Visual Methods in the Study of Religion
Sarah Dunlop
Visual research methods use images of society and images produced by society to
better understand the social situation. Researchers using images usually work within
the framework of qualitative, case study approach.
Since the 1860s, anthropologists have used photography to provide visual
information about their subjects. Historically, photography was considered to be a
recording device for surface data, as opposed to in-depth data, which needed to be
unearthed by other methods. (Edwards 1992: 4) Anthropologists still use photos as a
recording tool, but some have moved beyond this to explore it as method itself
(Collier & Collier, 1986).
Visual data was also used as a form of cultural critique in the 1920s. For example,
photographers El Lissitzky and Alexander Rodchenko sought to inform understanding
of social revolution in the early days of the Soviet Union using a photomontage
approach. Photojournalists such as Alfred Eisenstaedt and Erich Salomon used
photo-reportage or photo-essays to communicate social situations (Gidal 1973). The
Picture Post in England and Time, Life, and Fortune in the United States published the
work of photojournalists such as: Margaret Bourke-White (the first female war
correspondent), Walker Evans, W. Eugene Smith, and Robert Capa. Later sociologist
Howard Becker (1974) recognised that both photography and sociology emerged
around the same time and that both explored society. But Becker was concerned
that photography had come to be viewed like an art form, and sociology was treated
like a science. He called for them to be reunited and to work together to uncover
different aspects of social life. Some sociologists took up the challenge, and visual
research methods were increasingly used in various sociological studies (Ruby 1976,
Becker 1978, Wagner 1979).
In the past thirty years, an increasing number of social researchers in the UK have
recognised that the visual is a growth point in the social sciences and cultural
studies, drawing together researchers from a wide range of fields: anthropology,
sociology, cultural studies, media studies, visual communication, photography, film,
history and sociology of art as well as photojournalism and documentary film. Visual
anthropology and visual sociology overlap in many areas and often are
indistinguishable from each other. Sarah Pink (2007) has given a detailed account of
the development of visual ethnographic research within anthropology and sociology.
Using Visual Methods for studying religion
Visual methods bypass cognitive thought processes to engage with the emotive,
reactive, subconscious ways that people live out religion. Spirituality and religious
belief involve abstract concepts that may be difficult to express in words. Harper
writes, “images allow us to make statements which cannot be made by words, and
the world we see is saturated with sociological meaning. Thus it does not seem
peculiar to suggest that images enlarge our consciousness and the possibilities for
our sociology.” (1998, 38) Talking about religion or spirituality in terms of a personal
search to find ultimate meaning can be difficult, but these ideas can be expressed
through interacting with images.
Visual material, due to its ability to evoke embodied experience, opens opportunities
for deeper conversations about what is sacred with people than the traditional
interview question and answer format within qualitative research (Pearmain 2007,
76). McClintock Fulkerson (2007:50) has found that taking photos can be one means,
amongst others, of observing the use of tradition in ‘distinctive bodily practices’ and
the ‘ceaseless interplay between the messages of bodies and the messages of
explicit discourse’. Talking about images enables the researcher to move beyond the
participant’s thoughts and beliefs to take into account their practice of religion.
Material culture is an aspect of visual studies. Paying attention to the images that
are important in the daily lives of people open up conversations about values and
aspirations. As David Morgan (1999) argues, the meaning of an image is not merely
the act of putting it on the wall, but also exists in its display and ongoing presence in
the owner’s life.
The collaborative approach that most contemporary visual methods employ suits a
power-sharing approach to research. Informants are given a voice in the study in
order to shed light on the cultural situation. This approach is respectful toward a
person’s religious and spiritual beliefs and practices. Visual methods not only may
encourage the participant to provide the images but also allow them to invest them
with their own personal meaning and interpretation. The participant can speak as
personally or superficially as they choose regarding the images, thus allowing them
to control how much personal religious information is shared.
The visual enables identification with personal, subjective themes within lived
religion. Society has shifted from a textual culture to a complex, multi-faceted
culture full of unmediated images. Since people are used to processing visual
information, visual disseminations of research findings become accessible to a wide
range of people. Thus, visual methods also represent a shift away from the
epistemology typical of sociology of religion, because knowledge can be represented
and communicated through images rather than through text alone (Harper 1996).
Methods for conducting visual research
This section describes four methods for using the visual within qualitative research:
see ‘What is visual sociology’ from the British Sociology Association’s Visual
Sociology Study Group website http://www.visualsociology.org.uk/whatis/index.php
1. Collection of visual data
A video or film camera can record things that happen more quickly than field notes
can be taken. The use of a remote camera enables the recording of social
phenomena that might be dangerous or that the presence of the researcher would
change the situation. (For example, children playing, etc). The camera or video
camera can also collect data that is non-verbal. Documentary photography would be
included in this type of visual research.
2. Photo Elicitation
‘Photo elicitation’ involves using images to invoke comments and discussion in the
course of a semi-structured interview. The images used within the interview can
come from various sources. For example, with an archive of photographs provided
by the researcher, the interviewee looks through images and talks about them or
answers questions about them. Or, the interviewee instead of the researcher could
provide the images used for elicitation (such as the pictures on their walls or in
photo albums). This ensures that the pictures have personal meaning, but gives the
interviewer has less control over what is discussed. Reflexive photography puts the
camera into the hands of the interviewee, whereby the researcher gives the
informant the power to represent their world. Narrated photography combines
reflexive photography with interviews, inviting informants to narrate their own
photographs. (see Dunlop & Ward, forthcoming)
There are several significant advantages to using photo elicitation within interviews.
First, using the pictures within the interview relaxes the interviewee, because the
spotlight is on the pictures, not the person. Less eye contact needs to be maintained
as both interviewer and interviewee gaze at the images, and handling the pictures
can fill gaps in the conversation. The image gives the interviewee the opportunity to
discuss vague memories, associations or connotations that are related to the image.
This method empowers the individual informant, because the participant is able to
invest the pictures with their own personal meaning and interpretation. They can
speak as personally or superficially as they choose regarding image, thus allowing
them to control how much personal information is shared.
3. Studying visual data created by a social group
As mentioned above, this method is closely linked to studies of material culture and
entails observing the visual landscape and artefacts of society -- their production,
consumption and meaning – this includes art, photographs, film, video,
advertisements, fashion etc. The researcher can discover the use and understanding
of visual images as dictated by socially established symbolic codes, which can be
analysed through content analysis, semiotics, ethnography and other methods.
4. Visual communication of findings
Many different types of research outcomes can be represented visually. Since people
receive information in general visually, it makes sense that research findings and
theories can be communicated visually as well. Visual research may produce visual
results that are social knowledge in and of themselves, which convey findings on an
emotive, intuitive level to a wide audience.
Critique of visual methods
Visual research methods are not without limitations and using these methods within
research can create new challenges.
The first limitation is that a photograph or a film is visual information that has been
framed by the producer. The process of choosing what to include or what to exclude
from view is made by person who stands behind the camera, whether this is the
researcher or the informant. The photograph or film is a representation of, not an
exact replication, of a social situation. Thus it is essential, particularly when the
photographer or filmmaker is the researcher, that the project is conducted
reflexively. Drawing on a measure of self-awareness, the researcher should
document not only the content but also the context of each visual recording and
why it was shot in a particular way. The same issues applies to cropping
photographs, which can have considerable effects on the way in which an image is
experienced and interpreted.
Visual researchers may find they are limited by their own concern for the aesthetics
of the visual material they produce. If the researcher hopes to use images produced
within the research process in publications or other research outputs, there may be
a certain degree of pressure to create images pleasing to the eye. This
understandable concern for the aesthetics of images produced can limit which
photographs are used and will certainly influence how photographs are framed.
Some of these difficulties may be over come by allowing the informants to take the
photographs or shoot the film, as well as providing workshops in camera skills for
participants.
Another difficulty faced within visual research is that the process of ‘seeing’ and
interpreting what is seen is bound up in the culture of the person who ‘sees.’ The
owners or originators of the images should narrate their meaning and context. This
approach is subjective, involving co-operation between the researcher and subject.
For example, Sol Worth and John Adair (1972) applied this concept to their research
by teaching Navajo Indians to use filmmaking techniques to create a film to visually
depict their own culture. This type of collaboration not only allows the participant to
provide the images but also encourages them to invest them with their own
personal meaning and interpretation.
Furthermore, taking photographs may be seen as an act of aggression, which can
damage relationships between researcher and informant. Susan Sontag (1979: 14)
suggested that taking photographs can be a hostile act and that the photographer
aggressively objectifies others. She writes that ‘to photograph people is to violate
them…it turns people into objects that can be symbolically possessed’. Photographs
do not need to objectify people if they are sensitively executed and permission is
respectfully sought. Collaboration gives those researched a measure of control over
the images produced and can take place on different levels: agreeing to meet and
talk, allowing photographs to be taken, and even taking the photographs
themselves. There has also been a recent shift toward inviting the participants to be
involved in some level on analysing the visual data as well.
This leads us to another challenge of using visual research methods - the ethics of
using photographs or film of research participants. It is important that all the ethical
implications are considered before embarking on a project that uses visual methods.
In the UK there are no legal restrictions on taking photographs in most public spaces,
however on private land permission must be sought. In terms of research ethics, it is
respectful to ask permission to take or to keep a photograph. The researcher can
carry a large ‘obvious’ camera so that people know that the researcher is taking
photographs (Dunlop & Richter 2010). When it comes to disseminating photos, the
copyright rests with the creator of the image, so in research that involves the
participants taking pictures, the researcher should ask permission to use those
photographs in a publication or can ask the participants to waive the their copyright
and pass it onto the researcher. It is also important to consider whether publishing a
photo of someone might somehow endanger them or reflect poorly upon them.
Even if a person gives permission for a photo to be used, the researcher should use
their discretion as to whether it would be in the person’s best interests.
A full discussion of research ethics for visual research ethics can be read on the
Visual Sociology website. (see
http://www.visualsociology.org.uk/about/ethical_statement.php).
Using an Archive
Providing a collection of images to evoke some form of response from an
interviewee can be a telling means of opening up conversations about religion and
belief. If there are certain themes that the researcher would like to visually include,
then using the same archive in a series of interviews with different participants
insures a measure of similarity, prompting each interviewee to respond to the same
images. For example, when I conducted research into youth spirituality in Ukraine, I
included an Orthodox icon in the archive, amongst fifty other images, drawn from
various religions but also including famous people and art prints and advertising.
This meant that although some participants did not relate to the traditional religion
in terms of their personal spirituality, the icon forced them to respond in some way.
This lead to interesting data not only about existing beliefs and spirituality, but why
some beliefs were absent. I was able to test each participant’s reaction to the same
icon.
Care should be taken when choosing the archive and there are several issues to keep
in mind. First, the images themselves should be good quality prints. In my
experience, attractive images evoke much more interest and conversation. For
example, my research assistant in Slovakia told me that the young people she
interviewed were not really giving much response to the icon she included in her
archive. When she showed me the actual image as she had printed it, I discovered
that it was heavily pixelated. I believe that the young people did not engage with this
image because it was unclear and unattractive. It may seem obvious, but it is worth
emphasising that it is important that the image is printed and presented clearly.
Second, if the aim is to encourage the participant to respond to an image of a
famous person or place, then use an image that is iconic of that person or place, or
in a context that gives clues to the identity of the person or the location. Third, use
ambiguous image wisely. In their research with an archive with young people,
Savage et al. (2006, 107-110) discovered that when responding to ambiguous images
there was much more open thinking evidenced, compared with the closed thinking
elicited by the images that clearly represented something specific. I would agree that
ambiguous images that require some engagement or decoding tend to interest the
participants and invite them to add their own meaning and interpretation, often
leading to useful data about personal belief and worldview. However, it is important
that images are not so abstract that valuable interview time is taken up with
explaining what something is or might be.
One final, practical point on using an archive of images in an interview: Since I
usually audio record the interview, I have found that later, when I transcribe the
interview, that it can be difficult to determine which photograph is being discussed.
Therefore, I number each image in the archive, and when it is being discussed I
quietly say the number. I usually explain to the interviewee that I am just noting for
myself later which image we are talking about.
Narrated photography
Narrated photography entails inviting a participant to take photographs that portray
some aspect of their personal conceptions. This research method produces
‘narrated’ photograph because through interviews and focus groups, the
photographer is invited to produce a narrative that invests their images with
personal meaning. The resulting collection of images and text mediates the
subjective into a form that is perceptible, thus making the intuited concrete and
open for study.
There are several key points to keep in mind when conducting this type of visual
research. First, when placing the camera into the hands of the participant, it is
important to give a clear indication of the theme or question that they are being
asked to address through the images they produce. Not only should this be
discussed in person with the researcher so that clarification can be given if needed,
but a set of written instruction to take away is very helpful too. Of course, the
researcher should decide how prescriptive or open their research question should
be, but the actual instructions regarding how many photographs to take, at what
quality level setting on their camera, the number of photographs to be taken – all
this should be clearly set out at the start. If a camera is loaned, then the participant
should have clear instructions on how to use it.
Second, since the camera is in the hands of the participant, it is very difficult to
control the quality of the photographs. I would strongly recommend offering
photography workshops that cover just some of the basic principles for taking good
photographs, such as framing, composition, lighting, flash and focus. With this
knowledge, the participants are prepared to produce better photographs and are
more likely to be pleased with their own representations that they produce.
Documentary photography
A researcher may wish to photograph the context and people being studied. The
photographs can become visual field notes that supplement notes taken during
participant observation. Covert photography may leave the researcher with difficult
ethical issues to resolve, so, as mentioned above, it is better to carry a large, obvious
camera and openly take photographs. If one is photographing religious sites,
particularly interiors of buildings, it is essential that permission is gained from the
gatekeepers. Since a flash may disrupt the environment of a sacred site, I would
advise taking photographs using a tripod without a flash and increased ISO. Although
this may yield grainy or yellow-tinted photographs, this is far less of a disturbance to
the natural setting. With some creativity and precise timing, the researcher may be
able to stage photographs using natural light.
Consent should be sought from human subjects either before the photograph is
taken, or afterward, when permission can be given to ‘keep’ the photograph. When
photographing people, Howard Becker advises using a wide-angle lens instead of
standing at a distance and using a zoom lens. For him, the process of taking
photographs should be part of building interpersonal relationships with those being
researched (Becker 1974: 12). Indeed, consideration of those being photographed is
essential. Philip Richter helpfully outlines some of the issues the photographer faces
when pointing the camera at human subjects in an article for the Journal of
Contemporary Religion about using photography to study local churches
(forthcoming).
Of course, as previously stated, with this style of visual research, a high level of
reflexivity is absolutely necessary. Coming into a certain context and taking
photographs will have an affect on the situation being observed. The researcher
should be open about this and incorporate it into the study. Although the image of
the researcher may not appear in the frame, the presence of the researcher will still
be felt in some way. Since the researcher is holding the camera, it is important to
consider that the subject of the photograph and the framing and lighting are not
merely reflections of a social situation, but are an interpretation by the researcher
Bibliography
Banks, Marcus. 2001. Visual Methods in Social Research. London: SAGE.
Becker, Howard S. 1974. "Photography and Sociology." Studies in the Anthropology
of Visual Communication 1 (1): 3-26.
Dunlop, Sarah, and Philip Richter. 2010. "Visual Methods." Religion and Youth. Ed.
Collins-Mayo, Sylivia and Dandelion, Pink. Farnham: Ashgate, 209-16.
Dunlop, Sarah and Pete Ward. “Narrated Photography” Forthcoming.
Morgan, David. 1999. Visual Piety: History and Theory of Visual Images. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Morgan, David, and Sally Promey. 2001. The Visual Culture of American Religions.
London: University of California Press.
Pink, Sarah. 2007. Doing Visual Ethnography: Images, Media and Representation in
Research. 2nd ed. London: Sage.
Prosser, Jon. 1998. Image-Based Research : A Sourcebook for Qualitative
Researchers. London: Falmer Press.
Savage, Sarah, Sylvia Collins-Mayo, Bob Mayo and Graham Cray. 2006. Making Sense
of Generation Y: The World-View of 15-25 year olds. London: Church House.
Sontag, Susan. 1979. On Photography. London: Penguin.
Worth, Sol & John Adair. 1972. Through Navajo Eyes: An Exploration in Film
Communication and Anthropology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.