MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280522274 · doi:10.1177/16094069221095656

Virtual Photovoice With Older Adults: Methodological Reflections during the COVID-19 Pandemic

2022· article· en· W4280522274 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoiceParticipatory action researchPandemicPopularityData collectionQualitative researchPsychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Mental healthMedical educationPublic relationsSociologyMedicinePolitical scienceSocial psychologySocial scienceDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photovoice is a participatory action research method in which participants take and narrate photographs to share their experiences and perspectives. This method is gaining in popularity among health researchers. Few studies, however, have described virtual photovoice data collection despite the growing interest among qualitative health researchers for online data collection. As such, the aim of this article is to discuss the implementation of a virtual photovoice study and presents some of the challenges of this design and potential solutions. The study examined issues of social isolation and mental health among older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Canadian province of Québec. Twenty-six older adults took photographs depicting their experience of the pandemic that were then shared in virtual discussion groups. In this article, we discuss three key challenges arising from our study and how we navigated them. First, we offer insights into managing some of the technical difficulties related to using online meeting technologies. Second, we describe the adjustments we made during our study to foster and maintain positive group dynamics. Third, we share our insights into the process of building and maintaining trust between both researchers and participants, and amongst participants. Through a discussion of these challenges, we offer suggestions to guide the work of health promotion researchers wishing to conduct virtual photovoice studies, including with older adults.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.096
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0960.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.957
GPT teacher head0.807
Teacher spread0.149 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it