Abstract
Health research is increasingly concerned with tackling health inequalities and inequities. Given that poorer health outcomes are often experienced by those who are suffering a degree of socially, economically, or environmentally determined disadvantage, it is incumbent on us as researchers to include the views and voices of diverse and sometimes marginalized or vulnerable population groups. Challenges which may accompany this imperative include engaging so-called hard-to-reach populations, and addressing an imbalance of power that often occurs between researcher and participant. Participant-guided mobile methods are one strategy for rebalancing this power differential when undertaking qualitative research. In this chapter, we describe the method and several case study examples where the authors have used it. We also discuss the types of research questions for which it is particularly well-suited along with its benefits and its challenges. When compared with a more traditional face-to-face interview, participant-guided mobile methods allow participants more power and control over the interview process. In addition, the method can yield observational and visual data as well as interview data, and is useful for including children and other participants who may be less articulate or lack proficiency in the language of the interviewer as it provides opportunities to “show” as well as “tell.”
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Block K, Gibbs L, Snowdon E, MacDougall C. Participant guided mobile methods: investigating personal experiences of communities. Sage research methods cases. London: Sage; 2014.
Bourdieu P. Understanding. Theory Cult Soc. 1996;13(2):17–37.
Brewer JD. Ethnography. Maidenhead: Open University Press; 2000.
Cacari-Stone L, Wallerstein N, Garcia AP, Minkler M. The promise of community-based participatory research for health equity: a conceptual model for bridging evidence with policy. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(9):1615–23.
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.
Darbyshire P, MacDougall C, Schiller W. Multiple methods in qualitative research with children: more insight or just more? Qual Res. 2005;5(4):417–36.
Denzin NK, Lincoln Y. Introduction: the discipline and practice of qualitative research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln Y, editors. Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2008. p. 1–43.
Evans J, Jones P. The walking interview: methodology, mobility and place. Appl Geogr. 2011;31(2):849–58.
Finlay JM, Bowman JA. Geographies on the move: a practical and theoretical approach to the mobile interview. Prof Geogr. 2017;69(2):263–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2016.1229623.
Gibbs L, MacDougall C, Nansen B, Vetere F, Ross N, Danic I, McKendrick J. Stepping out: children negotiating independent travel. Jack Brockhoff Child Health and Wellbeing Program. Melbourne: The University of Melbourne; 2012.
Gibbs L, Waters E, Bryant R, Pattison P, Lusher D, Harms L, Richardson J, MacDougall C, Block K, Snowdon E, Gallagher HC, Sinnott V, Ireton G, Forbes D. Beyond bushfires: community, resilience and recovery - a longitudinal mixed method study of the medium to long term impacts of bushfires on mental health and social connectedness. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:1036. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-1036.
Gill T. No fear: growing up in a risk-averse society. London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation; 2007.
Hein JR, Evans J, Jones P. Mobile methodologies: theory, technology and practice. Geogr Compass. 2008;2(5):1266–85.
Holton M, Riley M. Talking on the move: place-based interviewing with undergraduate students. Area. 2014;46(1):59–65.
International Collaboration for Participatory Health Research (ICPHR). Position paper 1: what is participatory health research? Berlin: International Collaboration for Participatory Health Research; 2013.
Janes JE. Democratic encounters? Epistemic privilege, power, and community-based participatory action research. Action Res. 2016;14(1):72–87.
Kusenbach M. Street phenomenology: the go-along as ethnographic research tool. Ethnography. 2003;4(3):455–85.
MacDougall C, Schiller W, Darbyshire P. What are our boundaries and where can we play? Perspectives from eight to ten year old Australian metropolitan and rural children. Early Child Dev Care. 2009;179(2):189–204.
Nansen B, Gibbs L, MacDougall C, Vetere F, Ross NJ, McKendrick J. Children’s interdependent mobility: compositions, collaborations and compromises. Children’s Geograph. 2015;13(4):467–81.
Rainham D, McDowell I, Krewski D, Sawada M. Conceptualizing the healthscape: contributions of time geography, location technologies and spatial ecology to place and health research. Soc Sci Med. 2010;70(5):668–76.
Sheller M, Urry J. The new mobilities paradigm. Environ Plan A. 2006;38(2):207–26.
Sultana F. Reflexivity, positionality and participatory ethics: negotiating fieldwork dilemmas in international research. ACME Int J Crit Geograph. 2007;6(3):374–85.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this entry
Cite this entry
Block, K., Gibbs, L., MacDougall, C. (2019). Participant-Guided Mobile Methods. In: Liamputtong, P. (eds) Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_25
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_25
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-5250-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-5251-4
eBook Packages: Social SciencesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences