Institutional Life in Making: Methodological Reflections on the Use of Video Recordings in Qualitative Research

Author: Monika Wilińska
Institution: Jönköping University
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3916-2977
Year of publication: 2020
Source: Show
Pages: 38-55
DOI Address: https://doi.org/10.15804/kie.2020.02.03
PDF: kie/128/kie12803.pdf

Qualitative research is always about some form of intervention into the real world, however that intervention is always mediated by various material practices employed in the research process. This article engages with material practices accompanying research to discuss the ways in which they influence the research process, the observed and the observer. More specifically, this article attends to the use of video technology in qualitative research to reflect upon the material practices that not only make the world visible but also shed light on the research process through which such worlds become known. Reflections from research on institutions and institutional life are used to demonstrate points of interaction that transform the worlds of research and the worlds of everyday life.

REFERENCES:

  • Aarsand, P., & Forsberg, L. (2010). Producing Children’s Corporeal Privacy: Ethnographic Video Recording as Material-Discursive Practice. Qualitative Research, 10(2), pp. 249–268. DOI: 10.1177/1468794109356744.
  • Ahmed, S. (2014). Cultural Politics of Emotion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Back, L. (2012). Tape Recorder. In: C. Lury & N. Wakeford (Eds.), Inventive Methods: The Happening of the Social (pp. 245–260). London: Routledge.
  • Burkitt, I. (2014). Emotions and Social Relations. London: Sage.
  • Bülow, P.H., & Wilińska, M. (2020). Sympathy and Micropolitics in Return-to-Work Meet­ing. In: C.H.T. Dall, K. Juhila, & J. Koprowska (Eds.), Interprofessional Collaboration and Service User Participation: Analysing Meetings in Social Welfare (in press). Bristol: Policy Press.
  • Büscher, M. (2005). Social Life under the Microscope? Sociological Research Online, 10(1), pp. 100–123. DOI: 10.5153/sro.966.
  • Calasanti, T. (2003). Theorizing Age Relations. In: S. Biggs, A. Lowenstein, & J. Hendricks (Eds.), The Need for Theory: Critical Approaches to Social Gerontology (pp. 199–218). Amityville, NY: Baywood.
  • Clarke, A.E. (2005). Situational analysis: grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Thou­sand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  • Collins, R. (2014). Interaction Ritual Chains. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2005). Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of Qualita­tive Research. In: N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. (3rd ) (pp. 1–32). London: Sage.
  • Fineman, S. (2011). Organizing Age. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Fortier, A.M. (2010). Proximity by Design? Affective Citizenship and the Management of Unease. Citizenship Studies, 14(1), pp. 17–30. DOI: 10.1080/13621020903466258.
  • Gordon, C. (2013). Beyond the Observer’s Paradox: The Audio-Recorder as a Resource for the Display of Identity. Qualitative Research, 13(3), pp. 299–317. DOI: 10.1177/1468794112442771.
  • Haraway, D. (1990). A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s. In: L.J. Nicholson (Ed.), Feminism/Postmodernism (pp. 190–233). New York–London: Routledge.
  • Haraway, D.J. (1991). Simians, cyborgs, and women. The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.
  • Heath, C., Hindmarsh, J., & Luff, P. (2010). Analysing Video: Developing Preliminary Obser­vations. In: C. Heath, J. Hindmarsh, & P. Luff, Video in Qualitative Research: Analysing Social Interaction in Everyday Life (pp. 61–86). Los Angeles–London–New Delhi–Sin­gapore–Washington DC: Sage.
  • Hunter, S. (2015). Power, Politics and the Emotions: Impossible Governance? New York–Lon­don: Routledge.
  • Illouz, E. (2007). Cold Intimacies: The Making of Emotional Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity.
  • Isin, E.F. (2004). The Neurotic Citizen. Citizenship Studies, 8(3), pp. 217–235. DOI: 10.1080/1362102042000256970.
  • Kendon, A. (1990). Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters. Cam­bridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Lee, R.M. (2004). Recording Technologies and the Interview in Sociology, 1920–2000. Sociol­ogy, 38(5), pp. 869–889. DOI: 10.1177/0038038504047177.
  • Lefebvre, H. (1991). The Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
  • Liegl, M., & Schindler, L. (2013). Media Assemblages, Ethnographic Vis-ability and the Enactment of Video in Sociological Research. Distinktion: Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory, 14(3), pp. 254–270. DOI: 10.1080/1600910X.2013.863791.
  • Longino, H.E. (1990). Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Lykke, N. (2010). Feminist Studies: A Guide to Intersectional Theory, Methodology and Writ­ing. New York: Routledge.
  • Martin, P.Y. (2003). “Said and Done” versus “Saying and Doing”: Gendering Practices, Prac­ticing Gender at Work. Gender & Society, 17(3), pp. 342–366. DOI: 10.1177/0891243203017003002.
  • Massey, D. (2013). Space, Place and Gender. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.
  • McCarthy, E.D. (1996). Knowledge as Culture: The New Sociology of Knowledge. London–New York: Routledge.
  • Mills, C.W. (2000). The Sociological Imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Mondada, L. (2012). Video Analysis and the Temporality of Inscriptions within Social Inter­action: The Case of Architects at Work. Qualitative Research, 12(3), pp. 304–333. DOI: 10.1177/1468794112438149.
  • Ochs, E. (1979). Transcription as Theory. In: E. Ochs & B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Developmental Pragmatics (pp. 43–72). New York: Academic Press.
  • Oliver, D.G., Serovich, J.M., & Mason, T.L. (2005). Constraints and Opportunities with Inter­view Transcription: Towards Reflection in Qualitative Research. Social Forces, 84(2), pp. 1273–1289. DOI: 10.1353/sof.2006.0023.
  • Pink, S. (2012). Situating Everyday Life: Practices and Places. Los Angeles & London: Sage Publications.
  • Sparrman, A., & Lindgren, A.L. (2010). Visual Documentation as a Normalizing Practice: A New Discourse of Visibility in Preschool. Surveillance & Society, 7(3/4), pp. 248–261. DOI: 10.24908/ss.v7i3/4.4154.
  • Speer, S.A., & Hutchby, I. (2003). From Ethics to Analytics: Aspects of Participants’ Orienta­tions to the Presence and Relevance of Recording Devices. Sociology, 37(2), pp. 315–337. DOI: 10.1177/0038038503037002006.
  • Wilińska, M., & Bülow, P.H. (2017). “We Are on Air Now”: The Emotionality of Video-Recording in the Institutional Setting. International Journal of Social Research Method­ology, 20(4), pp. 343–355. DOI: 10.1080/13645579.2016.1176315.
  • Wilińska, M., & Bülow, P.H. (2020). Emotion Ability – Practices of Affective Citizenship in the Work Rehabilitation Process. Critical Policy Studies, 14(1), 38–66. DOI: 10.1080/19460171.2018.1519452. [Published Online: 2018]
  • Wilińska, M., Rolander, B., & Bülow, P.H. (2019). ‘When I’m 65’: On the Age-negotiated Duty to Work. Work, Employment and Society. DOI: 10.1177/0950017019885797.
  • Woodward, K. (2009). Statistical Panic: Cultural Politics and Poetics of the Emotions. Dur­ham, NC: Duke University Press.
  • Änggård, E. (2015). Digital Cameras: Agents in Research with Children. Children’s Geogra­phies, 13(1), pp. 1–13. DOI: 10.1080/14733285.2013.827871.

video recordings qualitative research institutions methodological reflections

Message to:

 

 

© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart