Difference between revisions of "Luff-Heath2012"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Paul Luff; Christian Heath; |Title=Some ‘technical challenges’ of video analysis: social actions, objects, material realities and t...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| − | |Author(s)=Paul Luff; Christian Heath; | + | |Author(s)=Paul Luff; Christian Heath; |
|Title=Some ‘technical challenges’ of video analysis: social actions, objects, material realities and the problems of perspective | |Title=Some ‘technical challenges’ of video analysis: social actions, objects, material realities and the problems of perspective | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Video; Objects; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Video; Objects; |
|Key=Luff-Heath2012 | |Key=Luff-Heath2012 | ||
|Year=2012 | |Year=2012 | ||
|Journal=Qualitative Research | |Journal=Qualitative Research | ||
|Volume=12 | |Volume=12 | ||
| − | |Pages=255- | + | |Number=3 |
| + | |Pages=255–279 | ||
| + | |URL=http://qrj.sagepub.com/content/12/3/255 | ||
| + | |DOI=10.1177/1468794112436655 | ||
| + | |Abstract=Unlike the wide-ranging methodological debates surrounding the accomplishment and analysis of interviews, fieldwork and focus groups, the discussions concerning the use of video data tend to focus on a few frequently rehearsed issues. In this article we wish to broaden the consideration of methodological concerns related to video. We address the problems faced when collecting data, particularly on how to select the framing for the recordings. We discuss the problems faced by researchers and how these have been addressed, revealing how a conventional solution has emerged that facilitates a particular kind of ‘multi-modal’ analysis. We then suggest some limitations of this framing and describe a number of recent approaches to recording video data that seek to overcome these constraints. While providing opportunities for very distinctive kinds of analyses, adopting these solutions places very particular demands on how data are collected, how research activities are conventionally undertaken, and perhaps more importantly, the nature of the analysis that is made possible. Although seeming to be a practical and technical consideration about recording data, selecting a camera angle uncovers methodological concerns that reveal the distinctive demands that video places on researchers concerned with the detailed analysis of naturally occurring social interaction. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 12:47, 25 February 2016
| Luff-Heath2012 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Luff-Heath2012 |
| Author(s) | Paul Luff, Christian Heath |
| Title | Some ‘technical challenges’ of video analysis: social actions, objects, material realities and the problems of perspective |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Video, Objects |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2012 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Qualitative Research |
| Volume | 12 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 255–279 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/1468794112436655 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Unlike the wide-ranging methodological debates surrounding the accomplishment and analysis of interviews, fieldwork and focus groups, the discussions concerning the use of video data tend to focus on a few frequently rehearsed issues. In this article we wish to broaden the consideration of methodological concerns related to video. We address the problems faced when collecting data, particularly on how to select the framing for the recordings. We discuss the problems faced by researchers and how these have been addressed, revealing how a conventional solution has emerged that facilitates a particular kind of ‘multi-modal’ analysis. We then suggest some limitations of this framing and describe a number of recent approaches to recording video data that seek to overcome these constraints. While providing opportunities for very distinctive kinds of analyses, adopting these solutions places very particular demands on how data are collected, how research activities are conventionally undertaken, and perhaps more importantly, the nature of the analysis that is made possible. Although seeming to be a practical and technical consideration about recording data, selecting a camera angle uncovers methodological concerns that reveal the distinctive demands that video places on researchers concerned with the detailed analysis of naturally occurring social interaction.
Notes
