Recherche et Applications en Marketing, vol.

22, n 1/2007

The contribution made by visual anthropology to the study of consumption behavior

Delphine Dion
IAE de Paris, Sorbonne Graduate Business School

ABSTRACT This paper describes the main methodologies of visual anthropology and discusses their use in marketing research. After a brief history of the emergence of pictures and videos in anthropology, we present the epistemological and methodological shifts in visual anthropology. Based on this, we identify two ways of using pictures and videos in the field of research: as a recording device and as a research tool. In the first approach, video and still cameras are used to obtain more detailed, precise and lively ethnographic descriptions of consumption behavior. The researcher attempts to draw up an exhaustive list of the objects owned by the consumer (inventory technique) or he uses a camera to record specific actions or objects he wants to focus on (videography). In the second approach, pioneered by Jean Rouch, videos are used in a more reflexive and subjective way. The camera is no longer considered as an objective recording device. It is used in a participative and collaborative way to develop a shared understanding of consumption experiences. By the mediation of the camera, the researchers aim is to bring the viewer into peoples experiences. The camera becomes the participant as well as the collaborator. Key words: Qualitative research, ethnography, visual anthropology, photography, video, consumption experiences, pictures, videography.

Western society has always given precedence to words over images, visual perception being considered inferior to other vehicles of knowledge. This skepticism toward images is not new; Plato also spoke of the deceptive and fallacious nature of images, that they fool the eyes and deceive the mind (Schroeder,

2002). Photography and video are often relegated to the status of illustration, entertainment or even work of art, and marketing research has long been a follower of this school of thought. However, photography and video are now used more and more in the human sciences, and particu-

The author wishes to thank Richard Ladwein for his comments and advice. She can be contacted by writing to the following e-mail address: delphinedion@orange.fr

62

Delphine Dion

larly in marketing, to study consumption behavior (Belk and Kozinets, 2005).1 Despite this evolution, marketing research, where images are granted the same importance as statistical or lexical analysis, for example, is still rare. The image is often confined to the role of simply illustrating a verbalization constructed independently as a self-contained unit of meaning. More often than not, we have very little information about the photographic images we see and use: whether it be as to how they were collected (locations, people photographed, framing, number of shots, etc.), or the methods employed in analyzing them. Some of these images are later inserted into a text with the purpose of illustrating behavior that, quite often, has been identified by means of other tools. However, the photographic image holds very important, very specific argumentative and analytical possibilities. Visual anthropology, like much of the work in consumption behavior where photography has been used, tends to be something other than a simple factual account and must be considered as a specific observation research method. We would therefore be well advised to gain a better understanding of the research techniques used in visual anthropology. The themes, tools and methods used in visual anthropology have changed greatly over the years, just as anthropology itself has changed. In the time of the silent or post-synchronized documentary, research was centered on directly observable movement and behavior: techniques surrounding the construction and use of objects, ceremonial behavior and non-verbal communication. The introduction of portable, lightweight cameras featuring synchronous sound-image recording devices in the 1960s and, later on, the advent of digital recording techniques, broadened the scope of visual anthropology significantly. The visual description of activities was now accompanied by the direct verbal expression of the subjects themselves, which meant that elements not directly observable before, such as personal experience, emotions, judgments and interpretations, could now be gathered (de France, 1994).
1. Many conferences now organize special sessions devoted to video. This is true, for example, of the Consumer Culture Theory Conference and the conferences of the Association for Consumer Research, which has, since 2002, held an annual film festival where researchers are invited to present videos on consumption. The review Consumption, Markets and Culture ran a special feature on this theme in September 2005.

Visual anthropology thus went from the study of movement to the exploration of experience. These new developments in technology cannot fully account for the disciplines new infatuation however, as this also corresponded with an epistemological revival that was both reflexive and comprehensive, and which generated new interest in ethnographic film and increased its validity (Pink, 2006). These evolutions have created a need to define the challenges facing visual anthropology more clearly so that marketing researchers may better fulfill the potential these new perspectives bring. The goal of the current article is to open a window on visual anthropology and make new observation research methods based on the photographic and/or video image available to both marketing researchers and professionals. This paper does not claim to be a guide or handbook on the issue, but rather seeks to draw marketing researchers attention to recent developments in contemporary visual anthropology. In visual anthropology, the image is considered as an intrinsic not extrinsic element of the research process, just as it is in the analysis of advertising visuals (Barthes, 1985; Ceriani, 2004), works of art (Thrlemann, 2004), family photographs (Bourdieu, 1965; Schroeder, 2002) or fiction films (Weakland, 1974; Comolli, 1994; Marteaux and Filser, 2006).2 It is not concerned with gathering and analyzing existing visual productions, but with producing photographic or video images in a given field of research in order to generate an understanding of the Other. This involves conducting research with images (researcher produces images as an instrument of research) and not on images (analysis of representations driven by images in a given situation). This paper will begin with a proposal for the definition of visual anthropology, which will then lead to two possible utilizations of the image: the image as a tool for recording behavior, and the image as a field of research. In so doing, pioneering marketing research using these methods of observation will be examined and several fields for the application of these techniques in marketing research and studies will be proposed.

2. For a literary review of the analysis of marketing visuals, refer to Tissier-Desbordes article (2004).

The contribution made by visual anthropology to the study of consumption behavior

63

VISUAL ANTHROPOLOGY: FROM TOOL TO FIELD OF RESEARCH

Before embarking on an analysis of the contribution made by visual anthropology to the study of consumption behavior, it is best to first gain an understanding of the specific characteristics of the discipline and the founding principles of anthropology. This will then be followed by an examination of how videography slipped into research methods little by little, until it developed into an entirely separate discipline. The final part of the paper will analyze the epistemological and methodological evolutions that visual anthropology has experienced in the past few years.

The founding principles of anthropology First and foremost, anthropology is defined by its field of study: the self-other relationship in other cultures (Aug, 1994). Anthropology cannot be defined by particular themes (religion, family, exchange, etc.), by the societies it studies (traditional) or by the theories it uses (structuralism, functionalism, culturalism, etc.), but by its mission: to study mankind in its entirety, in all societies, at all latitudes, in all its states and in all epochs. Accomplishing this mission is inseparable from its method: ethnographic description; that is the direct observation of particular social behaviors founded on a human relationship and familiarity with the groups we seek to understand by sharing their existence (Laplantine, 2005). At first, ethnologists limited themselves to bringing indigenous people into their colonial residences to interview them (in precisely the same way companies currently do when they invite their consumers into their buildings to talk about their consumption experiences....). In the tradition of Malinowski (1922), who broke away from this approach, ethnologists little by little left their colonial residences to go into the field and join what was happening. Participative observation thus gradually gained the upper hand over veranda ethnology, as Malinowski enjoyed calling it. (Like Malinowski, we could urge marke-

ting companies and researchers to go out into the field more and to relinquish veranda marketing research in favor of field marketing research). Henceforth, gaining knowledge of human beings could no longer follow the example of the botanist examining a fern or the zoologist observing a crustacean; it could only proceed by communicating directly with humans and by sharing their existence in a lasting way. The ethnographer must be capable of truly adopting the primary inclination of the culture hes studying (Laplantine, 1999). This understanding requires that the observer be integrated into the very location of the observation. The ethnographer must immerse himself in the day-to-day life and daily interaction of his research community in the same way as the indigenous person. This approach invites a slow and inevitably long period of familiarization with the groups being studied (LaburtheThorla and Warnier, 2003). The construction of knowledge is grounded (Hudson and Ozanne, 1988). First, researchers observe and take notes. This allows them to acquire an understanding of the society or group in which they are immersed. They then try to validate their conceptualizations based on their fieldwork immersion. In the next stage, researchers may need to collect data to enhance their knowledge, and this process continues until a complete conceptualization of the phenomenon being studied is achieved. The construction of knowledge is therefore iterative and continuing. It is constructed gradually through contact with the research area and results in a negotiated and shared understanding of behavior (Heisley, McGrath and Sherry, 1990).

The pioneers of visual anthropology For a very long time, most ethnologists and anthropologists have used the image as a tool for gathering information. This was the case for Haddons expedition to the Torres Strait Islands in 1898 when he made the first ethnographic film with one of the first Lumire motion picture cameras (de Brigard, 1974). The method was also employed by Boas, as early as 1885, when he photographed different elements of Indian culture (objects, ceremonies, behavior), and also by Malinowski when he studied the Trobrianders between 1915 and 1918. Although

64

Delphine Dion

these pioneers of visual anthropology often produced a vast amount of photographic material (1,100 of Malinowskis photographs are archived at the London School of Economics), they did not truly fulfill the potential of their pictures. In those times, the image was reduced to two functions: illustrating and objectifying (Pink, 2006). So, in the description Malinowski gives of his research options in Argonauts of the Western Pacific (1922), he doesnt speak of using photography as a means of investigation. He emphasizes the need to conduct a systematic description and, throughout his analysis, he supports his discourse by referring the reader to his various photographs taken in the field. He used his photographic images more as a testament to the truth of his observations. The use of photography in research reached a major turning point through the work of Bateson and Mead in 1942 at the end of a two-year period of field work in a village in Bali. Mead interviewed, chatted and took notes while Bateson took photos and filmed. In this way, they took 25,000 photos and 7,000 meters of film. When they returned to New York, they selected and wrote comments for 759 photographs, and these made up the body of Balinese Character: a photographic analysis. This book not only provided an original vision of learning about a culture but also constituted a renewal of fieldwork techniques (Winkin, 1981). The research method developed by Mead and Bateson no longer used photography as a simple means of proving written observations, but as a veritable research material in its own right. Mead points out that the different types of behavior identified in Balinese Character were brought to light by analyzing the photos, and that in no way did the photos represent a mirror of these behaviors (Worth, 1981). Despite their innovative approach, Mead and Bateson did not succeed in making the use of photography in anthropology more legitimate, and it wasnt until the 1970s that the discipline truly acquired academic recognition. After having been considered a minor and marginal discipline for many years, visual anthropology became a well-established and fastexpanding discipline (Ruby, 2005).

and grasped through non-verbal tools of investigation. The camera was perceived as a sort of secret weapon; invisible, omniscient and omnipotent, capable of witnessing the whole of an event (MacDougall, 1974). Focusing on the idea that film is objective, Mead sought to use the camera in the most neutral manner possible. She recommended keeping the camera on a tripod in the background and simply letting it film continuously so that people forgot it was there (Mead, 1974). The camera became a witness capable of recording an event in its entirety. Mead opposed edited and participative film, and sought to make it as objective as possible. To reconstruct reality as faithfully as possible, anthropological videography was limited to uncut unedited film. The result was more a recording than a film (Young, 1974). Today, this approach seems unrealistic and, for ethical and epistemological reasons, is not recommended.

From voyeurism to collaboration At that time, filming individuals without their knowledge didnt seem to cause any particular moral dilemmas (especially given the colonial mentality of the times). Mead and Bateson even went so far as to film situations where the people did not wish to be observed, let alone filmed (Mead, 1974). Although at the time these practices seemed normal, it would be unthinkable to proceed in this manner today. It was felt that, rather than trying to film people without their knowing it, a collaborative approach should be developed. The subject should no longer be treated like a lab animal that one observes from behind a camera lens, but as a partner collaborating in the research process.

From objectivity to subjectivity in visual descriptions Initially, anthropologists invested pictures with a view to obtaining a more objective means of recording their observations, and in this way expel subjectivity from their field notes. But the objectivity of pictures was very quickly called into question. It appeared, over time, that images were no more transparent than text notes.

The epistemological and methodological evolutions of visual anthropology Mead (1974) defined visual anthropology as the study of man based on what is offered to vision alone

The contribution made by visual anthropology to the study of consumption behavior

65

It can be said that any visual description is selective and incomplete insofar as it adheres to the laws of exclusion and overload, which state that showing one thing means simultaneously hiding another (law of exclusion) and also that showing one thing means simultaneously showing something else as well (law of overload) (de France, 1994). Therefore, no description can be either exhaustive or completely precise. Restricted on both sides by this goal for both richness and precision, the anthropologist is obliged to make choices regarding framing, focus, length of shot, angle, scenes and individuals to be photographed or filmed, etc. These choices can create optical illusions or conceal facts, therefore deceiving our understanding (MacDougall, 2006). Another consideration was that a description is shaped by its interactive context. This is influenced by interaction between the anthropologist and his informants (social environment) and objects (material environment), but also by the observers own culture. Observation is therefore rooted in a social context, cultural conventions, collective norms and each individuals personal experiences, all of which necessarily affect the description. The final consideration was that a description is distorted by the games played by the participants. Aware that they are being observed, the informants intervene in the image production process by playing self-projection games designed to control the way they show themselves (Conord, 2002). Barthes tells us: As soon as I feel I am being observed by the camera, everything changes: I begin to pose, I instantly create another body for myself, I metamorphose into a picture ahead of time [...]. In front of the camera, I am simultaneously the person I think I am, the person I would like people to believe I am, the person the photographer believes I am, and the person he is using to exhibit his art (Barthes, 1980, pp. 25-29). In this way, all agreed to admit to the subjectivity of visual description. A photograph or video is not a copy or mirror of the world, but a description of something created by someone. It is a representation a person makes for themselves of the world (Worth, 1981). An image must be considered a dynamic interaction between the photographer, the spectator and the image. Meaning is constructed actively and not received passively. An image is polysemic, capable of generating multiple meanings (Barthes, 1980).

From erasing to affirming the anthropologists presence in the research Behind the effacing camera, the ethnologist sought to erase his own presence from the research. It seems unrealistic, however, to think that people can forget the camera. The feeling of intrusion is likely to subside over time but can never disappear completely. Whatever the case, the simple presence of an observer is disturbing in itself, whether he has a camera or not. The ethnographer does not in fact consider himself as an objective witness observing objects, but rather a subject observing other subjects in the context of an experiment in which the observer himself is observed (Laplantine, 2005). The ethnographer is not, and does not want to be, invisible. He is not an indigenous person, a native; he is, and will remain, a foreigner, regardless of what he wants or the way he behaves to integrate and ground himself in the subjects culture (Copans, 2002). This means that all forms of ethnographic observation are imperfect, if only because of disturbance arising from the simple presence of an observer. Therefore, sooner or later, the anthropologist is led to reflect upon his status and the observerobserved relationship, whatever tools he may be using (speech, writing, video or still camera). However, the disturbance the ethnographers presence imposes on what he observes, far from being considered an epistemological obstacle that should be neutralized, is an infinitely rich source of knowledge (Laplantine, 2005). Conscious of the disturbance caused by his very presence, the anthropologist must seek to personally place himself at the heart of the observation. The anthropologist should not try to escape but, on the contrary, he should accept his status as a voyant-visible, to use the expression by MerleauPonty. One must try to go from an outsider looking in to an insider engaging in reciprocal observation. This viewpoint represents a fundamental break away from positivist conceptions based on the principle of data being collected by an absolute observer external to the phenomenon being studied (Laplantine, 2005). Rather than trying to hide oneself in an apparent attempt to make people forget the camera, and particularly the ethnologist, it is better to accept the presence of these two elements and continue working, fully aware of the situation. Rather than giving

66

Delphine Dion

people the impression of being filmed unwittingly and without having a real understanding of the way filming is being carried out, the camera should be placed at the center of the interaction. The purpose of this is not to question the way the camera changes behavior, but to film interaction in the presence of the camera, while remaining conscious of the distortion it brings (Young, 1974). Consequently, the study of mankind through pictures (photographic or video) represents not only the study of filmable mankind able to be filmed or photographed but also of filmed mankind, as it is shown by images. Visual anthropology therefore encompasses both the study of man captured by the image and the image of filmed man. This concept is the basis for Claudine de Frances (1994, p. 6) definition of visual anthropology: man as he is captured on film, in the unity and diversity of ways in which he exhibits his actions, his thoughts, and his milieu. Film and photography are, at the same time, both tool and field of research. Most anthropologists are attached to the first aspect and seek to complete their written notes with visual ones. Others search more deeply into the staging of reality and try to use the image in a more reflexive manner.

THE IMAGE AS A TOOL

better understand the uses of products/services: analyze the user manuals of products/services (location, time and frequency of use, users, functions used, use, difficulties of use, understanding of instructions for use, maintenance method, place kept, etc.), detect misuse or dangerous use of products, understand the relationship with products/services (rituals, importance and status of object for the user, how the product is displayed, etc.), analyze the social interaction surrounding the product/service (nature of interaction, status and roles of individuals, etc.); analyze behavior in a commercial setting (exploration of commercial setting, manipulation of products, organization of waiting periods, interaction with contact personnel and other customers, etc.). This type of information can allow marketers to understand the sociocultural context of a market, to identify areas of innovation (new products/services, new functions, new design for a space, etc.), to test prototypes and identify the best communication techniques for encouraging consumers to adopt a product/service. To create a visual description, the researcher can use the inventory technique and draw up the most exhaustive list possible of elements noted in the area of research, or use a video or still camera to identify the remarkable elements.

In this first approach, video and still cameras are used to obtain a visual description of a research area. In marketing research studies, the use of visual descriptions appears extremely promising as these allow the analysis of real behavior in its natural setting. This means we can go above and beyond statistical data and laboratory observations. More specifically, visual descriptions may be used to: explore the lifestyles of a consumer community or a marketing target group (activities, interests, reference universe, lifestyle, identity data, etc.); collect information in situations where there is significant distortion of statistical data: study of target groups that are difficult to question (children and teenagers, for example), or on sensitive or politically incorrect subjects;

Drawing up an inventory of social and cultural practices The researcher takes photographs to establish the most exhaustive list possible of the social and cultural practices of a given group of people. The inventory may be statistical, when it deals with objects; or dynamic, when it is centered on social interaction.

Statistical inventory Photography is used to create a list of the number and type of objects owned and their uses. This technique allows a visual representation of the way these objects are related to one another, where they are positioned in the space and how they are displayed.

The contribution made by visual anthropology to the study of consumption behavior

67

These spatial configurations give us an understanding of the cultural and social patterns of the inhabitants.3 When compiling this inventory, the photographer may either take an exhaustive number of shots of the phenomenon or take sample shots. Collier (1974) adopted this method in order to gain an understanding into the process of acculturation and adapting to a sedentary lifestyle of a group of American Indians in San Francisco. He photographed the inside of 22 houses (living room, kitchen and bedrooms) and then listed each object in an observation table in the following categories: furniture, organization of space, domestic appliances, literature, art, music, sports, games, Christian religion and Indian objects. Collier was then able to carry out one analysis per household and per consumption universe. This type of inventory can be replicated on several occasions in the space and over time. In this way, the evolution of a phenomenon can be studied over time (Collier, 1974).

The dynamic inventory has been called into question largely because of the ethical and epistemological limitations mentioned earlier. Anthropologists therefore generally prefer to adopt a more participative form of visual description.

Creating a videographic account In the tradition of ethnographic descriptions, video and still cameras are used like visual notepads. The aim is to achieve a richer, more complete and more dynamic description of the research field than the traditional ethnographic description recorded with pen and paper. Compared to traditional ethnographic descriptions, visual descriptions have undeniable qualities. First, the description they give is irrefutable in that the images are guarantees of the objects authenticity. They demonstrate that the object was real, that it did exist (Barthes, 1980). Second, ethnographic descriptions mediated by a video or still camera provide an almost continuous description, contrary to the process of perceiving something with the eye, which is merely a mental construction that uses a scanning technique to gather information and is relatively imperfect. In this context, the video or still camera becomes a palliative accompaniment, or a prolongation of the human eyes perceptions and the observation process (Copans, 2002). The continuity of audiovisual observation is only limited by the size of the cameras memory and the life of its battery. Discontinuity becomes a choice most of the time, whilst in direct observation this is restricted because of the physiological limits of those involved. Third, photos and videos, as material objects, supports or traces, allow the observer to survey the research area several times. Unlike a traditional observation situation, the analyst can go back to the image as often as he wishes. Fourth, visual description allows the researcher to concentrate on the details, details which are all too often missed in on-site note taking, which is necessarily quick and distorting and follows the movement of visual perception, omitting surplus gestures and insignificant moments (Piette, 1992). Visual description, therefore, allows us to pay particular attention to describing human actions and interactions which are not directly observable through the naked eye. Video and still cameras provide a better

Dynamic inventory Inventories may also be of a more dynamic nature and represent a sociometric analysis (Collier, 1974). These techniques provide information not only on social structures but also on the dynamics of social interaction and action. In this technique, the researcher seeks to understand the subjects relationship with space (the way the individuals use and divide up the space) and any social interaction (the way the subjects behave together and coordinate their actions). The researcher may choose to take shots freely in time and space, or take shots from a fixed location at regular intervals (if working with a still camera) or film continuously (if working with a video camera) to record the events playing out naturally and spontaneously in front of the lens. However, although the inventory is relatively well suited to material objects (statistical inventory), it has been widely criticized for studying social interaction.

3. Aerial photographs can complete this inventory. They provide a greater understanding of the relationship between ecology and the habitat, and give an insight into the overall social practices and use of space (Collier and Collier, 1967; Harper, 1997).

68

Delphine Dion

analysis of collective, complex, technical and timeintensive events (Copans, 2002). Traditionally, the researcher has a choice of taking unstructured shots or of structuring these around a script. He may also prefer to have the subjects take the shots themselves.

Unstructured photographing and filming Unstructured shooting is like taking written notes. It is based on a selection process. The anthropologist doesnt restrict himself to recording what unfolds naturally or spontaneously in front of his lens but attempts, rather, to work more in the line of taking text notes. The aim is no longer to make pictures an objective means of recording (given that this is not logical in any case), but rather to use the image like a pen and allow all its subjectivity to lie with the means of recording itself (Piette, 1992). When an anthropologist goes into the field, he observes different types of behavior, takes notes and establishes inferences based on his experience and the notes he took in the field. He then publishes the conclusions of his study and not the notes themselves. During this process, he is led to determine a certain number of priorities concerning the interest of the events and to concentrate more on certain elements in order to provide a more detailed description of them. Visual description must follow the same logic. Video and still cameras are not used to follow any particular sampling. Quite the opposite, they are used deliberately to pinpoint remarkable actions, that is, the actions and interactions that the ethnologist wishes to study in more detail. The camera should not be kept in the background or project a distant panorama of human actions, but should be close to the action and be inserted into the heart of the event so as to make it more intimate (Young, 1974). The film must try to mimic direct observation. Film description can be either micro-descriptive (hinged on the detail of each action) or macrodescriptive (focused on the ensemble of actions or facts). If the spirit of the description remains, the latter changes according to scale (de France, 1994). Microdescription possesses immense internal autonomy (intra-cinematic): the film is almost enough in itself and doesnt require a commentary within the film.

On the other hand, macro-description is often subject to external dependence (extra-cinematic) on other forms of expression in order to create a link between the different events that have been filmed. The anthropologist leaves his anonymity behind him and reveals himself to the spectator. He shares his opinions and questions concerning his methodological and technical options when filming or photographing (Ruby, 2005). He attempts to be as transparent as possible in terms of any illusions created by the presentation (by indicating scenes which have been deliberately hidden or which cannot be shown) in order to present the making and editing of the film as objectively as possible (de France, 1994). Several marketing researchers have collected their field data by means of visual description. In their Consumer Behavior Odyssey, Belk, Wallendorf and Sherry granted a significant amount of space to visuals. During their travels across several American states, they took 800 pages of notes, 3,500 photographs and recorded 60 hours of video (Wallendorf, 1987). Instead of concentrating on a particular site or exploring it exhaustively as ethnologists traditionally do, they preferred to enlarge the context of their study and therefore vary it. They were interested in American consumption as a whole, including a wide range of consumption activities, and therefore selected a group of locations with the aim of including several contrasting situations. They then performed two types of data triangulation: an inter-researcher triangulation to compare the three researchers analyses and an inter-support triangulation which brought visual and textual data into perspective. Based on this fieldwork, they analyzed a certain number of elements linked to consumption situations (Belk, Wallendorf and Sherry, 1989). Research that has used a similar approach includes Pealozas (1999) study of Nike Town, where she completed her text description with a visual description of the consumers environment, or Ladweins (2002) study of the spatial strategies of holidaymakers around a hotel swimming pool. During his observation process, Ladwein photographed several instances of remarkable behavior with a view to closely examining the interaction between the holidaymakers and their process of space appropriation.

The contribution made by visual anthropology to the study of consumption behavior

69

Photographing and filming structured around a script In transposing the principles of visual anthropology to sociology, sociologists modified practices in the field. Based on the principle that ones concepts are what direct the act of photographing or filming (Becker, 1974), shooting should follow a more structured research protocol and be based on a sort of script of the shots the film-maker wishes to record. To begin with, the researcher dissects the issue and identifies the various underlying research questions he wishes to find an answer to. This body of questions then serves as a sort of guide to the photographic images; a picture is taken in order to answer one of the questions asked. This process of collecting photos is therefore a highly strategic exploration placed in the context of precise theoretical questions. Its goal remains to make pictures the incarnation of sociological concepts. The process involves continuous interaction between the research area and the formulation of ideas, in the sense that the script is both flexible and interactive, and in this way is constantly evolving as the subject changes. As the photos are collected, new questions emerge, either more precise, or radically new, and this gives rise to new conceptual approaches, which in themselves allow the script to be reformulated (Suchar, 1997). It is therefore much more than a simple guide to visual interviews. In marketing research and studies, this approach could be an extremely useful means of exploring a given area of study, because it continuously dissects and refines an issue as the visual elements are gathered. This constant contact with the field allows a more and more detailed understanding of the consumption behavior observed.

Having your subjects take visual notes In order to better understand the way individuals perceive their environment, ethnologists have sometimes chosen to give the video or still camera to their subjects and asked them to create a visual account of their life story (photographic biography), a specific part of their life (Mizen, 2005, or even to translate certain concepts into images (Beilin, 2005). This method of collecting visual data has proven extremely rich because two people from two diffe-

rent cultures looking at the same scene dont necessarily see the same things. This is because the way we see things depends on our environment; we learn to see the things we need to see. In an unfamiliar area of experience, the common properties of its constituents predominate so much that they completely obscure their differences. (...) A farmer, shepherd or zoo-keeper sees a distinct individual in each of his animals, whilst, for the uninitiated, sheep are sheep and monkeys are monkeys. (Arnheim, 1969, p. 175). Over time, interest and experience teach us how to look. To look well is something that must be learned; only then will we be able to make initial abstraction more acute and increase our degree of differentiation between things (Arnheim, 1969). It thus follows that when the camera is entrusted to a person from the community, this person is likely to photograph things a foreigner would not even notice, and similarly, the foreigner may focus on things that are not necessarily significant to the members of the community. This technique excludes information on a culture generated by external observers (records about culture) and prefers recording of the culture by the indigenous individuals themselves (records of culture), therefore allowing the way that different groups structure and represent their environment to be appreciated (Worth, 1981). The pictures produced by the informants represent their subjective vision of the world, and this, in turn, becomes the object of the analysis. The interpretation of these images must necessarily be done by the subjects themselves and under no circumstances by the researcher. Collecting photos and videos can also be done via the Internet (Kozinets, 2002). Personal Internet sites, blogs and webcam sites are indeed bursting with photos and videos posted online by cyber surfers across the globe, and these forums give access to their behavior in both public and private domains. The Internet certainly facilitates the collecting process significantly, but also has several disadvantages. On the one hand, it is very difficult to get feedback from the individuals in the images in order to understand their context and decipher them; and on the other hand, it is nearly impossible to follow any particular sampling method. For example, by using real estate sites, one can gather masses of photos of the insides of houses, but without any communication with the owners, we cant learn much about their decorating choices, their relationship to their environment or their lifestyles.

70

Delphine Dion

Several marketing researchers have chosen to give the camera to their informants so that they may collect the images themselves, and it was in this vein for a study on consumption rituals that Wallendorf and Arnould (1991) asked students to photograph their Thanksgiving celebrations. Each student then arranged their photos in chronological order and placed each one in a table under the following categories: individuals, objects, behavior, proxemics, location, type of shot. Wallendorf and Arnould then added their own personal comments on each photograph. This data provided additional information to the themes which had emerged in previous in-depth interviews and observations (participative and nonparticipative), particularly in terms of clothing, pets, the presentation of the table and the proximity relationships of the individuals according to their status in the family. A textual analysis based on these data then identified recurring behavior and key words for each context. Donnenfeld and Goodhand (1998) used a similar research method in order to understand the ways children receive and represent their environment. The photo-biographies created by groups of children aged 7-8 and 11-12 helped provide new insight into conflicts between the protected and secure world of childhood and the adult world; the world of freedoms and responsibilities. A final example of this visual data collection technique is Warrens (2005) study of the way individuals perceive their work environment.

because they didnt want to. Subjects indeed find it quite difficult to speak about the mundane; and when they speak about the out-of-the-ordinary, they tend to focus on a certain number of salient aspects and go into great detail over them, while forgetting to mention the surrounding elements. This exchange session with the subjects looking at the images (representing them in specific situations) may be more or less structured.

Non-structured interviewing centered on images Anthropologists generally organize a free discussion centered on the images taken during research (Collier, 1974; Mizen, 2005). During a study of the Red Mesa swap market in New Mexico, Belk, Sherry and Wallendorf (1988) took photos on-sight and later came back to the market to show the stallholders their photos of them. This technique allowed them to create a solid foundation for their interviews based on the real-life experience of the informants and to encourage them to talk without having to ask them questions. McGrath, Sherry and Heisley (1993) also used this research method in an ethnographical context to research a weekly market; as did LaTour, Henthorne and Braun-LaTour (2003) to explore the behavior of cigar smokers; and Banister and Booth (2005) in a study on young children with a view to developing a new study methodology for children.

Organizing an exchange mediated by the image Ethnographic description can be enriched by feedback from informants on images. This exchange about the film generates a greater and more precise understanding of the way subjects perceive their world and allows us to share the reality of their visual context (Hall, 1967). Observing peoples reactions when they look at photos or film of themselves gives us a better understanding of the way subjects perceive their physical and social environments, as well as their activities. This exchange mediated by the image also gives us new insight because it brings up things which were not otherwise expressed because the individuals didnt pay attention to them, either because they didnt see the point in talking about these events or

Interviewing organized around processes of categorization (photo-elicitation) Sociologists use a more structured type of interview where photography is used to update the processes of individual categorization (photoelicitation). This approach is based on the theory of personal construct which states that our understanding of the world is shaped by the way individuals perceive events, others and situations (Beilin, 2005). These unique constructs, based on each persons experiences, are rooted in the values of the individual and are unique and exclusive to each person. In this technique, photography becomes the vehicle for eliciting the structure of these personal constructs. They are first categorized and ordered during a process called laddering. This can be achieved either by the

The contribution made by visual anthropology to the study of consumption behavior

71

subjects themselves (auto-categorization or autodriving) (Suchar, 1997; Beilin, 2005), or by the photographer, in which case the subjects validate his interpretation (hybrid categorization) (Schwartz, 1989). The technique then uses images during interviews to discover the way subjects perceive and structure the phenomena around them. Heisley and Levy (1991) used this photo-elicitation technique to analyze eating practices during the preparation and participation of a family dinner. More specifically, the study tried to better understand the role and status of each family member, the uses of food products, objects used during the preparation and participation of the meal, ways of preparing the meal and family interaction throughout the process. They spent three evenings with three families and took 400 photographs (172, 103 and 125 photos, respectively, for families 1, 2 and 3). Approximately 15 photos per family were then selected. These photos were chosen because they showed activities which were characteristic of those evenings. Each family then looked at the photos concerning them (respectively, 17, 14 and 10). The photos were presented to them in chronological order and the participants were asked to comment on each. Based on the individuals reactions to the photos, Heisley and Levy were able to analyze the use of products in a natural context and the roles and interactions within these families. This research method was repeated by Rosenbaum (2005) to study the way consumers interpret the presence of symbolic objects in sales locations and the way these objects affect consumers behavior. Holbrook et al. (1998, 2001) propose a hybrid methodology which combines photo-reporting and individual feedback from informants on their photographs, and collective reflection centered on non-personal photographs with the aim of developing a better understanding of consumption experiences. This research method begins with a photo-report, where informants are invited to illustrate consumption experiences using photographic images organized into very general themes: What New York means to me (Holbrook and Kuwahara, 1998) or What happiness means to me (Holbrook et al., 2001). The photographs are then individually commented on by the informants, which allows themes to emerge inductively based on the informants photos and comments, rather than deductively, based on a preconceived categorization. The process ends with collective reflection centered on the photos and comments collected in phases

one and two so as to compile a collective photographic essay which endeavors to present a panorama of the themes analyzed. This research method requires the active participation of informants, whose status goes from interviewees to collaborators. The collective photographic essay allows an in-depth exploration of consumption experiences through the eyes of the informants themselves. From these examples, we can see that visual anthropology methodologies are starting to develop in marketing research. The image is considered less and less as a methodological adjunct and more as a research material in its own right. Research studies carried out in marketing based on photo and video recordings have made it possible to study new aspects of consumption behavior: the sacred, rituals, appropriation of space, social interaction during consumption processes, use of products, the relationship with objects, etc. Video and still cameras are used to record social behavior and interaction, and preserve details. The image is used as a tool in order to refine ethnographic field description. It is considered as a machine observation of consumption facts and assists in analyzing the temporal flow of consumption activities, identifying culturally significant moments and studying spatial behavior and personobject interaction (Arnould and Wallendorf, 1994). Visual descriptions of consumption behavior are effective and rich. They constitute a more finished form of ethnographic description than the written variant, in that they provide a more complete description (animated and with sound). They allow a considerable mass of information to be recorded, compared to written note taking, and any gaps may be later filled in in writing. However, visual description, whether it be a photographic inventory or visual note taking, is based on a realistic and instrumental conception of film. The anthropologist makes a visual recording with the intention of analyzing the images later on (El Guindi, 2004). Visual description is therefore only a variant of the anthropology of words, to use Meads (1974) term. It uses precisely the same approach as traditional anthropology (MacDougall, 2006). In the 1980s and the 1990s, debates arose in anthropological circles concerning phenomenology and the issues of experience and the senses, which, under the impetus of first Jean Rouch then David MacDougall, gave way to a more reflexive and subjective form of visual anthropology (Pink, 2006).

72

Delphine Dion

THE IMAGE AS A FIELD OF RESEARCH

The model of traditional anthropology initiated by Malinowski in the 1920s was greatly criticized during the 1960s because of the absence of a reciprocal relationship between the giver and receiver of information (Copans, 2002). Postmodern approaches called the reality/interpretation, fact/representation and observer/observed dualities into question. In the movement of postmodern anthropology, initiated by Clifford and Marcus, ethnography was no longer to be considered as the experience and interpretation of another circumscribed reality, but rather as a constructive negotiation involving at least two conscious politically significant subjects (Clifford, quoted by Copans, 2002, p. 101). They suggested the development of new experiential, interpretive, dialogical and polyphonic styles. Anthropological knowledge based on a systematic description therefore lost its authority to an ethnographic description based more on experience (Pink, 2006). Jean Rouch is considered by all as the father of this new visual anthropology. He completely changed the role of the camera and the image: henceforth, the camera was a participant and a collaborator.

The camera as a participant The camera is no longer a recording tool; it becomes a field of research. The anthropologist is no longer considered as the man behind the camera merely recording the scene unfolding before his eyes. He is no longer trying to be forgotten, to be an invisible observer or a neutral narrator. Henceforth, the camera is placed at the heart of the action, in which it becomes an active player. The idea of the camera as a participant appeared in the 1920s in a film by Robert Flaherty on the life of the Eskimos. In contrast to the colonial approaches of the time, he didnt film the Eskimos as things so much as Nanook, an Eskimo as a person. Flaherty tried to get closer to this man in order to trace his daily life. He didnt simply follow him around filming him, but rather engaged him in dialogue and asked him to collaborate closely with the ethnogra-

phical portrait he was undertaking. Together, they created a presentation of real situations based on authentic reconstructions of reality, in which Nanook plays Nanook. Together, they made the film Nanook, which tells the story of a mans struggle against nature for survival (Rouch, 1974). This experience laid the foundations for dialogic anthropology and the coming together of perceptions. During the same period, Dziga Vertov tried to film the Russian revolution. His goal was not to film great moments in history but the small elements of reality, according to a principle that he called KI N O K , or cine-eye. The idea was to show the world as his eye saw it. He compared the camera to his eye, which he considered as a sort of omniscient mechanical machine that records everything it sees. Vertov tried all possible filming techniques to achieve and record reality in movement: a truth in movement (de Brigard, 1974). These two pioneers introduced two new practices: Flaherty; participation and Vertov; spontaneity. However, these innovations remained buried for several decades. It was Jean Rouch who exhumed them in the 1950s to give birth to a new visual anthropology in which the image was used in a more subjective and reflexive way so as to better describe and understand the sensory experiences of the Other. This evolution was made possible by emerging new technologies, particularly the portable video camera, which fundamentally changed the role of the camera and the ethnologist. Using the camera in a fixed position meant that you had to place yourself outside the action and use zoom effects to compensate for your observations rigidity. It reinforced the sensation of voyeurism. The camera was like a surveillance camera whose task was to record the facts and gestures of each person, and was often seen as a violation of privacy. With the advent of new lightweight, portable video cameras, the anthropologist could now place himself at the heart of the action and bring down the invisible wall between the observer and the observed. The principle developed by Rouch, which he called cine-trance by analogy with the trance-like state often experienced by the cameraman, consists of filming not rationally but emotionally, following emotional moods as they develop and change throughout the process. The film-maker goes into a cine-trance which places him in the center of the action (Colleyn,

The contribution made by visual anthropology to the study of consumption behavior

73

2004). He falls into synchrony with the individuals being filmed and bases himself in the harmony of the scene to incorporate the body of the others (MacDougall, 2006). The images are affected as much by the person behind the camera is by those in front of it. In Chronique dun t (1961), Jean Rouch becomes an actor behind the camera. He is integrated into the action. We can feel his presence through his voice and his responses to his subjects (MacDougall, 1974). In La chasse au lion (1967), Rouch is not an observer of the lion hunt but a hunter in his own right. He explains that this comes from the fact that Damour, Moussa, the others and myself participated in the adventure of the hunt and followed its rules, i.e., not carrying any weapons and wearing necklaces around our necks to remain invisible. From the moment we begin to play this game, we are hunters. In this film then, we became hunters, we belonged to the group of hunters (Rouch, 1994, p. 163). Rouch not only recorded the comments and reactions of his actors on the screen, as in Jaguar, but also used the presence of the camera to provoke situations and psychological drama, as is the case in La pyramide humaine (1959) (de Brigard, 1974). His camera entered the heart of the action, modified it, provoked it and created the reality described (Colleyn, 2004). This practice fundamentally modified the role of the camera and, consequently, the role of the researcher in the research process. The camera is no longer seen as a surveillance instrument. The ethnographic film is no longer reduced to a simple recording like the bovine eye of a surveillance camera (Aumont, 2006). The camera is integrated and involved in the action as an individual in its own right. The film is a means for the anthropologist to bring to life the experiences he shares with the group hes filming (Rouch, 1974). The elements of one culture are not described in terms of another. The anthropologist tries, via film, to bring the spectator into the experiences of its subjects (MacDougall, 1974). The film-maker must understand and receive the world. He finds himself in a direct and immediate relationship with what will instantaneously become the material of his film. He must do everything at once: see, interpret, adapt, cut, and consequently, edit (Aumont, 2006, p. 121). The ethnographic film is therefore distinguished from a fiction film by the absence of a script and of a director. Reality is always ahead of the film-maker, whereas in

a fiction film it is the film-maker who is ahead of reality, given that he is working from a script (...). With Rouch, filming is half accidental, embracing the whims of an event no one really controls (Aumont, 2006, p. 104). The camera deals more with the individuals than with cultural elements. The individual is at the heart of the film, which means less fragmented sequences and greater interaction with the subjects. The camera is no longer a detached eye but an active participant in the filming; the film must therefore be created by an ethnologist with an extremely important role to play. The film is centered on a sequence of open interaction between the person filming and the people being filmed (Young, 1974). The researcher lays claim to the distinctive nature of his own view, the particular orientation of his personal understanding of what he is showing. In La pyramide humaine, Jaguar and La chasse au lion, Rouch expresses his own vision, his own experience, his own view. Similarly, those who express themselves in his films speak in their own name (Piault, 2004). In all his films, he presents himself as cameraman, interviewer, film-maker and ethnologist (Aumont, 2006). The ethnographer must share his sensory experiences to understand the lifestyles and experiences of the Other. The goal is to first identify the sensory experiences of the Other, then to try to feel them, but also to stress any differences between them and his own. Rouch goes from ethnographic description to describing the subjective content of consciousnesses.

The camera as collaborator For many years, anthropology (in general and visual in particular) was based upon an asymmetrical relationship between the ethnologist and the informants. The ethnographic film was conceived as a description of a cultural group (generally from the third world) by another cultural group (generally American-European). This vision, by definition, created a barrier between the person filming and the people being filmed (MacDougall, 2006). Contemporary visual anthropology seeks to distance itself from this mentality by prioritizing intersubjectivity and collaboration. Collaboration is essential in that the anthropologist must not only be accepted in the community hes studying but must also obtain the collaboration

74

Delphine Dion

of his subjects. It is not simply a matter of gaining their willingness to be filmed but also of motivating them to invest themselves in the research process, above and beyond the actual shooting. To begin the process, an insertion period is necessary to lay the foundation for the filming. Its duration is extremely variable, but in no case should this be decided by the observer. It is the observed who decides. It seems all the more fundamental that the people being filmed are led to collaborate in an extremely active way. Once this is accomplished, it is time to shoot the film. During this phase, collaboration with the informants is all the more important because the aim is not to take pictures but to make pictures or videos (Becker, 1995). The ethnologist does not try to take pictures of the individuals or to film them but rather to make pictures or videos with them. This collaboration with the subjects allows the camera to be directed toward the facts that are important for the actors. Moreover, the individuals being photographed no longer consider the camera a weapon being pointed at them but a tool for interaction with the ethnologist. This expels any sensation of voyeurism or distance. The video or still camera acquires the power to validate the subjects values (Banks, 1995). The study often begins with an impromptu film, and then there is a process of constant back-and-forth between filming and going back over what has been filmed. The actors are invited to comment on the shots taken and this generates new questions and new paths of investigation, which is why it is essential to have a consensual cooperation between the film-maker and his subjects. By alternating sessions of looking at the images, discussions with the informants based on the images and further filming, understanding of the process gradually grows, cinematic description becomes more and more precise and the analysis becomes richer. This dialogue mediated by the image heightens the understanding of reality as much as the way of presenting it through film (choices of scenes to be filmed and edited). One example of where this procedure was used was in Rouchs La chasse au lion: I continuously applied the feedback process, every year coming back with the edited images of what I had filmed in the previous years. I projected the black-and-white copy of the last sequences filmed for the hunters. Basing myself on this projection, I improvised as to what I would film that year. The film was created year after year. After seven years I

stopped, because there was no longer any reason to continue (Rouch, 1974). Henceforth, the ethnographic film must be considered as the communication process between the person filming and the people being filmed. By involving the actors, this technique makes it possible to gather and identify aspects which had previously been neglected, hidden or unsuspected (Copans, 2002). Therefore, collaboration does not consist simply of having individuals react to the images that have been collected, but also of giving them power over the production of the images which will represent them (Pink, 2006). The film-maker and his subjects become partners in interaction in the progression of reciprocal knowledge. Knowledge no longer appears as an ethnographic secret which is stolen then devoured in the occidental temples of knowledge, but is now the result of an endless study in which the studied and the studier take a path together, a shared anthropology (Rouch, 1994). Jean Rouch also invented a new way of filming by turning the laws of visual anthropology on their head (rules which were not appropriate to an anthropological encounter) and creating a brand of anthropology that was interactive, lively and based on exchange (Piault, 2004). Positioning the ethnologist as subject-observer-actor gave visual anthropology a new lease of life as a means of observing and understanding, particularly for grasping the experiences of the Other, i.e., the way the individual perceives his environment and interacts with it, both physically and culturally (MacDougall, 2006). The research methods of contemporary visual anthropology may help us to gain new insights into consumption processes and, more particularly, into consumption experiences, whether these be shopping or usage experiences. The term consumption experience is meant here in its widest interpretation and refers to the real-life experience of the individual in a consumption situation. This can, of course, be based on an extraordinary situation or an ordinary day-today situation. What is important is the analysis of the experience in the situational context (watching a football game, vacuuming, tinkering in the shed, shopping at the supermarket, eating, etc.). From this viewpoint, the study consists of understanding the personal interpretation of consumption experiences (Marion, 2003), i.e., the way individuals relate to their consumption situations, whether in terms of

The contribution made by visual anthropology to the study of consumption behavior

75

purchasing behavior or the behavior surrounding using products and services. The research method developed by Rouch may shed new light on consumption experiences, not by talking about the experience as in the past, but by using a device which records the entirety of the sensory and emotional perceptions of the consumer, and follows his evolution throughout the consumption process. In marketing, to our knowledge, only two researchers have taken up this path. Marcoux and Legoux (2005) were inspired by the methodological principles developed by Jean Rouch to study the experience of marketing activities around Ground Zero. By alternating filming sessions in New York, picture viewing sessions and theoretical reflection, the two researchers explored the commercial activities linked to the sale of souvenirs from September 11 and the perceptions of visitors when confronted with these commercial activities. Their film, Ground zero: a contested market, highlighted the controversial role of commerce in the memory construction process. Anthropologists are also working in this vein. For example, we can cite the ethnographic film made by Mercier (2006) which traces his experiences at Tati, the study conducted by Ibanez-Bueno (2006) on the involvement of the body in webcam communication, or the work of Sarah Pink (2006) on keeping a household. Throughout this last study, conducted in collaboration with the Unilever Research Center, Pink and others made video visits to forty men and women, during which she was able to reconstruct their sensory experiences of their houses and the way they were kept. These video visits made her realize that the feeling of home is not only created by objects but also by sensory experiences (music, smell, light, touch, etc). This illustration gives us a glimpse of visual anthropologys potential to help us understand consumption experiences. Visual anthropology can give us a new vision of consumption behavior by trying to better understand the sensory experiences of consumers, whether from a sales point of view or in relation to using products.

CONCLUSION

Throughout the 20th century, the first visual anthropologists, such as Mead or Collier, tried to make the use of video and photographic images legitimate by engaging in mainstream positivist research, inserting the image in the anthropological approaches of the times. Recently, under the impetus of Jean Rouch and David MacDougall, visual anthropology started to break away from the positivist paradigm and to propose research methods based on a more reflexive and comprehensive epistemology which subordinated factual data and gave precedence to meaning being interpreted by and for the subject (Wunenburger, 2001). This approach changed our general understanding of the image and its status in the research process from the status of a tool to the status of a field of research. The camera is no longer a mere recording device and the anthropologist need no longer be considered as the man behind the camera recording the scenes unfolding before his eyes. He is no longer required to erase his presence, to be an invisible observer or a neutral narrator. Henceforth, the camera is placed at the heart of the action, in which it becomes an active participant. In this way, we have witnessed a transition from a voyeuristic brand of anthropology to a reflexive and collaborative anthropology in which visual anthropology gains new momentum as a method of observing and understanding, particularly as a way of comprehending the experiences of the Other. Until now, the (very few) marketing researchers who have incorporated the image into their research process have essentially followed the first school of thought, i.e., to use video and still cameras as tools. Although this approach has been extremely valuable in that it has allowed the analysis of new facets of consumption behavior, it is also worth considering a more reflexive approach, which brings with it a new understanding of consumption experiences, whether shopping or usage related. This is not a question of simply enriching text and photographic descriptions by adding sound and movement but of completely altering the role of the camera in the marketing research project so as to be more able to comprehend the individuals personal perception of his consumption experiences.

76

Delphine Dion

REFERENCES

Arnheim R. (1969), La pense visuelle, Paris, Flammarion (republished 1976). Aug M. (1994), Pour une anthropologie des mondes contemporains, Paris, Flammarion. Arnould E. and Wallendorf M. (1994), Market-oriented ethnography: interpretation building and marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, 3, 4, 484-505. Aumont J. (2006), Le cinma et la mise en scne, Paris, Armand Colin. Banister E. and Booth G. (2005), Exploring innovative methodologies for child-centric consumer research, Qualitative Market Research: an International Journal, 8, 2, 157-175. Banks M. (1995), Visual research methods, Social Research Update, 11. Barthes R. (1980), La chambre claire Notes sur la photographie, Paris, Gallimard, Le Seuil. Barthes R. (1985), Laventure smiologique, Paris, Le Seuil. Becker H.S. (1974), Photography and sociology, Studies in the Anthropology of Visual Communication, 1, 1, 3-26. Becker H.S. (1995), Visual sociology, documentary, and photojournalism: its (almost) all a matter of context, Visual Sociology, 10, 1-2, 5-14. Becker H.S. (1998), Les ficelles du mtier comment construire sa recherche en sciences sociales, Paris, La Dcouverte. Beilin R. (2005), Photo-elicitation and the agricultural landscape: seeing and telling about farming, community and place, Visual Studies, 20, 1, 56-68. Belk R., Sherry J. and Wallendorf M. (1988), A naturalistic inquiry into buyer and seller behavior at a swap market, Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 4, 449-470. Belk R., Wallendorf M. and Sherry J. (1989), The sacred and the profane in consumer behavior: theodicy on the Odyssey, Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 1, 1-38. Belk R. and Kozinets R. (2005), Videography in marketing and consumer research, Qualitative Market Research: an International Journal, 8, 2, 128-142. Blanchet A. (1997), Dire et faire dire lentretien, Paris, Armand Colin. Bonte P. and Izard M. (2004), Dictionnaire de lethnologie et de lanthropologie, Paris, PUF. Bourdieu P. (1965), Un art moyen essai sur les usages sociaux de la photographie, Paris, Les ditions de Minuit. Ceriani G. (2004), Reprsenter le silence Analyse de la campagne institutionnelle Telecom Italia 2003, Ateliers de smiotique visuelle (Eds. A. Hnault and A. Beyaert), Paris, PUF, 41-51. Collier J. (1974), Photography and visual anthropology, Principles of visual anthropology, Ed. P. Hockings, Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, 235-254.

Collier J. and Collier M. (1967), Visual anthropology photography as a research method, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, (republished The University of New Mexico Press, 1986). Colleyn J.P. (1990), Le film et le texte, La rancune et le prophte, Eds. M. Aug et N. Colleyn, Paris, EHESS, 7-14. Colleyn J.P. (2004), Jean Rouch, presque un homme-sicle, LHomme Revue Franaise danthropologie, 171, 537-542. Comolli A. (1994), Linvestigation filmique des apprentissages, Du film ethnographique lanthropologie filmique, ed. C. de France, Paris, ditions des Archives contemporaines, Ordres sociaux , 3-4, 91-127. Conord S. (2002), Le choix dune image en anthropologie, quest-ce quune bonne photographie ?, Ethnographiques, 2. Copans J. (2002), Lenqute ethnologique de terrain, Paris, Nathan. de Brigard E. (1974), The history of ethnographic film, Principles of visual anthropology, Ed. P. Hockings, Berlin, Mouton de Guyter, 13-43. de France C. (1994), Lanthropologie filmique : une gense difficile mais prometteuse, Du film ethnographique lanthropologie filmique, Ed. C. de France, Paris, Editions des archives contemporaines, Ordres sociaux , 3-4, 5-43. Donnenfeld S. and Goodhand A. (1998), A picture is worth one thousand words, Marketing and Research Today, 26, 1, 4-17. El Guindi F. (2004), Visual anthropology: essential method and theory, Walnut Crek, CA, AltaMira Press. Floch J.-M. (1995), Identits visuelles, Paris, PUF. Hall E. (1968), Proxemics, Current Anthropology, 9, 2-3, 83-95. Hall E. (1967), Foreword, Visual anthropology photography as a research method, Eds. J. Collier and M. Collier, Holt, Rinehart and Winston (republished University of New Mexico Press, 1986). Harper D. (1997), Visualizing structure: reading surfaces of social life, Qualitative Studies, 20, 1, 57-77. Harper D. (2003), Reimagining visual methods: Galileo to neuromancer, Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (Eds. N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln), 2nd edition, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications, 176-198. Heisley D. and D. Levy (1991), Autodriving: a photoelicitation technique, Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 3, 45-46. Heisley D. (2001), Visual research: current bias and future directions, Advances in Consumer Research, 28, 1, 45-46. Heisley D., McGrath M.A. and Sherry J. (1990), An abstract of To everything there is a season: a photo-essay of a farmers market, Advances in Consumer Research, 17, 1, 39-40. Holbrook M., Stephens D.L, Day E., Holbrook S. and Stazar G. (2001), A collective stereographic photo essay on key aspects of animal companionship: the truth about dogs and cats, Academy of Marketing Science Review, 1, 1-16.

The contribution made by visual anthropology to the study of consumption behavior

77

Holbrook M. and Kuwahara T. (1998), Collective stereographic photo essay: an integrated approach to probing consumption experiences in depth, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 15, 3, 201-222. Holbrook M. (2005), Customer value and autoethnography: subjective personal introspection and the meanings of a photograph collection, Journal of Business Research, 58, 1, 45-61. Hudson L. and Ozanne J. (1988), Alternative ways of seeking knowledge in consumer research, Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 4, 508-521. Ibanez Bueno J. (2006), Cration dun hypermdia virtuel et ethnologique lexemple dune recherche sur les internautes suisses et franais, Du cinma ethnographique lanthropologie visuelle, Paris, Muse de lHomme. Kozinets R.V. (2002), The field behind the screen: using netnography for marketing research in online communities, Journal of Marketing Research, 39, 1, 61-72. Laburthe-Torla Ph. and Warnier J.-P. (2003), Ethnographie anthropologie, Paris, PUF. Ladwein R. (2002), Voyage Tikidad : de laccs lexprience de consommation, Dcisions Marketing, 28, 53-64. Laplantine F. (1999), Clefs pour lanthropologie, Paris, Seghers. Laplantine F. (2005), La description ethnographique, Paris, Armand Colin. LaTour M., Henthorne T. and Braun-LaTour K. (2003), Is a cigar just a cigar? A glimpse at the new-age cigar consumer, Academy of Marketing Science Review, 1-13. Malinowski B. (1922), Les Argonautes du Pacifique occidental, Paris, Gallimard (republished 1989). Marcoux J.S. and Legoux R. (2005), Ground zero: a contested market, Consumption Markets and Culture, 8, 3, 241-259. Marion G. (2003), Apparence et identit : une approche smiotique du discours des adolescentes propos de leur exprience de la mode, Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 18, 2, 1-29. Mauss M. (1969), Manuel dethnographie, Paris, Payot. Mead M. and Bateson G. (1942), Balinese character: a photographic analysis, New York, Academy of science. Mead M. (1974), Visual anthropology in a discipline of words, Principles of visual anthropology, Ed. P. Hockings, Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, 3-10. Marteaux S. and Filser M. (2006), Comment renouveler la stratgie marketing ? Quand le cinma peut inspirer les stratges, Dcisions Marketing, 41, 81-85. MacDougall D. (1974, 1994), Beyond observational cinema, Principles of visual anthropology, Ed. P. Hockings, Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, 117-132. MacDougall D. (2006), Film, ethnography, and the senses the corporeal image, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press. McGrath M.A., Sherry J. and Heisley D. (1993), An ethnographic study of an urban periodic marketplace: lessons from the midville farmers market, Journal of Retailing, 63, 3, 280-319.

McGrath M.A. (1989), An ethnography of a store: trappings, wrappings, and rapture, Journal of Retailing, 65, 4, 421-449. Mercier A. (2006), Restitution dune exprience dethnographie filme sur support DVD vido, Du cinma ethnographique lanthropologie visuelle, Paris, Muse de lHomme. Mizen P. (2005), A little light work? Childrens images of their labour, Visual Studies, 20, 2, 124-139. Moles A. (1987), La visualisation thmatique du monde, triomphe du structuralisme appliqu, Cahiers Internationaux de Sociologie, LXXXII, 147-175. Monnet N. and Tovar M. (2006), Essai dethnographie visuelle ou comment cerner le pouls de la place de Catalogne au travers de photographies et dambiances sonores, Du cinma ethnographique lanthropologie visuelle, Paris, Muse de lHomme. Perec G. (1975), Tentative dpuisement dun lieu parisien, Paris, Christian Bourgois diteur. Pealoza L. (1999), Just doing it: a visual ethnographic study of spectacular consumption behavior at Nike Town, Consumption and Culture, 2, 4, 337-400. Piault M.H. (2004), Une attente incessante. Jean Rouch (1917-2004), Cahiers dtudes africaines, XLIV, 3, 175, 493-505. Piette A. (1996), Ethnographie de laction, lobservation des dtails, Paris, Editions Mtaili. Piette A. (1992), Le mode mineur de la ralit paradoxes et photographies en anthropologie, Louvain-la-Neuve, Peeters. Pink S. (2006), The future of visual anthropology engaging the senses, London, Routledge. Rook D. (1985), The ritual dimension of consumer behaviour, Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 3, 251-264. Rouch J. (1994), Le commentaire improvis limage , Du film ethnographique lanthropologie filmique, C. de France, Paris, ditions des Archives contemporaines, 159-166. Rouch J. (1974), The camera and man, Principles of visual anthropology, Ed. P. Hockings, Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, 79-98. Rosenbaum M. (2005), The symbolic servicescape: your kind is welcomed here, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 4, 4, 257-267. Rosenfeld J.-M. (1994), Filmer : une reconversion du regard, Du film ethnographique lanthropologie filmique, C. de France, Paris, ditions des Archives contemporaines, 43-59. Ruby J. (2005), The last 20 years of visual anthropology a critical review, Visual Studies, 20, 2, 159-170. Schouten J. and McAlexander J. (1995), Subcultures of consumption: an ethnography of the new bikers, Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 1, 43-61. Schroeder J. (2002), Visual consumption, London, Routledge. Schwartz D. (1989), Visual ethnography: using photography in qualitative research, Qualitative Sociology, 12, 2, 119-154.

78

Delphine Dion

Suchar Ch. (1997), Grounding visual sociology research in shooting scripts, Qualitative Sociology, 20, 1, 33-55. Tissier-Desbordes E. (2004), Lanalyse de visuels en marketing : pour une complmentarit des principales approches, Dcisions Marketing, 36, 63-74. Thrlemann F. (2004), Blumen-Mythos de P. Klee, Ateliers de smiotique visuelle (Eds. A. Hnault and A. Beyaert), Paris, PUF, 13-40. Wallendorf M. (1987), On the road again: the nature of qualitative research on the consumer behavior odyssey, Advances in Consumer Research, 14, 1, 374-375. Wallendorf M. and Arnould E. (1988), My favorite things: a cross-cultural inquiry into object attachement possessiveness, and social linkage, Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 4, 531-547. Wallendorf M. and Arnould E. (1991), We gather together: consumption rituals of Thanksgiving day, Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 1, 13-31.

Warren S. (2005), Photography and voice in critical qualitative management research, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 18, 6, 861-882. Weakland J. (1974, 1994), Feature films as cultural documents, Principles of visual anthropology, Ed. P. Hockings, Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, 45-67. Wunenburger J.J. (2001), Philosophie des images, Paris, PUF. Winkin Y. (1981), La nouvelle communication, Paris, Le Seuil. Worth S. (1981), Studying visual communication, University of Pennsylvania Press. Young C. (1974), Observational cinema, Principles of visual anthropology, Ed. P. Hockings, Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, 99-113.

Copyright of Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English Edition) is the property of AFM c/o ESCP-EAP and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.