The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1352-2752.htm
Exploring innovative methodologies for child-centric consumer research Emma N. Banister
Exploring innovative methodologies 157
Department of Marketing, Management School, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK, and
Gayle J. Booth Centre of Diversity and Work Psychology, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK Abstract Purpose – We discuss the use of creative qualitative techniques for research studies focusing on young participants and encourage the development of what we term a “child-centric” approach. We hope that by sharing our experiences we can help move forward the discussion of child-centric approaches and methods, providing a useful starting point for researchers considering conducting qualitative research with children, and food for thought for those experienced at researching the lives of young consumers. Design/methodology/approach – We begin our paper with a general overview of approaches to childhood as a social category, discuss methodological approaches to research with children and review the literature that informed our methodological approach. In the second part of the paper we focus on an empirical investigation, outlining a methodology with which we sought to embrace children’s active participation. Our qualitative approach incorporates the following: quasi-ethnographic methods; interviews; projective techniques and photography. Findings – It is suggested that by shifting our research focus from a top-down perspective into one that embraces childhood as a culture in its own right, we can greet children within their own language, using terminology they understand, and ultimately providing the context for a more fruitful and exciting data collection process. Our research design was effective in providing children with a voice with which to relate their experiences, and in this way we saw ourselves as facilitators, letting children tell us their own story in their own words. Originality/value – We argue that it is only by recognising and taking on board some of the recommendations that have emerged from the debate concerning research with children that consumer researchers will discover a fuller appreciation of the participants we seek to understand. Lessons from this approach can also be fruitfully used to enhance the experiences of research involving participants other than children who should also benefit from more participant-centred research designs. Keywords Children (age groups), Qualitative research, Photography, Ethnography, Consumer research Paper type Research paper
Introduction In this paper we discuss the use of creative qualitative techniques for research studies focusing on young participants and encourage the development of what we term a “child-centric” approach. Drawing on sociological approaches to research, we discuss research processes and methods that locate children as active generators of data (Pole et al., 1999), and encourage researchers to reflect on their stance towards children. We recognise the influence this “stance” will have on research designs, reflecting recent
Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal Vol. 8 No. 2, 2005 pp. 157-175 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1352-2752 DOI 10.1108/13522750510592436
QMRIJ 8,2
158
work that criticises studies that outline only adult conceptions of childhood (James et al., 1998; Pole et al., 1999) and promoting the use of approaches which acknowledge appropriate forms of language and behaviours. We begin our paper with a general overview of approaches to childhood as a social category, discuss methodological approaches to research with children and review the literature that informed our methodological approach. In the second part of the paper we focus on an empirical investigation, outlining a methodology with which we sought to embrace children’s active participation (James et al., 1998). We take on board some of the observations made in the first stage of our paper, and integrate this with a discussion of the methods we used, identifying the issues that were of particular interest to our focus. Our study focused on children’s notions of taste and we placed great importance on the need to design methods that situated children firmly at the centre of the research process, coining the term “child-centric” to describe this type of approach. We hope that by sharing our experiences we can help move forward the discussion of child-centric approaches and methods, providing an useful starting point for researchers considering conducting qualitative research with children, and food for thought for those experienced at researching the lives of young consumers. Literature review In her ACR presidential address, Roedder John (1997) urged consumer researchers to think outside what she termed the “adult box”, reflecting a dearth of research focusing on young consumers. Ongoing sociological debates focus on the question of just what constitutes childhood. Childhood can usefully be understood as a relational term, grounded in terms of its relationship (of difference) with adulthood, and the way in which adults relate to this social relationship (Jenks, 1996). Much of what we as adults know, interpret or assume about children reflects the differences between adults and children (Jenks, 1996). There has been a sociological shift “away from the idea of a child as ‘becoming’ an adult to the ‘being child’, conceptualised as an active social agent” (Qvortrup, 1994; Harden et al., 2000). As James et al. (1998:146) note, “Childhood should be understood as socially or culturally constructed. It cannot be straightforwardly ‘read off’ from the biological differences between adults and children such as physical size or maturity”. This suggests that when we research young consumers we should develop methods or media whereby children can relate their experiences through an active role in the data collection, providing children with the tools, environment and ultimately the voice with which to effectively relate their experiences. As part of this process we need to acknowledge children’s diverse competencies, signifying the need for an array of research techniques. James and Prout (1990, p. 6) challenge the view of childhood as a stage of adulthood, interesting for their potential rather than their current status, and recognise the need to understand children “as social actors shaping as well as being shaped by their circumstances”. Young children in particular are more accustomed to expressing themselves in creative as opposed to vocal means and research can benefit by using designs which make use of these talents, challenging the perception that children are less active social beings or less competent than adults (James et al., 1998). These different forms of expression used by children do not mean the data they generate is in any way less rich than adults’ (Mandell, 1991). However, adopting a “top-down” perspective, adults (including researchers) have a tendency to read adult meanings into what they hear children say
(Hyatt, 1991). Childhood exists under the watchful eye of adult surveillance, whether at home or at school (Harden et al., 2000) creating a panoptical awareness (Foucault, 1977). “When kids talk to researchers, they assume the adult is a kind of teacher and that the questions are, again, about getting it right or being wrong. Overcoming that mindset is crucial” (Roper, 1989, p. 20). Closing the perceived gap between the researcher (as adult) and the child provides an immediate challenge, and developing a rapport with the children in their space and on their terms, provides an integral aspect of the research process. An important aspect of “getting in and staying in” the field (Prosser and Schwartz, 1998, p. 121) centres on the decision of what role to take. Mandell (1991) advocates complete participation or taking the “least adult role”, involving “suspending all adult-like characteristics except physical size”. However, James et al. (1998) question the necessity of assuming this role, advising researchers to attempt “semi participation” and friendship with the children they are studying. Again, this provides a challenge because of the uneven nature of adult-child relations. Bartholomew and O’Donohoe (2003, p. 434) urge researchers to “look through the eyes of a child rather than the lens of adult researchers”. This involves adapting methods of communication to incorporate language that conforms to children’s conversational norms. This should have a three fold effect, firstly, it will ensure we are better understood; secondly it will help children feel more comfortable with the researcher, the environment and the research focus (Peracchio and Mita, 1991), and thirdly, it provides a check whereby the researchers can ensure they are familiar with the language used by the participant. This understanding is an essential aspect of viewing children as constructors of knowledge in collaboration with interviewers (Holstein and Gubrium, 1997). In Table I we provide an overview of recent qualitative studies that have attempted to embrace children’s “active participation” (James et al., 1998) moving towards a “child-centric” vision. Through inspection of this table it becomes clear that disciplines such as sociology, heath research and cultural studies have moved further than marketing in this direction. With the notable exception of Bartholomew and O’Donohoe(2003), whose innovative design incorporated a compelling attempt to use a child-centred approach, few marketing studies have acknowledged the debate that is taking place in other subject areas. The qualitative methods summarised in Table I range from interviews and discussions with children through projective techniques, to the full involvement of young people in the research process, from the design of the methods through to the data collection (refer Smith et al., 2002; Kirby, 1999 and Worrall, 2000 for advice and further references). The range of techniques signals a growing readiness by researchers to go beyond the use of words for expression and the communication of meaning (Hirschman, 1998). The variety of techniques employed in the studies summarised in Table I provide partial recognition of the need to recognise children’s development in social terms, rather than with sole regard to age. Yet there remains a tendency for children to be grouped in age across situations (particularly within the education system). As a result, children become more comfortable and accustomed to other children within their own age group. It is important for researchers to be aware that any social differences observed might originate from these contrasting experiences. When conducting research within a school context, we need to recognise the context as one where children’s experiences are clearly defined in age terms, where children’s behaviour
Exploring innovative methodologies 159
Observation
Hogg et al. (1999)
Russell and Tyler (2002)
Lawlor and Prothero (2003)
Group interviews Bartholomew and O’Donohoe (2003)
Davies et al. 2000
Backett and Alexander (1991)
Questionnaires followed by individual interviews
Comments/Challenges – towards “child-centrism”?
(continued)
Essentially adapted “adult” methods which were less problematic because of the age of the participants 4-12 years old: children’s health Individual interviews and a variety Used a variety of techniques in related beliefs and behaviours of techniques (including drawing, order to fit with children’s varying experiences projective techniques and visual stimuli) Gave children the responsibility to 6 –7 and 10-11 year olds: children’s Group discussions on a regular negotiate the construction of TV “taste culture” basis over a period of time incorporating sorting activities and childhood and adulthood TV scheduling activity Small friendship groups used to put 10-12 years: children’s advertising Friendship groups of three, experiences individual interviews, photo diaries children at ease and reflect social context of life. Children set agenda and creation of ad for imaginary for interviews with photo diary soft drink A range of methods may have been 8-9 year olds: understanding of Discussions of adverts and the advertising intent distinction between adverts and TV more suitable to capture responses of children with different programmes experiences and abilities Primarily 10-11 year olds: focus on Observation and accompanied store Older children tended to offer more retailer (“Girl Heaven”) visits. Eight girls given £2 to spend detailed commentary/drawings. (if wish), and individual drawings Tasks enabled individual contributions from less vocal of “girl heaven” members of the group Older age groups produced collages 7-10 year olds: children’s Group discussions incorporating and commentary that was richer in perceptions of branded clothing collage exercises. Participants given a range of materials to work detail, but methods allowed all children to participate effectively with
Thomson and Laing 13-15 years: Family purchasing (2003) behaviour and role of the internet
Age of participants and study focus Description of methods
Interviews
Table I. Overview of studies using qualitative approaches for research with children
Authors
160
Main method
QMRIJ 8,2
Authors
Age of participants and study focus Description of methods
Comments/Challenges – towards “child-centrism”?
Projective techniques
Belk et al. 1982
Approx 4- adult: explored consumption symbolism
Presentation of photographs (cars and houses), accompanied by verbal questions
Question whether the stimulus was relevant to the lives of children in the study. A challenge to devise methods appropriate for such a broad range Nguyen and 8-17 year olds: children’s use of Range of projective techniques (e.g. Question how much scope for Roedder John (2001) brands to define self image adding brand names to the design “active” participation because of (adult) pre-determined categories of of a rucksack, t-shirt and watch) response Useful reflections, particularly Photography Pole et al. 1999 Ages not specified: involvement in Variety of methods (interviews, paid work diaries, projective techniques) with accounts of points where constraints tempered the regular contact over a year participation of children as partners in the research process Ensured linguistic capabilities were Aided recall Macklin (1987) 3-5 years old: understanding of Mixture of (individual) activities task/game advertising intent and play in response to questions. not critical to the completion of the task. But, limited options Primarily non-verbal responses pre-formed by researchers (rather than children) The letters generated by the Letters O’Cass and Clarke Various ages: brand awareness and Content analysis of convenience (2001) request styles at Christmas sample of letters to Santa supplied children were not in response to the research study – raises ethical by retailer questions regarding the consent to participate Young people as Smith et al. (2002) Ages not specified: availability and Research participants as centre of Many practical challenges but developed approaches, which were co-researchers experience of healthcare the process. 38 young people meaningful within children’s own involved in design, and as frame of reference interviewers and research participants
Main method
Exploring innovative methodologies 161
Table I.
QMRIJ 8,2
162
becomes defined as age specific (Harden et al., 2000). Some of the studies summarised in Table I have made use of other means by which to access their participants (Smith et al., 2002; O’Cass and Clarke, 2001; Russell and Tyler, 2002) but by far the majority of studies focusing on children tend to recruit through schools primarily reflecting the practicalities of accessing participants and related ethical concerns. Researchers have a moral and ethical responsibility to account for the effects of the research procedures on participants. In studies involving children, much of the concern revolves around the notion of consent, and questions regarding the ability of children to offer their consent (Lind et al., 2003). In a typical study there may be several levels of ethical responsibility involved (e.g. children, parents, carers, teachers). The Market Research Society code of conduct advises that consent is first sought from the responsible adult – defined as the adult responsible for the child’s safety and welfare at the time of the research (MRS, 2000). “In a protected environment, like a school, the responsible adult will be the person in authority or overseeing the location who has responsibility for the protection of the child/young person” (MRS, 2000, p. 3). In addition to obtaining the consent of the responsible adult in order to approach the child, it is also important to ensure that the child is given the full opportunity to decline to participate at any point in the research. In practice we should perhaps question how willing and able children are to take responsibility for consent, and whether the power relations that exist between adults and children make it difficult for children to opt out of the research process. This presents a challenge for researchers, and again we would encourage attempts to reduce the gap between researcher and child in order that children can feel more confident about making their views heard. Some examples of how we attempted this will be outlined in the next section. Research design During the second half of this paper we will share our experiences, taking a reflective look at the means through which we attempted to embrace child-centric methods, discussing the relative merits of the different techniques we used. We do not attempt to come to any conclusions regarding the “right” methods or research design, but we hope to illustrate how we tried to incorporate a “child-centric” approach into our design. To provide some context we begin with an overview of the aims of our original study. It is not our intention to go into this in any depth except where our methodological discussions require it (the findings from our study have been written up elsewhere, refer Banister and Booth 2004; Booth 2003). Our study explored how children learn to attach negative meanings to products and brands through the socialisation process. We did not focus on a particular product category, but instead explored items that children liked and disliked, with discussions tending to focus on toys, food and clothing. Our focus was not so much concerned with how many children wore Nike trainers or did not like Harry Potter. Instead we sought to explore how children attributed meaning to objects, and under what circumstances these processes are learnt. We developed qualitative research techniques that would help us to explore children’s personal experiences and ultimately to discover how and why social structures and meanings are formed, sustained or rejected. It was imperative that we gained an inside view of the research field in order to begin unravelling the dynamic processes in operation (Mason, 1996) and ultimately this meant working with a relatively small sample.
Our research design consisted of a series of related studies (as recommended by Roper, 1989), each designed to address the overall aim of the study, in addition to focusing more specifically on one of the research objectives. Like Pole et al. (1999) our intention was to ensure that we gave our child participants a voice, rather than enabling a re-articulation of adult meaning. It was important that the children saw themselves as partners in the research process, and our explanation of the research to them emphasised the idea of co-ownership. The nature of the research site, a school with routines organised around lessons and timetables, meant the research design had various practical constraints imposed and it was important to maintain flexibility in our design. This decision to conduct research within a school was taken whilst recognising the limitations this choice of research site could present (criticisms primarily focus on the organisation of children within age groups and the power relationship created by teachers’ authority over children, which could have implications for the research relationship as well as suggesting that right or wrong answers exist). However, in this case there were two very clear advantages that the school environment could offer. Firstly, there were logistical advantages, as the school provided a means by which to gain access to a number of children within the age group identified. Secondly this site enabled us to gain an insight into the children’s behaviour in a social environment, indeed the very environment where many of the meanings associated with products are negotiated. To a certain extent we attempted to control for any negative effects arising from the research site, through the incorporation of individually based methods, which drew on other contexts of the children’s lives (the photography exercise and the interviews). We began with a quasi-ethnographic approach, which helped us to gain a sense of the social world in which children operated, and also helped us to build a trusting relationship within the community. This quasi-ethnographic work continued to a lesser extent throughout the data collection but was most important for the first 3 months. The second phase of the research saw the children involved in various task-centred creative activities connected to the topic under study (projective techniques and self-directed photography). The third and final phase consisted of interviews with the children who had participated in the activities and served as a means to further explore the meanings that had emerged from the previous two stages. Negotiating access and consent The University Ethics Committee was consulted about the nature of our study and it was satisfied that our proposed methods were appropriate. Following this guidance, one of our immediate ethical considerations was personal to one of the researchers. Access to the research site was motivated through the attendance of a younger sibling at the school. We took great care to ensure that we limited the potential implications of the research for him, particularly his social relationships in and out of school. We spoke for a month intermittently before both researcher and sibling were satisfied that the research would not represent a threat to him. Once his permission was granted, the Head Teacher was contacted and a meeting organised in order that the study, the research objectives and the school’s proposed involvement could be explained and discussed in full. Once the permission of the Head Teacher was secured, we informed the children and staff of the school about the nature of the study, and the researcher’s visits. Great care
Exploring innovative methodologies 163
QMRIJ 8,2
164
was taken to explain the research to the children in ways that they understood, and for this we were able to draw on the levels of understanding that had emerged during the quasi-ethnographic phase. Using shared language we emphasised the freedom to decide whether to participate or not, and to withdraw participation at any time. From the onset we made it clear that this was a university research project which explored why and how children learn to like and dislike things, that we would be asking for their help and participation and that their opinions were very important to us. Talking about how the findings would be written up in the form of a “book” (i.e. a dissertation) helped to spur the children’s enthusiasm. We then checked the children’s understanding of this issue through discussions within groups of children. Although no rewards were offered for participation, the research was designed to be fun and to provide the children with a number of experiences. The Head Teacher and staff of the school felt the initial research activities could be incorporated into the “normal” school activities thus not providing a concern for parents. However, when extra-curricular activities were required (i.e. the photography phase), written information was sent to parents to request permission for their child to participate (for those children that had expressed an interest). This provided an example of a point at which the research design had to be flexible with regards to the particular research setting and ultimately the views of the Head Teacher. Ideally we would have obtained consent from individual parents at an earlier stage, yet we also had to accept the school’s responsibility for the children and therefore, their wishes. This slightly uncomfortable situation was partially resolved through bowing to the Head Teacher’s knowledge of the school and his overall responsibility for the children’s welfare. With hindsight, this conundrum could (and should) have provided an opportunity to educate him on the ethical concerns of research and the need to obtain informed consent from all parties. The in-depth nature of the investigation meant the children gradually became more and more comfortable with the researcher’s presence and this had ethical implications. Some children discussed sensitive issues such as grief, divorce and elements of peer pressure. A small number of issues were raised that were not reported in the main study, in respect of the child’s (and their family’s) rights of confidentiality. The participants’ names were changed in the writing up of the study, in order to respect the children’s privacy. A Dictaphone was used for much of the data collection, but was only introduced after a rapport had developed and in all occasions its use was made explicit to the children. Sample The school selected as the site for our study educates children in their “middle years” (ages four to eleven), which was regarded as a suitable age group for our study. Within these ages children become increasingly aware of their self-identity yet there are varying opinions about when this process begins (refer Belk et al., 1982; James and Prout, 1990), with Klein (1987) arguing this begins at the onset of birth. However, by including children between the ages of four and eleven, we addressed these conflicting arguments, and also focused on an age group that are less often studied (James et al., 1998). The range of ages enabled us to study the development of self-identity and the association of negative symbolic associations with products, brands and activities, the main focus for our study.
Quasi-ethnographic stage Participant observational techniques have long been considered important methods for social scientists seeking the emergence of a more complete picture of a topic. Throughout the fieldwork, the researcher seeks to explore and understand a culture through long term immersion, which “increases the likelihood of spontaneously encountering important moments in the ordinary events of consumers’ daily lives and of experiencing revelatory incidents” (Arnould and Wallendorf, 1994, p. 485; Fernandez, 1986). Ethnography is becoming an increasingly popular method amongst consumer behaviour researchers (Elliott and Jankel-Elliott, 2003; Greig and Taylor, 1999; Ritson and Elliott, 1999) in order to develop “thick descriptions” of social behaviour. A difficulty of comprehensive ethnography is the amount of time needed to conduct an appropriate study. Elliott and Jankel-Elliott (2003) use the term “quasi ethnography” to refer to a technique which approximates ethnography but within the limited resources available to researchers. The role of the researcher and the manner in which their involvement affects the field is sometimes viewed as problematic. This aspect of the research interested us. We sought to be viewed by the children as “interested parties who could be trusted and to whom the children would enjoy talking and communicating” (Pole et al., 1999, p. 46). As time passed, rapport and participant relationships developed, and the researcher inevitably became a key aspect of the research process. We recognised this developing relationship, particularly in the analysis of the data. Reflexive engagement was experienced in the sense of the researcher becoming a child again, yet to the children the researcher may still have represented a “responsible adult” (in the mould of a teacher or parent-like figure). Therefore, as a researcher it was important to recognise this status as an adult yet to effectively communicate that the role was not to teach right and wrong, as adults tend to do. Childhood is experienced by everyone, and is therefore, part of everyone’s experiences, and inevitably the researchers’ own experiences were drawn on through reflexive engagement. Researchers also bring an ontological and epistemological position to their work, in the sense that certain behaviours may be looked for when observing the group or community because of assumptions and past experiences (Mason, 1996). Within the context of this paper we will not go into specific personal details, but it is useful to identify the implications and influence of autobiography in the research process (Griffiths, 1995; James, 1993; Oakely, 2002). It was impractical for us to undertake a full ethnographic study due to our particular resource and time constraints. However, the first stage of our study was commensurate with Elliott and Jankel-Elliott’s (2003) definition of quasi-ethnography enabling the development of a good rapport, facilitating a comfortable relationship. In order to understand children’s lived experience it was essential to gain access into an appropriate research location and to consult children in their collective environment. The school playground provided a place for children to congregate on a regular basis and an ideal opportunity in which to observe social relationships and to explore the broad context of the study – getting to grips with the social practices of the children and their display of aspects of self-identity, through consumption habits. It also allowed us the opportunity to identify possible respondents for the later stages of research. The interaction between the children and the researcher was initially lively but settled down after a short time. The children found the Dictaphone highly
Exploring innovative methodologies 165
QMRIJ 8,2
166
entertaining and would sometimes shout and scream making it difficult to understand what was said. On the other hand it was useful to use the Dictaphone during these initial stages as it ensured the children were familiar and comfortable with the recording of their responses in the later stages of the research. Field notes were taken on a regular basis and entered in a research diary, following the recommendations of Elliott and Jankel-Elliott (2003). These observational notes prompted a progressive understanding of playground interaction and the daily routines in the children’s natural school environment. Mason (1996) warns that the presence of an unfamiliar person, that is a researcher, can have adverse effects on the so-called natural setting. These field notes identified this kind of issue, reflecting upon the researcher’s role as an active and reflexive actor in the children’s world. It has been a long time since I had been in a busy school playground. The noise alone prompted overwhelming memories of my own childhood as I smiled to myself and found a quiet wall to lean on. The structure of the playground had not changed much. There were the familiar painted white lines for football, hopscotch grids, decreasing circles and footprints. However, the children had their own ideas about what these outlines could be used for. One side of the line was the sea and the other was a boat or a beach. The hopscotch grid featured as a stage for a budding girl band as they sang and danced. (Field Notes, 18 November 2001).
At other times the field notes recorded important background observations, which provided context and were important for our data interpretation. Most of the children, at some point, would take a moment to stand and stare at the other children. They would then join in or interact when “something” or the timing determined a suitable opportunity for acceptable intervention, which could be shared (Field Notes, 10 December 2001)
The quasi-ethnographic phase of the research lasted 3 months and produced an enormous amount of qualitative data. Some of this data was directly useful for the topic under study, and all of it was invaluable in forming an understanding of the norms by which these children lived their lives, helping in our development of appropriate techniques for the latter stages of the study. The conversations we became involved in and the observations that were made helped us directly in the formulation of techniques that would hopefully foster the enthusiasm and imagination in play that was so evident in the playground, while remaining true to the focus of the study. Projective technique: drawing and writing exercise Engaging children in what might be called “task centred activities” which exploit children’s particular talents and interests might provide a better way of allowing children to express their ideas and opinions than the use of more “talk-centred” methods such as interviews and questionnaires (James et al., 1998, p. 190)
Projective techniques, as they are generally known, have been used in previous consumer behaviour studies and can provide a fruitful means to elicit responses from children – particularly for abstract themes and ideas. We were eager to develop an activity that would harness children’s imagination and encourage their active participation, and maximise the amount of information given. The exercises were designed to provide a means to create mutual trust and acceptance by the children, rather than immediate one-to-one interviews which children sometimes find
intimidating (Hood et al., 1996). Children were given templates, which were blank except for an outline of either a tree, a carrier bag or a T-shirt. Twenty children participated in the exercise, with a range of ages represented and we used Roper (1989, p. 20) view regarding the importance of including children that were both typical and atypical of other children: “We need children who are more articulate than usual, but who still represent the usual case”. The first exercise encouraged children to draw and write on an outline of a tree. This exercise built on the experience of one of the researchers who had previously developed an exercise along similar lines while working with children[1], and was further informed by a series of pilot tests with children in this age range. The exercise was adapted to fit the research focus and designed to encourage the elicitation of different aspects of likes and dislikes. The tree templates were named as follows: tree of disgust; tree of not very good taste; and tree of very good taste. The instructions for these tasks required the children to decorate the tree. An example of the instructions given to the children was: “What things make you say ‘yuk!’ that’s disgusting! . . . .write these things down on the leaves . . . ” and they were also asked “Who is walking past this tree”? These instructions drew on language learnt from the playground and were articulated in such a manner that would be easily understood by the children within the specified age group, so both the design of the exercises and the way in which they were explained to the participants were informed by children (via the playground and the pilot study). The t-shirt and carrier bag exercises followed a very similar format and were greatly informed by the pilot study. They were designed in order to encourage responses focusing on consumer products and brands, and the items (i.e. carrier bag and t-shirt) were designed to be gender-neutral in order to encourage a broad range of responses. Four children completed the exercises at a time in the school library using shared felt tip pens, pencils and wax crayons, which were placed in the middle of the table. The participants were encouraged verbally (and by the prompts on the templates) to draw or write on the templates, including brand names, products, objects and colour, which they thought might “grow” from such trees or appear on t-shirts and carrier bags. The exercises aimed to prompt thought processes associated with negative items, as well as those items interpreted positively. We aimed to give the participants a free rein to express their views, with the intention of prompting detailed child orientated discussion at a later date. We involved children from a range of ages in the exercise, although younger children (of 4 to 6 years old) tended to need extra guidance and, where necessary, assistance was given with writing the words or brands that were suggested by these children, onto the templates. Previous studies have involved the development of collages using cutting and pasting exercises (Banister and Hogg, 2001; Belk et al., 1982; Hogg and Savolainen, 1998; Nguyen and Roedder John, 2001) yet we felt children’s perspectives could be better explored if items were drawn onto the templates by hand. Activities involving creativity can sometimes be challenging for respondents who are not used to expressing themselves in this way. Our exercises involved children participating in ways that were familiar to them – drawing, colouring and sometimes writing. However, it was important to recognise these activities are not fun for all children (James et al., 1998) so, for example, we ensured our task did not rely fully on drawing. It was also important to emphasise to the children that they would not be rewarded or
Exploring innovative methodologies 167
QMRIJ 8,2
168
punished on the basis of their answers (as may be the case with school activities). Some children participated more “successfully”, in terms of their skills with drawing and building on abstract ideas, but none of the children seemed frustrated by the task. The exercise was developed in order to encourage children to think about the “problem” or “challenge” they were presented with. Children were encouraged to bring their own interpretation to the task, rather than the “results” of the exercise providing evidence in its own right. The children’s creations were used as the basis for discussion, rather than the analysis solely focusing on what the children had produced, which was variable depending on the expertise of the child. Analysis of these exercises was ongoing. Initially observations of the children and their collages during the exercises were recorded, as well as answers to general informal questioning. The templates were then collected in for content analysis across the group and at a later stage the children were given the chance to talk in-depth about their individual collages (see interview section). Photography . . .photographs may not provide us with unbiased, objective documentaries of the social and material world, but they can show characteristic attributes of people, objects, and events that often elude even the most skilled wordsmiths. Through our use of photographs we can discover and demonstrate relationships that may be subtle or easily overlooked Prosser (1998, p. 116)
Photography has been used in a number of studies, providing a means to provoke an emotional and expressive response (Belk et al., 1982; Morrow, 1998; Schratz and Steiner-Lo¨ffler, 1998). Photographs can be used as an icebreaker in research projects (Bartholomew and O’Donohoe, 2003), helping the researcher to foster rapport and providing an alternative to the limitations of language for description (Schratz and Steiner-Lo¨ffler, 1998). They can help to locate items in time and space (Emmison and Smith, 2000) and provide images and representations (Schroeder, 1999), which the photographer can then talk about at length. As McCauley (1997, p. 63) says “all photographs are representations, in that they tell us as much about the photographer, the technology used to produce the image, and their intended uses as they tell us about the events or things they depicted”. Photography has been successfully incorporated into previous studies that focus on children (Schratz and Steiner-Lo¨ffler, 1998) and can provide useful visual prompts during the interview process (Morrow, 1998). The use of photography also means that children can set the agenda for interview discussions (Bartholomew and O’Donohoe, 2003), thus providing a means to enable children to take an active role in the data collection. The use of self-directed photography in our study helped us to “build a bridge” between our participants and ourselves. This term was coined by Prosser and Schwartz (1998) who refer to a study by Worth and Adair (1972), who taught filmmaking to Navajo Indians, offering them the means to depict their own culture on their terms. We asked 12 children to take approximately 12 photographs of things they considered distasteful, disgusting or disliked and 12 pictures of things they liked or enjoyed (i.e. 24 exposures in total). The children were given the task to complete over the 2-week Easter holiday (in order to include their out-of-school experiences). To assist the child with this project, we provided a flyer along with the camera. The flyer incorporated the use of cartoon facial expressions to help communicate
straightforward and simple instructions. As well as the opportunity to ask any questions before they took the camera home, the children were provided with a phone number in case they or their parents had any further questions. We sought information about the more mundane aspects of consumption (Warde, 1994) capturing a sense of these children’s life outside of school (including family life) to accompany the child-centric vision that was encapsulated during the initial stages of this research. The analysis of these photographs was child-centred, again allowing the children to gain an element of ownership. Once the films were developed, one of the researchers quickly glanced through them. However, when the child who had taken the photographs opened the envelope containing the photographs, no prior analysis of the photographs had been conducted. The child then spoke freely about why he or she had chosen to take the photographs, placing them on one of two boards, one of which represented those photographs featuring likes, and one featuring those that were disliked (drawing on methods used by Schratz and Steiner-Lo¨ffler, 1998). We used prompts where necessary, but as much as possible the child talked about their photographs as independently as possible, thus maintaining the flexibility of the design. It was important to consider the issue of empowerment and the extent to which the issue of “ownership” (of data and findings) could be considered (Prosser and Schwartz, 1998). The children were told they could take any photographs they wanted for themselves (following the methods used by Bartholomew and O’Donohoe, 2003, who ordered two sets of prints for this purpose). Following this stage, the two researchers reviewed the transcript from the interviews, looking for meanings in addition to those voiced by the participants. The process was therefore, one of self-analysis (by the child), supplemented by interpretation and discussion between the researchers. Interviews Interviews were carried out with 20 children. Eight of these children had participated in the projective exercises (tree, bags and t-shirt templates) but had not taken photographs. The remaining 12 children had participated in both the photography exercise and the other projective exercises. We kept the interviews fairly short (20-30 min) and they took place in a small communal room. They were semi-structured in order to generate free-flowing conversation. Douglas (1985) suggests a “conversational approach” as this helps to thaw the sometimes-edgy researcher/participant relationship into a more warm and friendly dialogue and increases the likelihood of participants being more natural and therefore, truthful in their responses. In addition, the actual process of listening or becoming a “listener” rather than an “interviewer” is also argued to be productive, as this active engagement with the participants creates a sense of valid importance for the respondent, and helps to reduce any feelings of knowledge inferiority (Douglas, 1985). We felt this to be particularly important in view of the age of the respondents and their inexperience with research participation. An open-ended approach was used to discuss and understand the meanings of the exercises and the photographs, some of which were ambiguous. Before we began discussing the exercises and photographs, we emphasised to the children that we would not be testing them about what they had drawn or the photographs they had taken. For those children who had been involved in all the exercises (i.e. photography as well as the projective technique), the interview began by asking the children to open
Exploring innovative methodologies 169
QMRIJ 8,2
170
the envelope containing the photographs. Their photographs remained in their original shop wrappers, once more encouraging a sense of ownership. The child then began the interview by positioning them on one of two boards, depending on whether they reflected likes or dislikes which instigated ownership, as the child would generally speak first. This fairly simple sorting exercise was enjoyed by the children and helped them to gain confidence in their ability to understand what was being asked of them. Further discussion regarding the trees, t-shirts and carrier bags was integrated naturally where the conversation coincided with the photograph. This often led to the conversation bouncing between the two activities. Frequently the projective techniques displayed items which were present in the photographs, and helped to clarify why items were (dis)favourable to the child. Where photographs were absent, discussion focused on what the children had drawn or written during the projective activities. Sometimes the children had not managed to compete their projective technique, and this provided the opportunity to ask what could have been done in order to provide a full understanding, they were also asked if they had changed their mind about any of the drawings. As with the quasi-ethnographic stage, each participant was asked at the beginning of the interview for permission to tape the discussion. The purpose of the discussion was explained; that we were going to discuss how they (the participant) learned to like and dislike things. The children laughed frequently about pictures they had taken, and the things they had written or drawn on their templates and would be asked why something was funny. This was seen as a good starting point for conversation. Sometimes they would look at the door when they were relating something a little mischievous, or a story about their experiences of sibling rivalry. It felt like a time where children could talk about important aspects of their lives, as if by this stage the researcher had become neither adult nor child to the children. In the playground a 9 year old girl said: “It’s ok to say anything to you [ ] you’re not like the teachers”. On occasions, children talked about personal issues such as divorce, grief and fears and this highlighted the extent to which the children “opened up” in the interviews, which was strengthened by the time that the researcher had spent with the children. One of the main challenges with interviewing children is the difficulty understanding some of their language. It is recommended that the interviewer is familiar with the age group under study, and it is something that becomes easier as an ear is developed for the words used. We drew on Ritson and Elliott’ (1999) use of shared language, incorporating this into the research process through the use of words or expressions frequently used by the children (e.g. “cool”, “yukky”, “smart”, “wicked”). At the end of each interview, each child was thanked for helping with the research. To reinforce their involvement they were given the opportunity to take any of the photographs with them if they so wished. If any photographs were taken these were noted and the child was escorted to either the playground or their class. Analysis of the data Understandably, an enormous amount of data resulted from the methods we have outlined. This gave us the opportunity to immerse ourselves within the topic under investigation and gain some understanding of children’s experiences relevant to the topic. Data analysis was ongoing throughout the data collection, with themes and
categories finalised in the latter stages. This gave us the opportunity to conduct preliminary analysis, followed by a period in which we socially distanced ourselves from the field, providing us with the opportunity to reflect upon the experience as a whole. Therefore, once the fieldwork and data collection were complete, we returned to our initial phases of data and resumed our analysis, searching for patterns amongst our data as a whole. Patton (2002) describes this process as “pattern recognition” and suggests this to be part and parcel of thematic analysis. We used inductive analysis (Patton, 2002) to interpret our data, reading and comparing our data, letting findings gradually appear. Rooting ourselves in the data in this way encouraged our understanding and interpretation of the embedded meanings of what children disliked or found distasteful. Patterns and themes then became increasingly apparent and meaningful. The second phase of our analysis could be described as data reduction. Through this process we sought to conceptualise emerging patterns to source the origins of such patterns (Miles and Huberman, 1994; Patton, 2002). This process enabled the organisation of data in such a way, which allowed us present our findings coherently. Concluding remarks We do not claim that the methodologies outlined in this paper or the overarching child-centric view that we espouse is a new one. In fact considerable debate has been ongoing within sociology and other fields. However, this debate does not seem to have yet reached the fields of marketing and consumer research, and we urge consumer researchers to think carefully about ways in which they can attempt to reach as full an understanding of their participants as possible, particularly when such marked differences exist in the relationship between the researcher and the researched (e.g. as adult and child). Our literature review suggested that in order to experience children’s tastes and distastes we would need to “go back to school”. A quasi-ethnographic approach provided a good starting point as this involved getting to know children in the school environment, away from the influence of parents. We wanted to adopt methods with as little structure as possible as we wanted to avoid putting words into the children’s mouths, or in any way encouraging certain responses above others. Therefore, projective techniques featured prominently in our methods, as they prompt insightful data without being intrusive, and built on this further with the photography exercise. We like to think that we provided the children with the tools to be able to tell their own story. Although invariably we brought our own interpretation to the analysis, as much as possible we tried to retain the children’s voices, using the researchers’ voices to clarify aspects and to suggest similarities and differences (see discussion in Stern, 1999 of different means of representing verbal data). By taking the time to become acquainted with the children and their ways of interaction, we became accustomed to their daily routines. The quasi-ethnographic element of the design was invaluable for the development of a shared language, which inevitably assisted us enormously with developing a confident rapport, and we were rewarded with detailed and insightful responses. Through providing media such as photography and projective techniques, whereby the children generated data themselves, we establish the importance of maintaining a child-centric perspective when researching children and their understanding of the consumer world.
Exploring innovative methodologies 171
QMRIJ 8,2
172
Children have long been seen as difficult or somewhat “incompetent” research participants. It is suggested that by shifting our research focus from a top-down perspective into one that embraces childhood as a culture in its own right, we greet children within their own language, using terminology they understand, and ultimately providing the context for a more fruitful and exciting data collection process. Ownership, active participation and an environment that responds to needs such as shared language and respect are considered to be central to this child-centric approach. Our own experience suggests that children can be incredibly keen, able and ultimately useful research participants, but we need to harness their involvement and expertise in different ways to adult participants. Our research design was effective in providing children with a voice with which to tell us about their experiences, and in this way we saw ourselves as facilitators, letting children tell us their own story in their own words. Ironically, perhaps the most successful method was the one in which we handed children the most responsibility – the photography exercise. With this exercise we demonstrated our trust in the participants and they rewarded us by taking the task seriously. The photographs allowed us a huge insight into the lives of the children, they decided for themselves what the subject matter of their photographs was going to be, and also took the initiative with the analysis that followed. With the help of these photographs as prompts, the children led the discussion, inviting us into their world, a crucial aspect of this child-centric approach. Perhaps the over arching lesson that our experiences taught us, was to design methods which children would not only enjoy, but would invite them to feel some kind of co-authorship in the research process. In future designs, we will attempt to take this further involving child participants far more in the initial design stages as well as data collection (refer Kirby, 1999; Smith et al., 2002 and Worrall, 2000 for a guide to methodological issues) as perhaps this is the only means by which to achieve a truly child-centric approach. Our encouragement to consumer researchers to adopt this “child-centric” approach reflects ongoing debates within sociology (James et al., 1998; Pole et al., 1999) which are yet to reach the consumer behaviour arena. We argue that it is only by recognising and taking on board some of the recommendations that have emerged from this debate that consumer researchers will discover a fuller appreciation of the participants we seek to understand. Lessons from this approach can also be fruitfully used to enhance the experiences of research involving participants other than children – such as ethnic minorities, economically disadvantaged consumers and consumer with disabilities – who should also benefit from more participant-centred research designs. Note 1. One of the researchers had developed what she termed the “tree of life” whilst working with children with emotional and behavioural issues who had difficulties articulating their views. References Arnould, E. and Wallendorf, M. (1994), “Market-oriented ethnography: interpretation building and marketing strategy formulation”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. XXXI, pp. 484-504. Backett, K. and Alexander, H. (1991), “Talking to young children about health: methods and findings”, Health Education Journal, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 34-8.
Banister, E.N. and Booth, G.J. (2004), “Tastes, distastes and disgusts: young consumers’ positive and negative experiences of food”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. XXXI. Banister, E.N. and Hogg, M.K. (2001), “Mapping the negative self: from ‘So Not me’. . .to ‘Just Not Me’”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. XXVIII, pp. 242-8. Bartholomew, A. and O’Donohoe, S. (2003), “Everything under control: a child’s eye view of advertising”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 19, pp. 433-57. Belk, R.W., Bahn, K.D. and Mayer, R.N. (1982), “Developmental recognition of consumption symbolism”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9, pp. 4-17. Booth, G. (2003), “The socialisation of young consumers: a study of distastes Dislikes and Disgusts”, unpublished MPhil thesis, UMIST, Manchester. Davies, H., Buckingham, D. and Kelley, P. (2000), “In the worst possible taste: children, television and cultural value”, European Journal of Cultural Studies, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 5-25. Douglas, D. (1985), Creative Interviewing, Sage Publications, London. Elliott, R. and Jankel-Elliott, N. (2003), “Using ethnography in strategic consumer research”, Qualitative Market Research – An International Journal, Vol. 6 No. 4, p. 215. Emmison, M. and Smith, P. (2000), Researching the Visual: Images, Objects, Contexts and Interactions in Social and Cultural Enquiry, Sage, London. Fernandez, J.W. (1986), Persuasions and Performances: The Play of Tropes in Culture, University of Indiana, Bloomington, IN. Foucault, M. (1977), Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Penguin Books, London. Greig, A. and Taylor, J. (1999), Doing Research with Children, Sage Publications, London. Griffiths, M. (1995), Feminisms And The Self: The Web of Identity, Routledge, London. Harden, J., Scott, S., Backett-Milburn, K. and Jackson, S. (2000), “Can’t talk, won’t talk?: methodological issues in researching children”, Sociological Research Online, Vol. 5 No. 2, available at: www.socresonline.org.uk/5/2/harden.html (accessed 22 July 2003). Hirschman, E.C. (1998), “Afterwords: some reflections on the mind’s eye”, in Stern, B.B. (Ed.), Representing Consumers: Voices, Views and Visions, Routledge, London, pp. 384-92. Hogg, M.K. and Savolainen, M.H. (1998), “Symbolic consumption and the situational self”, European Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 3, pp. 11-16. Hogg, M.K., Bruce, M. and Hill, A.J. (1999), “Brand recognition and young consumers”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. XXVI, pp. 671-4. Holstein, J.A. and Gubrium, J.F. (1997), “Active interviewing”, in Silverman, D. (Ed.), Qualitative Research: Theory Method and Practice, Sage Publications, London. Hood, S., Kelly, P. and Mayall, B. (1996), “Children as research subjects: a risky enterprise”, Children & Society, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 117-28. Hyatt, C. (1991), “Qualitative and quantitative approaches to child research”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. XVIII, pp. 18-22. James, A. (1993), Childhood Identities: Self and Social Relationships in the Experience of the Child, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. James, A. and Prout, A. (Eds) (1990), Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood, Falmer Press, Basingstoke. James, A., Jenks, C. and Prout, A. (1998), Theorizing Childhood, Polity Press, Cambridge. Jenks, C. (1996), Childhood, Routledge, London. Kirby, P. (1999), Involving Young Researchers, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York Publishing Services Ltd in association with Save the Children, York.
Exploring innovative methodologies 173
QMRIJ 8,2
174
Klein, J. (1987), Our Need for Others and its Roots in Infancy, Tavistock Publications Ltd, London. Lawlor, M.A. and Prothero, A. (2003), “Children’s understanding of television advertising intent”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 19, pp. 411-31. Lind, C., Anderson, B. and Oberle, K. (2003), “Ethical issues in adolescent consent for research”, Nursing Ethics, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 504-11. McCauley, E.A. (1997), “Photography”, in Barnet, S. (Ed.), A Short Guide to Writing About Art, 5th ed., Longman, New York, NY, pp. 61-71. Macklin, M.C. (1987), “Preschoolers’ understanding of the informational function of television advertising”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14, pp. 229-39. Mandell, N. (1991), “The least-adult role in studying children”, in Waksler, F. (Ed.), Studying the Social Worlds of Children, Falmer Press, London. Mason, J. (1996), Qualitative Researching, Sage Publications Ltd, London. Miles, M. and Huberman, M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Source Book, Sage Publications, London. Morrow, V. (1998), Understanding Families: Children’s Perspectives, National Children’s Bureau, London. MRS (2000), MRS Code and Guidelines: Guidelines for Research among Children and Young People, available at: www.mrs.org.uk/standards/children.htm (accessed 11 July 2003). Nguyen, L. and Roedder John, D. (2001), “Abercrombie & Finch – that’s me: brand names in children’s self concept presented in just do it! the influence of brand names on children’s lives”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. XXVIII, pp. 48. O’Cass, A. and Clarke, P. (2001), “Dear Santa, do you have my brand? A study of the brand requests, awareness and request styles at Christmas time”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 37-53. Oakely, A. (2002), Gender on Planet Earth, Polity Press, Cambridge. Patton, M. (2002), Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 3rd ed., Sage Publications, London. Peracchio, L. and Mita, C. (1991), “Designing research to assess children’s comprehension of marketing messages”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. XVIII, p. 23. Pole, C., Mizen, P. and Bolton, A. (1999), “Realising children’s agency in research: partners and participants?”, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Theory and Practice, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 39-54. Prosser, J (Ed.) (1998), Image-Based Research: A Sourcebook for Qualitative Researchers, Falmer Press, London. Prosser, J. and Schwartz, D. (1998), “Photographs within the sociological research process”, Image-Based Research: A Sourcebook for Qualitative Researchers, pp. 115-30. Qvortrup, J. (1994), “Childhood matters: an introduction”, in Qvortrup, J., Bardy, M., Sgritta, G. and Wintersberger, H. (Eds), Childhood Matters: Social Theory Practice and Politics, Avebury, Aldershot. Ritson, M. and Elliott, R. (1999), “The social uses of advertising: an ethnographic study of adolescent advertising audiences”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 25 No. 3, p. pp260. Roedder John, D. (1997), “Out of the mouths of babes: what children can tell us”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. XXIV, pp. 1-5. Roper, G. (1989), “Research with marketing’s paradoxical subjects: children”, Marketing Research, pp. 16-23, June.
Russell, R. and Tyler, M. (2002), “Thank heaven for little girls: ‘Girl Heaven’ and the commercial context of feminine childhood”, Sociology, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 619-37. Schratz, M. and Steiner-Lo¨ffler (1998), “Pupils using photographs in school self-evaluation”, in Prosser, J. (Ed.), Image-Based Research: A Sourcebook for Qualitative Researchers, Falmer Press, London, pp. 235-51. Schroeder, J. (1999), “Consuming representation: a visual approach to consumer research”, in Stern, B.B. (Ed.), Representing Consumers: Voices, Views and Visions, Routledge, London, pp. 193-230. Smith, R., Monaghan, M. and Broad, B. (2002), “Involving young people as co-researchers”, Qualitative Social Work, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 191-207. Stern, B.B. (1999), “Narratological analysis of consumer voices in post-modern research accounts”, in Stern, B.B. (Ed.), Representing Consumers: Voices, Views and Visions, pp. 55-82. Thomson, E. and Laing, A.W. (2003), “‘The Net Generation’: children and young people, the internet and online shopping”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 19, pp. 491-512. Warde, A. (1994), “Consumption identity-formation and uncertainty”, Sociology, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 877-99. Worrall, S. (2000), Young People as Researchers: A Learning Resource Pack, Save the Children, London. Worth, S. and Adair, J. (1972), Through Navajo Eyes: Explorations in Film Communication and Anthropology, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN. (Emma N. Banister is a lecturer in the Department of Marketing at Lancaster University. Her overall research interest is symbolic consumption and in particular the role of tastes and distastes in shaping identity. Her work has been published in the Journal of Marketing Management, European Journal of Marketing, Qualitative Market Research and Journal of Customer Behaviour and she has presented papers at a number of conferences including European Marketing Academy Conference, Academy of Marketing and US and European meetings of the Association for Consumer Research. Gayle J. Booth followed her undergraduate studies in Sociology with an MPhil at UMIST, focusing on the socialisation of young consumers and their formation of distastes. She is presently in her final year of a PhD at Manchester University, which explores women entrepreneurs in the context of fashion design. She has published in Advances in Consumer Research and presented at the International Small Business Association, the European Institute for Advanced Studies in Management and British Academy of Management.)
Exploring innovative methodologies 175
