Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Methodology
Findings
The Unrealized Potential of PV as Data
Bridging Qualitative and Quantitative Data
PV Video as Data
Conclusion
References

Towards Participatory Video 2.0

Profile image of Matt Baillie SmithMatt Baillie Smith

Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376694
visibility

…

description

13 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Participatory video (PV) is an established practice for enabling communities to "speak truth to power" and has been widely used by local, national and international Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). However, the digital media landscape has changed dramatically since PV became widely accessible with the rise of the camcorder in the 1980s. Current media practices have evolved considerably since, yet PV remains essentially unchanged. We report on an investigation of current PV practices and reflect on these in terms of what the future for PV holds. We conducted interviews with staff at a global humanitarian network who directly and indirectly engage in community story capture; and explore their reflections on the potentials and barriers to PV use. We propose a new vision for PV that draws on current visual media production, consumption and distribution technologies and practices, and propose principles on which PV 2.0, a new generation of Participatory Video can be founded.

Related papers

Participatory Use of Video: A Case Study of Community Involvement In Story Construction
Kole Odutola

Global Media Journal, 2003

View PDFchevron_right
Critiquing participatory video: experiences from around the world
EJ Milne

AREA, 2016

Over the past decade there has been a growing interest in participatory video, but accounts have often been celebratory and uncritical. At the same time there has been an ever-increasing multiplicity of interpretations, thus making participatory video seem 'nebulous' and 'perplexing'. This special section seeks to develop some of the critiques developed over the past five years, by bringing together a series of provocative thought pieces. Through this special section we seek to continue to develop a critique of participatory video as both a methodology and method. We also call on researchers, practitioners and participants to commit to engaging in rigorous public debate and intellectual critique in order to strengthen the field.

View PDFchevron_right
Participatory video: A revolution in communication for development
Chris Lunch

2019

Perspectives: Participatory videoa revolution in communication for development By Chris Lunch Feature article 4 Camcorders, cassava and crude By Lars Johannson Case studies 7 Puppet goat newsreader covers food security, grain prices By Chloé Aicha Boro 8 'Everyone's a teacher, everyone's a student' By Dominic Elliot 10 Ghanaian cocoa farmer videos tackle pod pest By Andrews Akrofi Techtip 11 What you need to start a participatory video project Q&A 12 Gender and participatory video in agriculture and developmentan interview with Maria Protz ICT Update issue 34, November 2006. ICT Update is a bimonthly printed bulletin with an accompanying web magazine (http://ictupdate.cta.int) and email newsletter. Each issue of ICT Update focuses on a specific theme relevant to ICTs for agricultural and rural development in African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries, and includes feature articles and annotated links to related web resources and projects. The next issue will be available in January.

View PDFchevron_right
Fifty Years of Practice and Innovation Participatory Video (PV)
Tony Roberts

Handbook of Communication for Development and Social Change, 2018

Benefiting from more than 50 years of practice and innovation, participatory video (PV) is a firmly established approach in the field of communications for development. The term "participatory video" is used to refer to a very wide range of practices that involve nonprofessionals in making their own films as a means to engage communities, develop critical awareness, and amplify citizens' voices to discuss social problems that they prioritize. The canonical texts on participatory video all make reference to PV's grounding in the praxis of Brazilian popular educator Paulo Freire, and the influence of feminist practice is often also noted in

View PDFchevron_right
Defining participatory video from practice
Gusztav Nemes

AltaMira Press eBooks, 2012

View PDFchevron_right
Embedded filming for social change
Rico Lie, Loes Witteveen

International Journal of Educational Development, 2009

View PDFchevron_right
Participatory Video (remote, online)
Pamela E . Richardson

Gaia, 2022

Participatory Video (PV) is a method that involves supporting individuals in a group setting to co-produce videos. It is a community development, research and advocacy tool that has recently been adapted for online, remote facilitation in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic (Marzi forthcoming). As with the in-person methodology, an online PV process is geared towards fostering dialogue around a shared issue. During the process, smartphone videos are created by participants as a tool for communication and reflection. PV captures situated viewpoints, while fostering intra-group communication, peer-to-peer learning and skills development. PV also enables participants to communicate their ideas to an external target audience, which may include communities in other areas, policy-makers, or scientists. PV can support many different steps along a participatory research journey. In the early stages, PV may be applied to support the co-creation of video-based funding proposals or the development of group plans (box 1). Further into the research process, videos can be created by participants for project documentation and reflection purposes, or for participatory monitoring and evaluation (Lemaire and Lunch 2012). Towards the latter stages, PV could be used to support dissemination of "best practices" or to communicate results and lessons learned (Richardson et al. forthcoming). In these ways, video-making by participants can support both internal and external communication processes within a research project.

View PDFchevron_right
Video for Change: A Guide for Advocacy and Activism
Sam Gregory, Katerina Cizek

Video for Change: A Guide for Advocacy and Activism, 2005

Pictures from Abu Ghraib showed the power of the amateur image to grab the world's attention. The Asian tsunami, caught on camcorder, brought home the reality of what had happened more than any news report ever could. Around the world the increasing availability and affordability of technology has fuelled the world of social justice video activism. Film-making - at its best - has the power to change the way people think, and create real social change, and now the tools to do it are more accessible than ever before. This book shows how activists and human rights campaigners can harness the power of images and stories for their own purposes - it's a step-by-step guide to the handicam revolution. Written by leading video activists, and staff of the world-renowned human rights organization WITNESS, this practical handbook will appeal to experienced campaigners as well as aspiring video activists. It combines a comprehensive analysis of what's going on in this growing global field with a how-to primer to doing it yourself.

View PDFchevron_right
Documentary and collaboration: Placing the camera in the community
Elizabeth Coffman

Journal of Film and Video, 2009

View PDFchevron_right
Critiquing the politics of participatory video and the dangerous romance of liberalism
Shannon Walsh

In this article I argue that participatory video must acknowledge its often technocratic, liberal presumptions, and take a more critical look at the political underpinnings of 'empowerment' and 'voice'. I am interested in how we can use participatory video while resisting the romance of community, seeing beyond short-term individualist approaches towards a longer-term collective project of social justice. A reflexive approach to how power and agency work within participatory video is essential if the method is going to effect change and not merely manage social conflict. While the participatory video process can be discussed from many perspectives, I focus here on a critique of the often-hidden politics of participatory video, its relation to academic research and in turn, to project participants within a progressive social change agenda.

View PDFchevron_right

References (52)

  1. Mary B Anderson. 1999. Do no harm: how aid can support peace or war. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder, Colorado.
  2. Tom Bartindale, Guy Schofield, and Peter Wright. 2016. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems -CHI '16. ACM. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858102
  3. Tom Bartindale, Delvin Varghese, Guy Schofield, and Miki Tsukamoto. 2019. Our Story: Addressing Challenges in Development Contexts for Sustainable Participatory Video. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article Paper 437, 12 pages. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300667
  4. Frank Bentley and Danielle Lottridge. 2019. Understanding mass-market mobile TV behaviors in the streaming era. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems -Proceedings 1 (2019), 1-11. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300491
  5. Pablo Cesar and Konstantinos Chorianopoulos. 2008. Interactivity and user participation in the television lifecycle. (2008), 125. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1453805.1453830
  6. Vivian Chávez, Barbara Israel, Alex J Allen III, Maggie Floyd DeCarlo, Richard Lichtenstein, Amy Schulz, Irene S Bayer, and Robert McGranaghan. 2004. A bridge between communities: Video-making using principles of community-based participatory research. Health Promotion Practice 5, 4 (2004), 395-403. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1524839903258067
  7. Kuang Chen, Akshay Kannan, Yoriyasu Yano, Joseph M Hellerstein, and Tapan S Parikh. 2012. Shreddr: pipelined paper digitization for low-resource organizations. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Symposium on Computing for Development. ACM, 3. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2160601.2160605
  8. Andy Cockburn and Tony Dale. 1997. CEVA: a tool for collaborative video analysis. GROUP 97 (1997), 47-55. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/266838.266857
  9. Sebastien Cuendet, Indrani Medhi, Kalika Bali, and Edward Cutrell. 2013. VideoKheti. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems -CHI '13. ACM Press, 2833. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2481392
  10. Nicola Dell and Neha Kumar. 2016. The Ins and Outs of HCI for Development. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2016), 2220-2232. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858081
  11. Nicola Dell, Vidya Vaidyanathan, Indrani Medhi, Edward Cutrell, and William Thies. 2012. Yours is better!: participant response bias in HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1321-1330. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2208589
  12. Mirka Duijn and Hartmut Koenitz. 2017. Beyond the timeline a data-driven interface for interactive documentary. TVX 2017 -Adjunct Publication of the 2017 ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video (2017), 33-37. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3084289.3089920
  13. fourcornersproject.org. 2018. Four Corners Project. https://fourcornersproject.org/en/about/. (2018). [Online; accessed 19-July-2019].
  14. David Frohlich, Simon Robinson, Kristen Eglinton, Matt Jones, and Elina Vartiainen. 2012. Creative cameraphone use in rural developing regions. Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Human-computer interaction with mobile devices and services -MobileHCI '12 September 21-24 (2012), 181. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2371574.2371603
  15. David M. Frohlich, Dorothy Rachovides, Kiriaki Riga, Ramnath Bhat, Maxine Frank, Eran Edirisinghe, Dhammike Wickramanayaka, Matt Jones, and Will Harwood. 2009. StoryBank. In Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Human factors in computing systems -CHI 09. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 1761. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518972
  16. globalwebindex.com. 2017. GlobalWebIndex -Digital Analytics, Audience Insight Tools and Trends. https://www.globalwebindex.com/. (2017). [Online; accessed 19-July-2019].
  17. grabyo.com. 2019. Global Video Trends Report 2019. https://about.grabyo.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/ Grabyo-Global-Video-Trends-Report-2019.pdf. (2019). [Online; accessed 19-July-2019].
  18. David Philip Green, Clara Crivellaro, and Jimmy Tidey. 2015. Interactive Design Documentary as a Method for Civic Engagement. In TVX 2015. 161-166. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2745197.2755518
  19. David Philip Green, Guy Schofield, Gary Pritchard, Patrick Olivier, and Peter Wright. 2017. Cinehacking Cape Town -Embracing Informality in Pursuit of High Quality Media. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '17 2010 (2017), 4753-4764. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025481
  20. Aakar Gupta, William Thies, Edward Cutrell, and Ravin Balakrishnan. 2012. mClerk: enabling mobile crowdsourcing in developing regions. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1843-1852. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2208320
  21. Jonathan Hook. 2018. Facts, interactivity and videotape: Exploring the design space of data in interactive video storytelling. TVX 2018 -Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video (2018), 43-55. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3210825.3210826
  22. i-docs.org. 2017. About i docs. http://i-docs.org/about-idocs. (2017). [Online; accessed 19-July-2019].
  23. Esther Jang, Mary Claire Barela, Matt Johnson, Philip Martinez, Cedric Festin, Margaret Lynn, Josephine Dionisio, and Kurtis Heimerl. 2018. Crowdsourcing Rural Network Maintenance and Repair via Network Messaging. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 67. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173641
  24. Jarvey, Natalie. 2017. Mark Zuckerberg Details Facebook's "Video First" Strategy. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/facebook- shares-up-revenue-growth-970957. (2017). [Online; accessed 19-July-2019].
  25. Hubert Knoblauch, Alejandro Baer, Eric Laurier, Sabine Petschke, and Bernt Schnettler. 2008. Visual analysis. New developments in the interpretative analysis of video and photography. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol. 9.
  26. Hubert Knoblauch and Bernt Schnettler. 2012. Videography: Analysing video data as a 'focused'ethnographic and hermeneutical exercise. Qualitative Research 12, 3 (2012), 334-356. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1468794111436147
  27. Neha Kumar, Pallavi Lal, Richard Anderson, Trevor Perrier, Michelle Desmond, Kiersten Israel-Ballard, Vikrant Kumar, Sudip Mahapatra, Anil Mishra, Shreya Agarwal, and Rikin Gandhi. 2015. Projecting health. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development -ICTD '15. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 1-10. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2737856.2738023
  28. Jie Li, Thomas Röggla, Maxine Glancy, Jack Jansen, and Pablo Cesar. 2018a. A new production platform for authoring object-based multiscreen TV viewing experiences. TVX 2018 -Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video (2018), 115-126. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3210825.3210834
  29. Jie Li, Zhiyuan Zheng, Britta Meixner, Maxine Glancy, Pablo Cesar, and Thomas Röggla. 2018b. Designing an object-based preproduction tool for multiscreen TV viewing. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems -Proceedings 2018-April (2018), 1-6. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3170427.3188658
  30. Chris Lunch and NIck Lunch. 2006. Insights into Participatory Video. Technical Report. InsightShare. 126 pages. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2008.00473_13.x
  31. Jennifer Manuel, Geoff Vigar, Tom Bartindale, and Rob Comber. 2017. Participatory Media: Creating Spaces for Storytelling in Neighbourhood Planning. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems -CHI '17. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 1688-1701. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025745
  32. Elizabeth-Jane Milne, Claudia Mitchell, and Naydene De Lange. 2012. Handbook of participatory video. AltaMira Press, Lanham, Md.
  33. ooyala.com. 2018. Global Video Index Q2 2018. http://go.ooyala.com/rs/447-EQK-225/images/Ooyala- Global-Video-Index-Q2-2018.pdf. (2018). [Online; accessed 19-July-2019].
  34. O'Dubhghaill, Liam and O'Gorman, Mary and Flanagan, Patrick. 2013. The Prosumer | Role of the author/ audience within digital new media. https://authorandaudience.wordpress.com/the-prosumer/. (2013). [Online; accessed 19-July-2019].
  35. participatoryvideo.com. 2013. PV History: Colin Low - The Children Of Fogo Island. http://www.participatoryvideo.com/2013/02/pv-history- colin-low-the-children-of-fogo-island/. (2013). [Online; accessed 09-September-2019].
  36. Perez, Sarah. 2017. Spotify acquires blockchain startup mediachain to solve music's attribution problem. https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/26/spotifyacquires- blockchain-startup-mediachain-to-solve-musics- attribution-problem. (2017). [Online; accessed 09-August-2019].
  37. James Putzel. 2010. Do no harm: international support for statebuilding. Organisation for Economic Co-opertation and Development, Paris, France.
  38. Elena Rishes, Stephanie M. Lukin, David K. Elson, and Marilyn A. Walker. 2013. Generating Different Story Tellings from Semantic Representations of Narrative. In Interactive Storytelling. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 192-204. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02756-2_24
  39. Tony Roberts. 2016. Women's Use of Participatory Video Technology to Tackle Gender Inequality in Zambia's ICT Sector. Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development -ICTD '16 (2016), 1-11. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2909609.2909673
  40. Laura Roper and Jethro Pettit. 2002. Development and the learning organisation: an introduction. Development in Practice 12, 3-4 (2002), 258-271. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0961450220149654
  41. Navkar Samdaria, Ajith Sowndararajan, Ramadevi Vennelakanti, and Sriganesh Madhvanath. 2013. Cyber cafes as microtasking hubs. In Proceedings of the 11th Asia Pacific Conference on Computer Human Interaction. ACM, 364-370. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2525194.2525305
  42. Seale, Shelley. 2018. Mobile Video Consumption Tech Trends for 2019. https://www.stateofdigitalpublishing.com/insights/ mobile-video-consumption/. (2018). [Online; accessed 19-July-2019].
  43. Jacqueline Shaw. 2016. Emergent ethics in participatory video: negotiating the inherent tensions as group processes evolve. Area 48, 4 (2016), 419-426. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/area.12167
  44. Jackie Shaw and Clive Robertson. 2008. Participatory video: A practical approach to using video creatively in group development work. Routledge. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203133217
  45. Davy Smith, Tom Bartindale, Jonathan Hook, Gerard Wilkinson, Guy Schofield, Phil Stenton, Marian F. Ursu, and Matthew Brooks. 2017. Designing reconfigurable televisual experiences. DIS 2017 Companion - Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (2017), 368-371. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3064857.3064867
  46. David R Thomas. 2006. A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American journal of evaluation 27, 2 (2006), 237-246. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748
  47. Timson, Evelyn. 2018. Strategy: Digital Video Content Trends. https://www.meltwater.com/blog/digital-video- content-trends-in-2018/. (2018). [Online; accessed 19-July-2019].
  48. Crystal Tremblay and Ana Maria Peredo. 2014. Participatory video as an approach for strengthening collective social entrepreneurship: The recycling cooperative movement in brazil. Research Methodology in Strategy and Management 9, August (2014), 189-214. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S1479-838720140000009015
  49. UNDP. 2009. Handbook on Planning , Monitoring and Evaluating. Undp (2009), 1-232.
  50. Gerard Wilkinson, Tom Bartindale, Tom Nappey, Michael Evans, Peter Wright, and Patrick Olivier. 2018. Media of Things: Supporting the Production of Metadata Rich Media Through IoT Sensing. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 206, 13 pages. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173780
  51. Williams, Doug and Wyver, John and Glancy, Maxine. 2016. Evaluating the potential benefits of object¬-based broadcasting. Technical Report. British Telecom, London, UK. https://nem-initiative.org/wp-content/ uploads/2016/11/doug-willams-obb.pdf
  52. Kehkashan Zeb, Stephen Lindsay, Suleman Shahid, Waleed Riaz, and Matt Jones. 2019. Sugar Ka Saathi-A Case Study Designing Digital Self-management Tools for People Living with Diabetes in Pakistan. In IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 161-181. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29387-1_10

Related papers

Participatory Video
Tony Roberts

Abstract The information and communication technology (ICT) of participatory video has become an increasingly popular development activity over the last 45 years. This is due, in part, to its claimed efficacy in generating valued development outcomes at the level of the individual, group and society. Participatory video is a set of techniques to involve a group or community in shaping and creating their own film (Lunch & Lunch 2006). Unlike other kinds of film-making participatory video, it involves handsing-over control of the film-production process to inexpert users to enable them to express and represent themselves, communicating to others about issues affecting their lives. It is claimed that among other benefits, this process can enhance participants' self-confidence and self-esteem, individual and collective agency, and serve as an effective mechanism to amplify the voices of marginalised groups to influence the decision-making processes affecting their lives. In recent years writing about participatory video has generally become less celebratory and more critical, questioning among other things, the extent to which control is handed over and scrutinising claims that participatory video generates transformational social change.

View PDFchevron_right
Bridging the Divide with Participatory Video
Usha Harris

Fijian Studies: A Journal of Contemporary Fiji, 2008

Participatory video (PV) projects have put video technology in the hands of the most marginalised in society for self-representation and social reform. PV has gained a favoured place in many development projects and has been used by non-government organisations, development workers and indeed communities themselves to foster dialogue and to instigate change and empowerment. The case study discussed here combined action research and visual ethnography to study the process of PV production and how the community's engagement in it contributes to dialogue and community building in a post-conflict society. This study found that rural women in Fiji use social capital -their relationships and social networks -as a key element in video production to highlight community needs and linkages.

View PDFchevron_right
Interrogating Practitioner Tensions for Raising Citizen Voice with Participatory Video in International Development
Dr. Tamara Plush

Within international development, strengthening the voice of citizens living in poverty is recognised as vital to reducing inequity. In support of such endeavors, participatory video (PV) is an increasingly utilised communicative method that can stimulate community engagement and amplify the voice of groups often excluded from decision-making spaces. However, implementing PV processes specifically within an international development context is an immensely complex proposal. Practitioners must take into consideration the different ways institutions may understand the use of participatory video for raising citizen voice; and how therefore the practice may be influenced, co-opted or even devalued by these institutional assumptions. To this end, this article interrogates how global PV practitioners express tension in their work. Analysis of their descriptions suggests six influential views on PV practice with the potential to diminish the value of voice from the margins. Nordicom Review 36 (2015) Special Issue, pp. 57-70

View PDFchevron_right
"From Persecution to Pernury" - A Case Study on Participatory Video Production
Renato Athias
View PDFchevron_right
Telling Stories of War through the Screen. Participatory video approaches and practice for peace in conflict-affected contexts
Valentina Baú

"By bringing together literatures of Communication for Development and Conflict Transformation, this paper provides a theoretical illustration of the impact of participatory video as a tool for overcoming hostility among groups, as well as for healing and re-connecting communities that have endured loss and suffering as a consequence of civil war and inter-communal violence. This is accompanied by a number of practical experiences of projects implemented by organizations on the ground. This type of scenario, often characterized by a lack of dialogue among groups, has been recognized to be fertile ground for the setting up of community media, where people are given the means for self-expression. In particular, video productions created through participatory methodology can be effective tools for dealing with the hostility and grief that linger after a civil war, as they provide those channels of communication that are needed for effective development interventions aimed at community healing."

View PDFchevron_right

Cited by

Exploring the Role of Paradata in Digitally Supported Qualitative Co-Research
Pamela Briggs

CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Academics and community organisations are increasingly adopting co-research practices where participants contribute to qualitative data collection, analysis, and dissemination. These qualitative practices can often lack transparency that can present a problem for stakeholders (such as funding agencies) who seek evidence of the rigour and accountability in these decision-making processes. When qualitative research is done digitally, paradata is available as interaction logs that reveal the underlying processes, such as the time spent engaging with diferent segments of an interview. In practice, paradata is seldom used to examine the decisions associated with undertaking qualitative research. This paper explores the role of paradata arising from a four-month engagement with a community-led charity that used a digital platform to support their qualitative co-research project. Through observations of platform use and refective post-deployment interviews, our fndings highlight examples of paradata generated through digital tools in qualitative research, e.g., listening coverage, engagement rate, thematic maps and data discards. From this, we contribute a conceptualisation of paradata and discuss its role in qualitative research to improve process transparency, enhance data sharing, and to create feedback loops with research participants. CCS CONCEPTS • Human-centered computing → Empirical studies in HCI; Collaborative and social computing systems and tools. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

View PDFchevron_right
Scaffolding Young People's Participation in Public Service Evaluation through Designing a Digital Feedback Process
Shauna Concannon

Designing Interactive Systems Conference

Young people facing marginalisation often rely on publicly funded services for support. Such services must include users in improving their provision, but often lack the processes and tools to facilitate this. The civic turn within HCI means that we are still tackling the complexities of community-based design research required to provide digital tools of relevance to public services. To address this, we worked with groups of young people to explore the design of a service evaluation process, supported by digital resources, intended to support marginalised youths to infuence service delivery. Our fndings demonstrate how the groups of young people participating in processes of service evaluation using our digital tools embraced the opportunity to express themselves. We also identify tensions from the social values underpinning the youth voluntary sector that impede their participation. We close by discussing challenges for community-based design and implications for digital technologies that facilitate the participation of marginalised young people in civic processes. CCS CONCEPTS • Human-centered computing → Human computer interaction (HCI); Empirical studies in HCI.

View PDFchevron_right
The Co-Creation Space: Supporting Asynchronous Artistic Co-creation Dynamics
Mikel Zorrilla

Companion Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

Artistic co-creation empowers communities to shape their narratives, however HCI research does not support this multifaceted discussion and reflection process. In the context of community opera, we consider how to support co-creation through the design, implementation, and initial evaluation of the Co-Creation Space (CCS) to help community artists 1) generate raw artistic ideas, and 2) discuss and reflect on the shared meaning of those ideas. This work describes our user-centered process to gather requirements and Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s).

View PDFchevron_right
Engaging with Under-Resourced Communities for User Research through Self-Authored Videos
Dhaval Vyas

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction

The conventional 'participant-as-informant' model of user research has recently been challenged by approaches that advocate for participants to have a greater authorial control over narratives that portray their lived experiences. This is particularly important for addressing relationships of power and representation. Informed by narrative approaches in social work, we report on a study exploring the use of self-authored videos captured by 16 participants from under-resourced communities. Participants portrayed their mundane life experiences in a form of a video biography. Co-analysis of resulting videos showed that video biographies were used for: authentic representation of daily routines and life stories; portrayal of DIY identities; and promoting living well. Findings show how the self-authored biographies afforded participants a vehicle for challenging cultural stereotypes often associated with the research population. We further demonstrate the value of video-based app...

View PDFchevron_right
CoSpeak: Peer Feedback on Voice Stories to Inform Learning Spoken English
RAVI POOVAIAH

2021

English is officially recognized in India as a means of public communication as it plays an important role in academia, government affairs etc. However, only 10.6% of Indians speak some English according to the 2011 Census report. In this project, primary research was conducted in the context of teaching English to class 12 students from regional language medium schools. The context was understood, difficulties faced in learning, aspects of learning and teaching were identified. The topic of speaking English in daily conversations was prioritized. Existing solutions were analyzed. A design brief consisting of goals based on the research was formulated. Ideas were brainstormed and the final direction was consolidated based on the feedback received. CoSpeak, an interactive mobile application using voice recognition and utilizing collaborative learning was designed iteratively. An evaluation with the teacher and students was conducted using a Wizard of Oz type prototype and future possibilities were identified. • CSS Concepts: Human-centred computing -Collaborative and social computing -Collaborative and social computing design and evaluation methods -Ethnographic studies;

View PDFchevron_right
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved