# Introduction

The use of visual methods as a research tool has increased worldwide, along with the need to understand the nuanced and contextual benefits, challenges, and risks of their use (Pain, 2012). Within participatory approaches, visual methods can offer an adaptable, interactive, and critical way of engaging with refugee youth, making research more accessible to this often underrepresented population (Robertson et al., 2016; Vecchio et al., 2017). In Montreal, the COVID-19 pandemic forced programs, services, and research involving refugee youth to adapt to the needs of this population while respecting physical distancing guidelines. In this paper, we describe some of the strengths and challenges of using photo journals, a form of visual methods, with refugee youth to document their experiences participating in a Montreal community-based mentoring program during the pandemic.

## *Visual methods*

The use of visual methods has become increasingly popular in research with youth across a variety of cultural contexts (Literat, 2013). With careful consideration for the context in which they are used, visual methods have proven helpful as a community-engagement strategy (Switzer et al., 2015) and a means for young people to process, document, and share their opinions about difficult topics (Brown, Spencer, McIsaac & Howard, 2020). Moreover, these methods can facilitate research with immigrant youth by addressing language and communication barriers and their difficulties building relationships, as well as countering negative perceptions towards research (Francis Cain & Trussell, 2019). This is done by offering various forms of expression, dedicating time for interaction between researchers and participants, and offering an opportunity to ‘freely and playfully’ express themselves through a research creation (Georgis & Matthews, 2021). As a form of visual methods, photo journals include a combination of participant-generated images (e.g., drawings or photographs) and text. In previous studies with youth, photo journals have facilitated youth engagement, motivation, and relationship building within marginalized groups (Shankar-Brown, 2011), as well as academic improvement and personal growth (Vaughns, 2017). Photo journals can also serve to mediate power dynamics and facilitate meaningful dialogue between youth and researchers (Anderson, 2014).

Visual methods can be a useful participant-centred method when properly adapted to the context and to the participants. This is especially true in situations where research is conducted at a distance, for instance in the context of public health measures during the pandemic. Using visual methods as a research tool, youth from diverse backgrounds have been able to generate and mobilize knowledge (Burkholder et al., 2022); represent how they understand, respond to, and are impacted by the pandemic in a variety of media (Rizzo et al., 2022); and expand the reach of their findings through social media (Pickering et al., 2022). Interestingly, many of these studies with young people either adapted or adopted visual methods as a response to the pandemic.

## *Ethical considerations*

Visual methods are often cited as ‘participatory’. However, rather than automatically ensuring participation, these methods propose values, practices, and a theoretical grounding that when used reflexively can facilitate the participation and transformation of individuals and communities (Benjamin-Thomas et al., 2019). As researchers sought creative and innovative ways to collect data during the pandemic, they needed to ensure the methods adhered to safety and ethical guidelines (Samuels, 2019). Concerns have been raised around ethical scrutiny and regulation that can have harmful effects on visual research development (Wiles et al., 2012). In response, several researchers have proposed guidelines for ethical visual research that, on one hand, can provide support to researchers using visual methods in their studies and, on the other, meet the needs of Ethics Review Boards (ERBs) who review and approve these studies (Cox, 2014). For example, the guidelines proposed by Cox (2014) are based on the following six categories: (1) confidentiality; (2) minimizing harm; (3) consent; (4) fuzzy boundaries; (5) authorship and ownership; and (6) representation and audience/s.

Throughout this study, we adopted a relational ethics approach. For us, this means considering youth wellbeing and agency where participants had the capacity to make decisions for themselves (Gonzalez & Ruiz-Casares, 2021); integrating reflexive and relational research practices that contribute to the validity and depth of the data collected (Liegghio & Caragata, 2020; Meloni et al., 2015); centring ongoing and valid consent throughout the process (Ruiz-Casares & Oates, 2018); and prioritizing safety, confidentiality, and transparency when we made decisions (Graham et al., 2015). All these elements of a relational ethics approach were key to the way we designed, implemented, and adapted the study. In this paper, we reflect on our use of photo journals with refugee youth to understand the strengths and challenges of conducting research with this population during the pandemic, describe some of the ethical reflections that emerged during the study and subsequent adaptations to the research methods, and draw lessons that can be applied in non-pandemic contexts. Aligned with our view of young people as social actors with valuable contributions to research, we argue that researchers need to incorporate reflexive practices and prioritize youth engagement and perspectives when conducting social science research during and after the pandemic.
# Methods

## *Participants*

Participants were recruited through Say Ça!, a community based-organization that delivers services to refugee youth (Box 1).We invited all 20 young people participating in Say Ça! sessions to join the study, which took place while they attended the program. Six chose to participate in the study. They had migrated to Montreal seven months to four years prior to the beginning of the study and spoke Arabic, English, French, and Spanish. Participating youth had attended weekly sessions with Say Ça! for at least four months before joining the study. Eleven Say Ça! volunteers, who assumed the roles of tutors and program coordinators, also participated in the study. They had been a part of the program for over a year. Table 1 describes participant demographics in more detail.

<table><caption>Table 1 — Participant demographics and data collection methods — <sup>a</sup> The second author was less involved in data collection.</caption><tr><td>ParticipantAge (years)Countries of originGenderData collection
                        methodYouth (n=6)11 to 17Cameroon, Chad, Lebanon, Uganda, and Venezuela4
                        females2 malesPhoto journals and individual interviewsSay Ça! volunteers
                        (n=11)20 to 35Canada (Montreal), Colombia, Egypt, France, Iran, Peru and
                        Syria7 females 4 malesFocus group discussionsResearchersa(n=1)27Colombia1
                        femaleParticipant observation</td></tr></table>

We developed a university-community partnership with Say Ça! that emerged from conversations between the researchers and the director around the organization’s current needs and how research could support those needs. The partnership informed the research design, in particular the choice of visual methods, as well as facilitated collaboration and mutual support, encouraged reflective and documentation practices within the organization, and supported participant recruitment and retention (Samuels, 2019). Additionally, the study followed an iterative process that included consultations with the Say Ça! leadership team at key decision-making moments such as research design, implementation logistics, methodological adaptations that took place throughout, and research outputs. In consulting with Say Ça!, we were able to contextualize the study by gaining an understanding of the organizational needs, interests, and resource limitations, as well as knowledge of the participants and their contexts.

## *Measures and procedures*

With the support of Say Ça! volunteers, we delivered ‘care packages’ to the young peoples’ homes, which included journalling materials (i.e., a journal, a disposable camera, markers and pencil crayons, and a glue stick) along with a description of the study and an informed consent form. Following public health measures, we wore masks, used hand sanitizer frequently, and kept a 2-metre distance during every visit to participants’ homes.

Throughout the journalling activity, young people documented their experiences participating in the tutoring program before and during the pandemic as well as their own reflections of using the journals. We encouraged participants to use the language with which they felt most comfortable and to use photos, writing, and/or drawings. The journal prompted participants to reflect on their favourite moments at Say Ça!, moments when things did not go as planned, and what they looked forward to with Say Ça!. Before beginning the activity, we invited young people to participate in an online one-hour photography workshop where one of the researchers introduced the project and the materials in the ‘care package’. Following the photography workshop, one of us communicated with the six young people for clarifications as they worked through their journal entries. Having ongoing and transparent engagement with young participants has been cited as a way to recognize their autonomy (Taylor et al., 2018), especially so during the pandemic (Beauvais and Knoppers, 2021). After two months, we invited the young people to an interview (online or phone) with one researcher to share their journalling experience and to assist in the interpretation of the visual data (Bagnoli, 2004). Participants were asked to reflect on the content of their journals as well as the overall journalling process to document the strengths and challenges from their perspective of using this method. Participants chose to have the interviews in English, French or Spanish. Interpretation was available but not used since the interviewer spoke the three chosen languages fluently. Interviews took place at a time that was convenient for the participants (Samuels, 2019). Secure communication protocols were implemented, such as a password protected Zoom link and a phone number to reach in case the call was interrupted. Young people received a gift card to recognize their participation in the study (Seymour, 2012); we did not perceive this as a significant incentive to their engagement.

Complementary to the journalling activity, we conducted three two-hour bilingual focus group discussions (FGD) with volunteers and documented participant observation during organizational meetings and informal conversations with volunteers. FGD took place with the aim to contextualize the study, map out the history of the organization and explore the young peoples’ experiences participating in the program during the pandemic as well as how the organization adapted to deliver the program. Emilia Gonzalez facilitated the FGD while a trained bilingual graduate student took detailed notes. One FGD was conducted in person while the other two took place over Zoom to respect physical distancing measures.

From the beginning of the study, we documented participant observation in chronological and systematic field notes, recording observations about the context, relationships, informal conversations with participants, non-verbal cues, research process, and researcher’s positionality. Triangulated with the photo journals, both FGD and participant observation were appropriate to elicit different perspectives about the program to guide program development (Krueger & Casey, 2014) in the case of FGD, and to improve our interpretation of the data (Musante & DeWalt, 2010) and the positionality of the researcher (Angrosino & Rosenberg, 2011) in the case of participant observation.

## *Analysis*

We audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and denominalized the interviews and FGD. We invited participants to choose their own pseudonyms used in this paper (Allen & Wiles, 2016). The interview and FGD transcripts, along with the FGD detailed notes and our fieldnotes, were coded thematically using NVivo 12 (QSR International Pty Ltd., 2018). We developed a codebook with codes derived from an initial read-through of all data sources. Codes also included reflections about the research process such as the rapport with participants, features of youth discourse (Spyrou, 2016) and effects of the pandemic. After grouping the codes into categories, providing a short description for each and discussing possible gaps (Gibson & Brown, 2009), we applied the codebook to the journals, transcripts and fieldnotes. For this paper, our analysis triangulated across all data sources and focused on codes that captured the strengths and challenges of using photo journals from the perspective of the participants and researchers.

The analysis of photo journals and corresponding interview transcripts were done simultaneously, as meaning of the images depends on the interpretation shared by the participant during the interview (Gomez, 2020). In this sense, we considered the content of the images not as something static and complete, but as “a departure point for apprehending something of [the youth’s] world and world-making” (Mitchell, 2006, p. 63). During the analysis, we paid attention to the way participants framed their images as well as what was omitted from them (Literat, 2013). We translated quotes from Spanish and French into English for the publication of results to enhance understanding by a wider readership and to protect the confidentiality of participants. There was no need to translate quotes during analysis since both researchers are fluent in the languages used.

Approval was obtained from the ERB at the McGill Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
# Conclusion

The pandemic forced us to adapt our questions and methods so that we could conduct research with refugee youth while respecting physical distancing. Yet more importantly, it made us think critically about how we relate to and communicate with participants, how we obtain valid consent and ensure confidentiality, and how we negotiate power dynamics with participants and with other institutions. In this article, we presented some of the ethical reflections that emerged from the use of photo journals and guided the research process and outcomes. Following these reflections and in line with our position in recognizing young people as social actors with valuable knowledge and an ability to generate quality research, we argue that researchers need to prioritize youth engagement and perspectives in the context of physical distancing, despite its challenges. Moreover, researchers need to incorporate reflexive practices when implementing the necessary adaptations to conduct social science research during and after a pandemic.

## Références

R. E. S. and Wiles, J. L.        (2016). A rose by any other name: Participants choosing research pseudonyms. *Qualitative        Research in Psychology, 13*(2), 149-165. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2015.1133746

T. (2014). Photovoice as a catalyst for conversation: Children as co-researchers        in an elementary school in the USA. In S. Miles and A. Howes (Eds.), *Photography in        Educational Research* (1<sup>rst</sup> ed., p. 36-49). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203740316

Angrosino, M., and Rosenberg, J. (2011). Observations on observation. In N. Denzin and Y.        Lincoln (Eds.), *The Sage handbook of qualitative research* (4<sup>th</sup> ed., p.        467-478). Sage Publications.

A. (2004).        Researching identities with multi-method autobiographies. *Sociological Research Online,        9*(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.909

A.        (2009). Beyond the standard interview: the use of graphic elicitation and arts-based        methods. *Qualitative Research, 9*(5), 547-570. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794109343625

M. J. S., and Knoppers, B. M. (2021).        Coming out to play: Privacy, data protection, children’s health, and COVID-19 research.        *Frontiers in Genetics, 12*. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2021.659027

T. E., Laliberte Rudman, D., Cameron, D., and Batorowicz, B. (2019).        Participatory digital methodologies: Potential of three approaches for advancing        transformative occupation-based research with children and youth. *Journal of        Occupational Science, 26*(4), 559-574. https://doi.org/10.1080/14427591.2018.1512054

A., Clément, M. È., Lafantaisie, V., LeBlanc, A., Baron, M., Picher, G., Turgeon,        J., Ruiz-Casares, M., and Lacharité, C. (2021). How societal responses to COVID-19 could        contribute to child neglect. *Child Abuse and Neglect, 116(Pt 2)*, 104761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104761

G. F., Davies, A., Iskander, D., and Chambers, M. (2018). Reflections on the ethics        of participatory visual methods to engage communities in global health research. *Global        Bioethics, 29*(1), 22-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/11287462.2017.1415722

Borland, J. (2020). *Embracing socially distant data collection*. https://aea365.org/blog/iea-affiliate-week-embracing-socially-distant-data-collection-by-jennifer-borland/?utm_source=feedburnerandutm_medium=emailandutm_campaign=Feed%3A+aea365+%28AEA365%29

A., Spencer, R., McIsaac, J.-L., and Howard, V.        (2020). Drawing out their stories: A scoping review of participatory visual research methods        with newcomer children. *International Journal of Qualitative Methods*, 19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920933394

C., MacEntee, K., Mandrona, A., and Thorpe, A. (2022). Coproducing digital        archives with 2SLGBTQ+ Atlantic Canadian youth amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. *Qualitative        Research Journal*, 22(1), 24-41. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-01-2021-0003

Canadian Council for Refugees Youth Network. (2020).        *COVID-19 and impacts on newcomer and refugee youth*. Canadian Council for Refugees.        https://ccrweb.ca/en/covid-19-impacts-newcomer-and-refugee-youth

Cox, S., Drew, S., Guillemin, M., Howell, C., Warr, D. and        Waycott, J. (2014). *Guidelines for ethical visual research methods*. Visual Research        Collaboratory. https://socialequity.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/1981392/Ethical-Visual-Research-Methods-WEB.pdf

P. (2020). Co-researching with children in        the time of COVID-19: Shifting the narrative on methodologies to generate knowledge.        *International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19*, 160940692098213. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920982135

Lannoy, L., Rhodes, R. E., Moore, S. A., Faulkner, G., and Tremblay, M. S. (2020). Regional        differences in access to the outdoors and outdoor play of Canadian children and youth during        the COVID-19 outbreak. *Canadian Journal of Public Health, 111*(6), 988-994. https://doi.org/10.17269/s41997-020-00412-4

T., St Jean, N., and Birman, D. (2020). COVID-19 and refugee and immigrant youth: A        community-based mental health perspective. *Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research,        Practice, and Policy, 12*(S1), S225-S227. https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0000875

S., Travers, R., Guta, A., McDonald, S., and        Meagher, A. (2007). Ethical dilemmas in community-based participatory research:        recommendations for institutional review boards. *J Urban Health, 84*(4), 478-493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-007-9165-7

Flores, K. S. (2007). *Youth participatory evaluation: Strategies for engaging young        people*(vol. 14). John Wiley and Sons.

M.,        Mediratta, K., Ruglis, J., Stoudt, B., Shah, S., and Fine, M. (2010). Critical youth        engagement: Participatory action research and organizing. In: L. Sherrod, J. Torney-Puta,        and C. Flanagan (Eds), *Handbook of Research and Policy on Civic Engagement with Youth*(p. 621-649). Wiley Press.

Cain, T., and        Trussell, D. E. (2019). Methodological challenges in sport and leisure research with youth        from refugee backgrounds. *World Leisure Journal*, 61(4), 303-312. https://doi.org/10.1080/16078055.2019.1661106

D., and Matthews, S. (2021). The trouble with research-creation: Failure, play and        the possibility of knowledge in aesthetic encounters. *International Journal of        Qualitative Studies in Education*, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2021.1888164

K. (2022). Bridging the digital divide: Reflections on using WhatsApp instant        messenger interviews in youth research. *Qualitative Research in Psychology*, 19(3),        611-631. doi:10.1080/14780887.2020.1751902

W., and Brown, A. (2009). *Working with qualitative data*. Sage publications.

B., Ndejjo, R., Tchetchia, A., De Claro, V., Mago,        E., Diallo, A. A., Lopes, C., and Bhattacharyya, S. (2020). Community engagement for        COVID-19 prevention and control: A rapid evidence synthesis. *BMJ Global Health,        5*(10), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003188

Gomez, R. (2020). Photostories. *Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries,        9*(1), 47-63. http://www.qqml.net/index.php/qqml/article/view/588

E., and Ruiz‐Casares, M. (2021). Negotiating        child agency in childcare practices among immigrant families. *Child and Family Social        Work, 27*(2), 195-205. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12869

A., Powell, M. A., and Taylor, N. (2015). Ethical        research involving children: Encouraging reflexive engagement in research with children and        young people. *Children and Society, 29*(5), 331-343. https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12089

A.        C., Hill, A. L., and Flicker, S. (2014). A situated practice of ethics for participatory        visual and digital methods in public health research and practice: A focus on digital        storytelling. *American Journal of Public Health, 104*(9), 1606-1614. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2013.301310

Gupta,        S. (2017). Ethical issues in designing internet-based research: Recommendations for good        practice. *Journal of Research Practice, 13*(2), D1-D1.

S. (2007). Methodological and ethical issues in        conducting qualitative research with children and young people: A literature review.        *International Journal of Nursing Studies, 44*(7), 1250-1260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.08.015

Krueger, R. A., and Casey, M. A. (2014). *Focus groups: A practical guide for applied        research*(5<sup>th</sup> ed.). Sage publications.

M., and Caragata, L. (2020). COVID-19 and youth        living in poverty: The ethical considerations of moving from in-person interviews to a        photovoice using remote methods. *Affilia, 36*(2), 149-155. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886109920939051

I. (2013). “A pencil for your thoughts”: Participatory drawing as a visual        research method with children and youth. *International Journal of Qualitative Methods,        12*(1), 84-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691301200143

O. (2016). Repositioning the research encounter: Exploring power dynamics and        positionality in youth research. *International Journal of Social Research        Methodology*, *19*(3), 339-354. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2015.1011821

F., Vanthuyne, K., and Rousseau, C. (2015). Towards a relational ethics: Rethinking        ethics, agency and dependency in research with children and youth. *Anthropological        Theory, 15*(1), 106-123. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463499614565945

L. M. (2006). Child-centred? Thinking        critically about children’s drawings as a visual research method. *Visual Anthropology        Review, 22*(1), 60-73. https://doi.org/10.1525/var.2006.22.1.60

F. J., Moothathamby, N., McAdam, L., Solomon,        M., Varadi, R., Tullis, D. E., and Reisman, J. (2020). Telling my tale: Reflections on the        process of visual storytelling for children and youth living with cystic fibrosis and        muscular dystrophy in Canada. *International Journal of Qualitative Methods*, 19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919898917

M. (2017). Visual methods in research with migrant and refugee children and young        people. In: P. Liamputtong, P. (ed.), *Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social        Sciences*(p. 1-16). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2779-6_42-1

Musante, K., and DeWalt, B. R. (2010). *Participant observation: A guide for        fieldworkers*(2<sup>d</sup> ed.). Altamira Press.

H. (2012). A literature review to evaluate the choice and use of visual methods.*International Journal of Qualitative Methods,* 11(4), 303-319. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691201100401

C. J., Al-Baldawi, Z., Amany, R. A., McVean, L., Adan, M., Baker, L.,        Al-Baldawi, Z. and O’Sullivan, T. (2022). Photovoice and Instagram as strategies for youth        engagement in disaster risk reduction. *Qualitative Health Research*, 32(12),        1897-1906. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323221116462

Government of Quebec. (2020). *Unequal toll of the pandemic: COVID-19 is hitting harder        in the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods on the island of Montréal*. https://santemontreal.qc.ca/fileadmin/fichiers/Campagnes/coronavirus/situationmontreal/point-sante/inegalites-montreal/Inegaux-Pandemie-Population-EN.pdf

QSR International Pty Ltd. (2018). NVivo (Version        12). https://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo-qualitative-data-analysis-software/home

H. L., Lawford, H. L., Rose-Krasnor, L., Freeman,        J., and Lanctot, J. (2018). Engaging diverse Canadian youth in youth development programs:        Program quality and community engagement. *Children and Youth Services Review, 94*,        20-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.09.023

S., Knox, E., Azizi, N., Sulevani, I., Chia, C.,        Leo, M., Spina, M., Percy-Smith, B., Tay, C., Monchuk, L., and Day, L. (2022). Young        People’s Perspectives on the Value and Meaning of Art during the Pandemic. *Sociological        Research Online*, 27(3), 587-603. https://doi.org/:10.1177/13607804221105282

Z., Gifford, S., McMichael, C., and Correa-Velez, I. (2016). Through their eyes:        Seeing experiences of settlement in photographs taken by refugee background youth in        Melbourne, Australia. *Visual Studies*, 31(1), 34-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/1472586X.2015.1128845

M., and Oates, J. (2018). Informed Consent. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), *The        Sage Encyclopedia of Lifespan Human Development*. Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506307633

S.        A., and Moscovitch, D. A. (2021). Effects of mask-wearing on social anxiety: an exploratory        review. *Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 34*(5), 487-502. https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2021.1929936

Z., Nouvet, E., and Schwartz, L. (2021). Reflections of methodological and ethical        challenges in conducting research during COVID-19 involving resettled refugee youth in        Canada. *Journal of Medical Ethics, 0*, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2021-107291

Samuels, F. (2019). *Tips for collecting primary data in a Covid-19 era*. London:        Overseas Development Institute. https://cdn.odi.org/media/documents/primary_data_collection_emerging_analysis_and_ideas_1.pdf

L., Chanmugam, A., Moses, T., Saltzburg, S.,        Williams, L. R., and Letendre, J. (2015). Youth participation in qualitative research:        Challenges and possibilities. *Qualitative Social Work, 14*(4), 504-521. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325014556792

Seymour, K. (2012). Using incentives: Encouraging and recognising participation in youth        research. *Youth Studies Australia, 31*(3), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.753562865363473

R. (2011). Actively engaging middle level        students with photo journals: A photo journal project engages reluctant learners. *Middle        School Journal, 43*(2), 24-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2011.11461798

S. (2016). Troubling children’s voices in research. In F. Esser, M. S. Baader, T.        Betz, and B. Hungerland (Eds.), *Reconceptualising agency and childhood: New perspectives        in childhood studies* (p. 105-118). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315722245

D. T., and Terry, S. F. (2013). Reforming        biobank consent policy: A necessary move away from broad consent toward dynamic consent.        *Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers, 17*(12), 855-856. https://doi.org/10.1089/gtmb.2013.1550

S. (2020). “People give and take a lot in order to participate in things:” Youth talk back –        making a case for non-participation. *Curriculum Inquiry, 50*(2), 168-193. https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.2020.1766341

S., Guta, A., de Prinse, K., Chan Carusone, S., and Strike, C. (2015). Visualizing        harm reduction: Methodological and ethical considerations. *Soc Sci Med, 133*, 77-84.        https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.03.040

M. J., Dove, E. S., Laurie, G., and Townend, D. (2018). When can the child speak        for herself? The limits of parental consent in data protection law for health research.        *Medical Law Review, 26*(3), 369-391. https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwx052

J. A., Fraser, S. L., Perez, R. M.,        Paquette, C., and Frohlich, K. L. (2020). Girls and young women negotiate wellbeing during        COVID-19 in Quebec. *Girlhood Studies, 13*(3), 48-63. https://doi.org/10.3167/ghs.2020.130305

S. (2017). Ethnographic research with young people: Methods and rapport. *Qualitative        Research Journal, 17*(2), 66-76. https://doi.org/10.1108/qrj-10-2016-0059

Vaughns, A. B. (2017). *The impact of photo        journals and structured narrative reflections on preservice teachers engaged in        service-learning*. Washington, DC: AERA Online Paper Repository. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED591708

L.,        Dhillon, K. K., and Ulmer, J. B. (2017). Visual methodologies for research with refugee        youth. *Intercultural Education*, 28(2), 131-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2017.1294852

R., Coffey, A., Robison, J., and Prosser, J. (2012). Ethical regulation and visual        methods: Making visual research impossible or developing good practice? *Sociological        Research Online, 17*(1), 3-12. https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.2274