Isn’t it great when you get to use ideas that have been in your head for a while? Over the last year, I’ve populated my Pinterest Board with images of origami, folding and card structures for no other reason than I find them fascinating: but those images have found their moment. Over the last year, I’ve done LOTS of work with images and objects to help people think and talk; and of course, the Global COVID-19 Pandemic has forced us all to think about how we talk and think ‘at a distance’. So, back to paper, literally.
As my sketches in this post attempt to show, I returned to why ‘things’ are so important in thinking. I was inspired by the idea of receiving something (the philosopher Paul Ricoeur talked about gift giving in fascinating terms, for example), something that showed care and could be personalised. I thought about the sort of research partnerships I wanted to develop, in this case with parents of young children, and I knew that any research ‘at a distance’ would have to reflect ideas of care, nurture, crafting and personalisation.
Senses and Interactions are important
Over thirty years of work with children, young people and professionals (I know!), one of the simplest, but most useful insights I have developed is that looking at things and handling things REALLY helps us talk and think individually, and together.
We use a wide range of experiences to “think” about things. Before we are born, we “make sense” of the world through our senses and interactions, and as we get older, we still rely on our senses and interactions to problem solve, work out what is going on, and decide what things mean to us and others. This can be quite a tricky task - no wonder we need all the information we can get!
Before we have a well crafted story to tell about “what’s going on” we wade through LOTS of environmental information. We have to sift through so much information, but our brains and bodies are really quite good at this (sometimes in different ways). We find ways of making sense of the world and (inter) acting with it - some people have called them schemas. If think of how you make sense of things you will probably recognise your own patterns (or schemas) of sense making. Before you have the slick explanation and plan for action, you will have do all sorts of things almost without “thinking” in the traditional conscious sense - things like gazing, moving, mark-making, handling, sorting and grouping, right through to things that ‘look’ more like conscious thought, like annotating or note taking.
Imagine receiving something. I can imagine for most of us, there might be some curiosity - especially if the ‘thing’ didn’t look like a marketing circular, or a bill. I wanted to build on that as part of a wider, multi-channel research methodology, but the “Send and Return” method developed as a part of that.
Look at the graphic below: here’s some quick notes on what a crafted object (in this case, a fold out interactive visual) could do, and why.
There is something about the act and experience of giving and receiving that is fascinating. We all experience this at times of celebration; there are so many interesting and pleasurable moments in both giving and receiving. What if we utilised this in research, even research at a distance? The ‘back and forth’ of pen pal letters (if you are under a certain age, you won’t appreciate that) builds a sense of intimacy that a tick box or cold call could create. Together with other methods, I wondered if I could build up a shared story or picture with my research partners, being experts in their own experience and family life. You can see some early thinking I’ve had below for a current project, below.
HOW we ask questions matters. Authors like James A. Holstein and Jaber F. Gubrium explain this in constructivist terms - that is, the “data” we look for is not “collected” but is constructed in the process of interactions. What we ask, how we ask it, who we are, where we are all matter, as they co-construct the data. So, I began to develop the “Post and Return” method as a a conversation. This conversation begins with me showing something, incomplete, but inviting. Research partners are invited to show me what the topic looks like for them. See my early note on this, below.
Asking research partners to “show me” something of their lived experience needs more than a blank page. As much as I’d like to get a fold out origami through the post, it won’t become a meaningful conversation if I don’t have anything to say, or any way for people to express themselves. The detail is critical - both what and how much. There has to be a connection between what I want to appreciate and what research partners want to tell me. Gadamer’s concept of the shared horizon of experience is a useful reference here. The thing I ask must connect to a recognisable aspect of lived experience, and also must invite a response. I want people to interact, from the moment of unfolding the origami right through to sending a completed one back through the post. This is also about thinking carefully about what I am asking participants to do - not too simplistic, but not to complex.
[NB. I’ve been on a great journey since my last blog post ONE YEAR ago, but no apologies, as I’ve been busy doing the work. I’ve had the pleasure of working with academic colleagues and professional partners in Health, Social Care and Education to develop and ‘test drive’ a range of methods. You can follow me on Twitter (@ianrobsons) to find out things as they happen.]
