization: extending the analysis of discourse as multi-semiotic practice , 2003 .

[18]  Risk and Resilience: The Ordinary and Extraordinary Everyday Lives of Young People Living in a High Crime Area , 2010 .

[19]  C. Ramazanoglu On Feminist Methodology: Male Reason Versus Female Empowerment , 1992 .

[20]  G. Kress Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication , 2009 .

[21]  E. Guba,et al.  Competing paradigms in qualitative research. , 1994 .

[22]  M. Hammersley On Feminist Methodology , 1992 .

[23]  L. Gelsthorpe Response to Martyn Hammersley's Paper `on Feminist Methodology' , 1992 .