Doing Mental Health Research with Children and Adolescents: A Guide to Qualitative Methods


Michelle O'Reilly & Nicola Parker

  • Citations
  • Add to My List
  • Text Size

  • Chapters
  • Front Matter
  • Back Matter
  • Subject Index
  • SAGE

    SAGE has been part of the global academic community since 1965, supporting high quality research and learning that transforms society and our understanding of individuals, groups, and cultures. SAGE is the independent, innovative, natural home for authors, editors and societies who share our commitment and passion for the social sciences.

    Find out more at:

    Connect, Debate, Engage on Methodspace

    • Connect with other researchers and discuss your research interests
    • Keep up with announcements in the field, for example calls for papers and jobs
    • Discover and review resources
    • Engage with featured content such as key articles, podcasts and videos
    • Find out about relevant conferences and events


    View Copyright Page

    List of Figures and Tables

    • 1.1 Concepts and theory 8
    • 4.1 Process of ethics 42
    • 4.2 Assent form 46
    • 4.3 Section of an information sheet 47
    • 4.4 Confidentiality and the parent information sheet 51
    • 5.1 Generating a research topic 60
    • 6.1 Access process 81
    • 9.1 Communication aids: Faces 140
    • 10.1 Flowchart for naturally occurring data 149
    • 13.1 Guide to doing thematic analysis 201
    • 13.2 Steps in grounded theory 203
    • 13.3 Steps involved in IPA 206
    • 13.4 Decision-making about NVivo 213
    • 14.1 Supervision notes 225
    • 15.1 Press release 242
    • 1.1 Audit, service evaluation and research 4
    • 1.2 Differences 6
    • 2.1 Practical hints for performing literature searches 19
    • 2.2 Initial steps for critiquing a paper 23
    • 2.3 Main steps for critiquing a paper 23
    • 2.4 Final steps for critiquing a paper 24
    • 3.1 Four issues of dual role 30
    • 3.2 Potential problems in the dual relationship 31
    • 3.3 Power relationships 34
    • 4.1 Approaches to ethics 43
    • 4.2 Consent 45
    • 4.3 Designing an information sheet for children 47
    • 5.1 Possible audiences 65
    • 5.2 Tips for proposals 70
    • 5.3 Benefits of a pilot study 75
    • 6.1 Forms of communication 83
    • 6.2 Barriers to getting through the ‘gate’ related to the institution 84
    • 6.3 Barriers to getting through the ‘gate’ related to research 85
    • 6.4 Communicating with children 88
    • 6.5 Communicating with children with physical impairments (Benjamin & MacKinlay, 2010) 89
    • 6.6 Children who may have difficulty understanding/concentrating 89
    • 7.1 Planning recruitment through schools 99
    • 7.2 Recruiting through schools 99
    • 7.3 Protecting physical safety when planning 109
    • 7.4 Protecting physical safety when preparing data collection 109
    • 7.5 Protecting physical safety when collecting the data 109
    • 7.6 Protecting emotional safety 111
    • 8.1 Administering questionnaires to children 116
    • 8.2 Tips for designing your questionnaire 118
    • 8.3 Tips for designing your questions 118
    • 8.4 Benefits and limitations of questionnaires with children 121
    • 8.5 Four types of observation 122
    • 8.6 Types of researcher notes (Willig, 2001) 123
    • 9.1 Types of interview 128
    • 9.2 Tips for planning 131
    • 9.3 Tips for getting started 132
    • 9.4 Tips for conducting your qualitative interview with children 132
    • 9.5 Tips for preparing focus groups with children 133
    • 9.6 Tips for starting focus groups with children 134
    • 9.7 Practical tips for conducting focus groups with children 134
    • 9.8 Tips for developing an interview/group schedule 136
    • 10.1 The advantages and disadvantages of using solicited diaries 158
    • 11.1 The advantages and disadvantages of using internet questionnaires with children 166
    • 11.2 Asynchronous and synchronous methods 166
    • 11.3 Practical tips for using email methods with children 168
    • 11.4 The advantages and disadvantages of using Instant Messaging 169
    • 11.5 Discussion boards, blogs and chat rooms 171
    • 11.6 Ethical challenges of social networking site research 175
    • 11.7 Practical ethical considerations for chat rooms, blogs and discussion boards 176
    • 12.1 The benefits and limitations of audio 180
    • 12.2 The benefits and limitations of video 181
    • 12.3 Emotional challenges of using video with children 184
    • 12.4 Practical challenges of using video with children 185
    • 13.1 The three core concepts 209
    • 14.1 Lousy research supervision (Magnuson et al., 2000) 223
    • 15.1 Practical tips for planning (Creswell, 2005) 229
    • 15.2 Practical tips for writing 230
    • 15.3 Specific writing issues for a paper 230
    • 15.4 Preparing slides (Ranse & Hayes, 2009) 234
    • 15.5 Some dos and don'ts of presenting 235
    • 15.6 First sections 238
    • 15.7 Main body 238
    • 15.8 Final sections 239

    About the Authors

    Dr Michelle O'Reilly is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Leicester, for the Greenwood Institute of Child Health. Michelle has an interest in various areas of child mental health, undertaking research in autism, self-harm, family therapy and mental health assessments. She favours the methods of discourse and conversation analysis. Michelle is the director of two language-based research groups. The Language and Interaction Research Assembly (LIRA) is a University of Leicester interdisciplinary group who utilise a range of qualitative language-based approaches. Conversation Analysis Research in Autism (CARA) is an international group who utilise discourse and conversation analytic approaches in the study of autism. Michelle has recently published two books: Research with Children: Theory and Practice (Sage) and A Practical Guide to Mental Health Problems in Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder (JKP).

    Dr Nicola Parker is a Senior Clinical Psychologist currently working for the Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. She has clinical experience in the assessment and implementation of therapeutic interventions with children and families, particularly those in Looked After settings including foster care and adoptive families. Nicola also has a wealth of practical experience working with children and young people for more than two decades as a Youth Worker, School Governor, Business Mentor and Prison Volunteer. In addition she has worked for Relate UK and Samaritans as a project manager developing curriculum for children and training counsellors in working with young people. Before embarking on a Clinical career, Nicola completed a PhD in Psychology to further her research interest in the interactions between adults and children in therapeutic settings. Her research is informed by a social constructionist perspective favouring the analysis of intergenerational interactions in therapy environments using discursive approaches.


    This book is an introductory text to illustrate the key issues faced when undertaking a child mental health research project. It provides an accessible guide through each element of the research process from inception to dissemination/application. It is designed to help students, trainees, researchers, academics and others in health, mental health, social care, education, or other disciplines to plan and undertake a qualitative project. This is a timely text given the growing emphasis within mental health services on evidence-based practice.

    The focus of this book is on doing research with rather than about children, which is congruent with the contemporary perspective of giving children their own ‘voice’ through research. Nonetheless, the importance of doing research with significant adults, including parents and professionals involved in caring for or working with children with mental health difficulties, is considered alongside this. The need for systematic and practical advice for researchers has dictated the focus of each chapter; each of which is filled with helpful tips and advice.


    Throughout the book a number of concepts/terms are employed. To assist you we outline the ways in which these are utilised. For example, where the pronoun ‘we’ is used, we refer to the authors and the pronoun ‘you’ refers to the reader.

    As this book focuses on child mental health research, we recognise the importance of defining the way in which we use the term ‘mental health’. The definition utilised by the World Health Organization (WHO) which is most widely accepted defines mental health as:

    … a state of well-being in which every individual realizes his or her own potential, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can work productively and fruitfully, and is able to make a contribution to her or his community. (WHO, 2011: 1)

    Whilst this applies to mental health in all populations, for children there are some additional specific indicators related to chronological and developmental age. One widely cited definition of child mental health is offered by the Mental Health Foundation (1999) and is used here as a benchmark against which mental health and mental health difficulties are demarcated in this book. The key elements are: to develop psychologically, creatively, spiritually, emotionally and intellectually; to initiate, develop and sustain personal relationships; to enjoy and use solitude; to be aware of others and express empathy; to learn and play; to develop a sense of right and wrong; and to be able to resolve problems and setbacks and learn from them.

    We acknowledge there are a range of different terms used when referring to the absence of positive mental health, including mental illness, mental disorder, mental health problem, mental health difficulty, mental health conditions and mental ill health. Each of these terms tend to be underpinned by different models which dictate the terms favoured, for example, the medical profession may prefer terminology such as ‘illness’. For the purpose of clarity and consistency in relation to conducting research we employ the general term ‘mental health difficulty’.

    Unless otherwise specified, we use the term ‘child/children’ throughout the book as an overarching category which encompasses children of all ages from 0–18 years. Where it is required to differentiate age groups we employ the categories of ‘younger child’, ‘young child’ and ‘older child’ to distinguish chronological age groups, 0–4 years, 5–11 years and 12–18 years respectively.

    The term ‘parent/parents’ is used throughout the book to refer to all adults who have legal responsibility for children, this includes foster parents, adoptive parents, biological parents, step-parents, carers, legal guardians and local authorities.


    We would like to offer our appreciation to several people who have helped to make this book happen. Nadzeya Svirydzenka made an important contribution to the information on transcription by translating Russian data into English and contributed to the interview in the chapter on dissemination. Panos Vostanis also contributed to the transcription detail by translating data into Greek and provided useful comments for the research setting chapter by discussing his work with homeless children. We are very grateful for their time. Nisha Dogra contributed to the interview for the dissemination chapter, discussing the challenges relevant to disseminating to children and we thank her for these insights. Tom Muskett and Jessica Lester also contributed interviews for the book. Tom made a useful contribution in discussing the challenges of occupying dual roles and Jessica talked about her experiences of being reflexive in the research process. We very much appreciate these important discussions. We also thank Victoria Stafford for sharing her insights in conducting pilot studies and offering practical comments on this aspect of the chapter on planning. We thank Arthritis Research UK and Elizabeth Hale for allowing us to copy their press release in the dissemination chapter as this is an especially useful example of this form of dissemination. We want to extend our appreciation and give special thanks to Khalid Karim and Claire Bone for their useful and insightful comments on the book as a whole as we feel that the book is much improved because of it. We also thank the two anonymous reviewers for their suggestions to develop areas within the book and all of their ideas. Of course we thank our partners and families for their personal support during the process of writing, for their patience and understanding. Finally we thank SAGE, for facilitating this book from inception to publication.

    List of Abbreviations

    • CA Conversation analysis
    • CAMHS Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services
    • CBT Cognitive behaviour therapy
    • CRB Criminal Records Bureau (now referred to as DBS – see below)
    • DA Discourse analysis
    • DBS Disclosure and Barring Service
    • DP Discursive psychology
    • GP General Practitioner
    • IPA Interpretative phenomenological analysis
    • OCD Obsessive compulsive disorder
    • RCT Randomised controlled trial
    • SRA Social Research Association
    • UK United Kingdom
    • WHO World Health Organization
  • Glossary

    • Altruism refers to putting the needs of another before one's own; selflessness.
    • Asymmetry refers to two parts not being the same or equal. This links with a power imbalance.
    • Audit a process whereby the auditor measures current practice against a set of standards which have been predefined. Its aim is to establish the extent to which actual practice compares with best practice.
    • Autonomy refers to the individual having independence to make their own choices.
    • Beneficence refers to the act or quality of being kind or doing good.
    • Capacity refers to an individual's ability to make decisions, usually in relation to their developmental and intellectual abilities.
    • Coercion the act of persuading an individual, or forcing them through unethical means.
    • Deductive disclosure this refers to the risk in qualitative research of friends or colleagues of the participants in the data recognising those participants despite the quotations being anonymous.
    • Demographics refers to the statistical data regarding the characteristics of your sample, such as their age, gender and race.
    • Dissemination to disseminate your work means to distribute it so that others may read it.
    • Encryption refers to the process of coding information so that it cannot be viewed by unauthorised persons. Typically this is achieved through passwords.
    • Epistemology epistemology refers to the theory of knowledge and is concerned with what we know, how we know it and who knows it.
    • Exclusion criteria the specific criteria the researcher decides to use to determine whether particular participants should be excluded from the study.
    • Exploitation refers to the act of treating people unfairly or taking advantage of them.
    • Gatekeepers the individuals who have some authority over the children the researcher may want to access. They have the power to grant or refuse access.
    • Generalisability relates to the extent to which the findings are relevant and applicable to other members of the population.
    • Ideology a set of ideas or beliefs that are considered important by a particular group or culture.
    • Inclusion criteria the criteria that are specified by the research which must be present in the participant sample. These are the criteria by which the researcher decides whether a participant is eligible to be included in the study.
    • Likert scale this is a form of asking questions on a questionnaire so that respondents rate their answers in terms of the strength of their agreement. This is a psychometric scale where respondents specify their level of agreement with a statement to capture the intensity of feelings.
    • Mental health a state of being mentally healthy. Mental health refers to a general state of well-being and a freedom from mental illness.
    • Mental illness an impairment of the person's capacity to function; the presence of a mental disorder or condition.
    • Mixed methods a mixed methods design is one whereby the researcher uses both quantitative and qualitative methods in their approach. The results/findings from these two aspects are then combined, integrated or triangulated.
    • Naturally occurring refers to collecting data from natural contexts whereby the event would continue to occur regardless of the involvement of the researcher.
    • Non-maleficence the ethical principle referring to doing no harm to research participants.
    • Ontology an underpinning philosophy, referring to the nature of reality.
    • Paradigm a complicated term which is understood to have various meanings, but can be characterised as a set of beliefs which represent a particular world view.
    • Positivism a position which assumes a relationship between the world and the understanding the research holds of it. It relates to the natural sciences, assuming that there is an objective reality which can be measured.
    • Qualitative research qualitative research is used to explore people's beliefs, experiences and perceptions and is usually conducted with smaller sample sizes. It is concerned with depth of information.
    • Quantitative research quantitative research is based upon scientific principles with an aim to generate large-scale numerical data so that the researcher may predict trends. Quantitative research starts with a hypothesis and seeks to generalise results to wider populations.
    • Rapport the building of a positive relationship between two or more people.
    • Reflexivity refers to the process of actively reflecting upon the role and impact that the researcher has had on the research process. This means that the researcher has to consider the influences upon the data collection and data analysis.
    • Reliability refers to the extent to which the research study could be easily replicated by another researcher.
    • Social constructionism a position that believes things do not pre-exist but that they are co-created in a social, historical and political context.
    • Therapeutic misconception relates to when the participant is not able to understand the difference between the goals of the research and the goals of their treatment and may misunderstand that research does not necessarily have therapeutic benefit. This is particularly concerning in medical trials.
    • Transferability the extent to which the findings from one qualitative research study can be transferred to other settings.
    • Validity refers to the extent to which the researcher has managed to measure what they intended to measure in the study.


    Abiddin, N., Hassan, A. & Ahmad, A. (2009). Research student supervision: An approach to good supervisory practice. The Open Education Journal, 2, 11–16.
    Ahmedani, B., Harold, R., Fitton, V. & Shifflet-Gibson, E. (2011). What adolescents can tell us: Technology and the future of social work education. Social Work Education, 30(7), 830–846.
    Akyol, A. (2008). How to write a paper for publication. International Journal of Human Sciences, 5(2), online.
    Alderson, P. (2004). Ethics. In S.Fraser, V.Lewis, S.Ding, M.Kellett & C.Robinson (eds), Doing research with children and young people. London: Sage.
    Alderson, P. (2005). Designing ethical research with children. In A.Farrell (ed.), Doing research with children and young people (pp. 97–112). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Alderson, P. (2007). Governance and ethics in health research. In M.Saks & J.Allsop (eds), Researching health: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods (pp. 283–300). London: Sage.
    Alderson, P. & Morrow, V. (2004). Ethics, social research and consulting with children and young people. Ilford: Barnardos.
    Aldridge, J. (2007). Picture this: The use of participatory photographic research methods with people with learning disabilities. Disability and Society, 22(1), 1–17.
    Antaki, C. & O'Reilly, M. (in press). Either/or questions in psychiatric assessments: The effect of the seriousness and order of the alternatives, Discourse Studies.
    Atkinson, P. & Coffey, A. (2004). Analysing documentary realities. In D.Silverman (ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (
    Second edition
    ) (pp. 56–75). London: Sage.
    Ayling, R. & Mewse, A. (2009). Evaluating internet interviews with gay men. Qualitative Health Research, 19, 566–576.
    Baez, B. (2002). Confidentiality in qualitative research: Reflections on secrets, power and agency. Qualitative Research, 2(1), 35–58.
    Bagley, S., Reynolds, W. & Nelson, R. (2007). Is a ‘wage-payment’ model for research participation appropriate for children?Pediatrics, 119(1), 46–51.
    Barke, R. (2009). Balancing uncertain risks and benefits in human subjects research. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 34(3), 337–364.
    Barter, C. & Renold, E. (2000). ‘I wanna tell you a story’: Exploring the application of vignettes in qualitative research with children and young people. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 3(4), 307–323.
    Beauchamp, T. & Childress, J. (2008). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (
    Sixth edition
    ). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Bell, A. (2007). Designing and testing questionnaires for children. Journal of Research in Nursing, 12(5), 461–469.
    Bell, L. (1998). Public and private meanings in diaries, in researching family and childcare. In J.Ribbens & R.Edwards (eds), Feminist dilemmas in qualitative research: Public knowledge and private lives (pp. 72–86). London: Sage.
    Benjamin, H. & MacKinlay, D. (2010). Communicating challenges: Overcoming disability. In S.Redsell & A.Hastings (eds), Listening to children and young people in healthcare consultations (pp. 151–168). Oxon: Radcliffe Publishing.
    Beresford, B. (1997). Personal accounts: Involving disabled children in research. New York: Social Policy Research Unit.
    Berger, R. & Paul, M. (2011). Using e-mail for family research. Journal of Technology in Human Sciences, 29, 197–211.
    Bertrand, C. & Bordeau, L. (2010). Research interviews by Skype: A new data collection method. In J.Esteves (ed.), Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Research Methodology for Business and Management Studies (pp. 70–79). Madrid: IE Business School.
    Billig, M., Condor, S., Edwards, D., Gane, M., Middleton, D. & Radley, A. (1988). Ideological dilemmas: A social psychology of everyday thinking. London: Sage.
    Black, N. (1992). The relationship between evaluative research and audit. Journal of Public Health Medicine, 14(4), 361–366.
    Blaxter, L., Hughes, C. & Tight, M. (2001). How to research (
    Second edition
    ). Buckingham: Open University Press.
    Bloor, M., Fincham, B. & Sampson, H. (2007). Qualiti (NCRM) Commissioned inquiry into the risk to well-being of researchers in qualitative research. Cardiff: School of Social Sciences.
    Bloor, M., Fincham, B. & Sampson, H. (2010). Unprepared for the worst: Risks of harm for qualitative researchers. Methodological Innovations, 5(1), 45–55.
    Bogolub, E. & Thomas, N. (2005). Parental consent and the ethics of research with foster children. Qualitative Social Work, 4(3), 271–292.
    Bolger, N., Davis, A. & Rafaeli, E. (2003). Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 579–616.
    Borbasi, S., Chapman, Y. & Read, K. (2002). Perceptions of the researcher: In-depth interviewing in the home. Contemporary Nurse, 14(1), 24–37.
    Bottorff, J. L. (1994). Using videotaped data recordings in qualitative research. In J. M.Morse (ed.), Critical issues in qualitative research methods (pp. 244–261). London: Sage.
    Boud, D., Keogh, R. & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. London: Kogan Page.
    Bourne, P. (2005). Ten simple rules for getting published. PLoS Computational Biology, 1(5), e57: 0341–0342.
    Boyatzis, R. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. London: Sage.
    Brannen, J. (1998). Research note: The study of sensitive topics. Sociological Review, 36, 552–563.
    Branthwaite, A. & Patterson, S. (2011). The power of qualitative research in the era of social media. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 14(4), 430–440.
    Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.
    Brekke, J., Ell, K. & Palinkas, L. (2007). Translational science at the National Institute of Mental Health: Can social work take its rightful place?Research on Social Work Practice, 17(1), 123–133.
    Britten, N. (2000). Qualitative interviews in health care research. In C.Pope & N.Mays (eds), Qualitative research in health care (pp. 11–19). London: BMJ Books.
    Bromley, J., Hare, D., Davison, K. & Emerson, E. (2004). Mothers supporting children with autistic spectrum disorders: social support, mental health status and satisfaction with services. Autism, 8(4), 409–423.
    Bryman, A. (2008). Social research methods (
    Third edition
    ). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Burgess, R. (1981). Keeping a research diary. Cambridge Journal of Education, 11(1), 75–83.
    Burns, E. (2010). Developing email interview practices in qualitative research. Sociological Research Online, 15(4), Art 8, [online journal]. Retrieved from on 15 February 2013.
    Burr, V. (1995). An introduction to social constructionism. London: Routledge.
    Busch, S. & Barry, C. (2007). Mental health disorders in childhood: Assessing the burden on families. Health Affairs, 26(4), 1088–1095.
    Bushin, N. (2007). Interviewing children in their homes: Putting ethical principles into practice and developing flexible techniques. Children's Geographies, 5(3), 235–251.
    Butz, A. & Alexander, C. (1991). Use of health diaries with children. Nursing Research, 40(1), 59–61.
    Cahill, P. & Papageorgiou, A. (2007). Video analysis of communication in paediatric consultations in primary care. British Journal of General Practice, 57, 866–871.
    Cameron, H. (2005). Asking the tough questions: A guide to ethical practices in interviewing young children. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), 597–610.
    Carroll, K., Iedema, R. & Kerridge, R. (2008). Reshaping ICU ward round practices using video-reflexive ethnography. Qualitative Health Research, 18(3), 380–390.
    Carter, B. (2009). Tick box for child? The ethical positioning of children as vulnerable, researchers as barbarians and reviewers as overly cautious. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46, 858–864.
    Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21st century: Applications for advancing social justice studies. In N.Denzin & Y.Lincoln (eds), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (
    Third edition
    ) (pp. 507–535). London: Sage.
    Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: Practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.
    Chenail, R. (2011). Qualitative researchers in the Blogosphere: Using blogs as diaries and data. The Qualitative Report, 16(1), 249–254.
    Chorpita, B. & Regan, J. (2009). Dissemination of effective mental health treatment procedures: Maximizing the return on a significant investment. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47(11), 990–993.
    Christensen, P. (2004). Children's participation in ethnographic research: Issues of power and representation, Children and Society, 18, 165–176.
    Clark, A. (2005). Listening to and involving young children: A review of research and practice. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), 489–505.
    Cleary, M. & Walter, G. (2004). Apportioning our time and energy: Oral presentation, poster, journal article or other?International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 13, 204–207.
    Closs, S. & Cheater, F. (1996). Audit or research – what is the difference?Journal of Clinical Nursing, 5, 249–256
    Coad, J. & Devitt, P. (2006). Research dissemination: The art of writing an abstract for conferences. Nurse Education in Practice, 6(2), 112–116.
    Coad, J. & Lewis, A. (2004). Engaging children and young people in research – Literature review. London: National Evaluation of the Children's Fund. Retrieved from on 13 March 2013.
    Coar, L. & Sim, J. (2006). Interviewing one's peers: Methodological issues in a study of health professionals. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care, 24, 251–256.
    Cocks, A. (2006). The ethical maze: Finding an inclusive path towards gaining children's agreement to research participation. Childhood, 13(2), 247–266.
    Coles, J. & Mudlay, N. (2010). Staying safe: Strategies for qualitative child abuse researchers. Child Abuse Review, 19, 56–69.
    Convery, I. & Cox, D. (2012). A review of research ethics in internet-based research. Practitioner Research in Higher Education, 6(1), 50–57.
    Cook, C. (2011). Email interviewing: Generating data with a vulnerable population. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 68(6), 1330–1339.
    Corbin, J. & Morse, J. (2003). The unstructured interactive interview: Issues of reciprocity and risks when dealing with sensitive topics. Qualitative Inquiry, 9(3), 335–354.
    Corden, A. & Sainsbury, R. (2006). Exploring ‘quality’: Research participants' perspectives on verbatim quotations. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 9(2), 97–110.
    Corsaro, W. (2011). The sociology of childhood (
    Third edition
    ). California: Pine Forge Press.
    Coyne, I. (2010). Accessing children as research participants: Examining the role of gatekeepers. Child: Care, Health and Development, 36(4), 452–454.
    Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (
    Second edition
    ). London: Sage.
    Cresswell, J. (2005). Writing for academic success: A postgraduate guide. London: Sage.
    Cromby, J. & Nightingale, D. J. (1999). What's wrong with social constructionism? In D.Nightingale, and J.Cromby (eds), Social constructionist psychology: A critical analysis of theory and practice (pp. 1–20). Buckingham: Open University Press.
    Cunningham, S. (2004). How to … write a paper. Journal of Orthodontics, 31, 47–51.
    Danby, S., Ewing, L. & Thorpe, K. (2011). The novice researcher: Interviewing young children. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(1), 74–84.
    Davidson, C. (2009). Transcription: Imperatives for research. International Journal of Qualitative Research, 8(2), 35–52.
    Davies, B. (2005). Coercion or collaboration? Nurses doing research with people who have severe mental health problems. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 12, 106–111.
    Davies, H., Nutley, S. & Smith, P. (eds) (2000). What works? Evidence-based policy and practice in public services. Bristol, UK: The Policy Press.
    DeLeeuw, E., Borgers, N. & Smits, A. (2004). Pretesting questionnaires for children and adolescents. In S.Presser, J.Rothgeb, M.Couper, J.Lessler, E.Martin, J.Martin & E.Singer (eds), Methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires (pp. 409–430). New York: John Wiley.
    Department of Health (1999). Research – What's in it for consumers? Report of the Standing Advisory Committee on consumer involvement in the NHS research and development programme. London: Department of Health.
    Devers, K. (1999). How will we know ‘good’ qualitative research when we see it? Beginning the dialogue in health services research. Health Services Research, 34(5), 1153–1188.
    Dickson-Swift, V., James, E., Kippen, S. & Liamputtong, P. (2006). Blurring boundaries in qualitative health research on sensitive topics. Qualitative Health Research, 16(6), 853–871.
    Dickson-Swift, V., James, E., Kippen, S. & Liamputtong, P. (2008). Risk to researchers in qualitative research on sensitive topics: Issues and strategies. Qualitative Health Research, 18(1), 133–144.
    Dixon-Woods, M., Angell, E., Ashcroft, R. & Bryman, A. (2007). Written work: The social functions of Research Ethics Committee letters. Social Science and Medicine, 65, 792–802.
    Dixon-Woods, M., Tarrant, C., Jackson, C., Jones, D. & Kenyon, S. (2011). Providing the results of research to participants: A mixed-method study of the benefits and challenges of a consultative approach. Clinical Trials, 8, 330–341.
    Drew, P. (2006). When documents ‘speak’: Documents, language and interaction. In P.Drew, G.Raymond & D.Weinberg (eds), Talk and interaction in social research methods (pp. 63–80). London: Sage.
    Drew, S., Duncan, R. & Sawyer, S. (2010). Visual storytelling: A beneficial but challenging method for health research with young people. Qualitative Health Research, 20(12), 1677–1688.
    Driessnack, M. (2006). Draw-and-tell conversations with children about fear. Qualitative Health Research, 16, 1414–1435.
    DuBois, J. (2008). Ethics in mental health research: Principles, guidance, and cases. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Duffy, M. (2000). The internet as a research and dissemination resource. Health Promotion International, 15(4), 349–353.
    Dunn, L., Kim, D., Fellows, I. & Palmer, B. (2009). Worth the risk? Relationship of incentives to risk and benefit perceptions and willingness to participate in schizophrenia research. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 35(4), 730–737.
    Duranti, A. (2007). Transcripts, like shadows on a wall. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 13(4), 301–310.
    Eastham, L. (2011). Research using blogs for data: Public documents or private musings?Research in Nursing and Health, 34, 353–361.
    Eder, D. & Corsaro, W. (1999). Ethnographic studies of children and youth: Theoretical and ethical issues. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 28(5), 520–531.
    Edwards, D., Ashmore, M. & Potter, J. (1995). Death and furniture: The rhetoric, politics and theology of bottom line arguments against relativism. History of the Human Sciences, 8(2), 25–49.
    Edwards, D. & Potter, J. (1992). Discursive Psychology. London: Sage.
    Elliott, H. (1997). The use of diaries in sociological research on health experience. Sociological Research Online, 2(2). Retrieved from on 17 March 2013.
    Emmel, N., Hughes, K., Greenhalgh, J. & Sales, A. (2007). Accessing socially excluded people: Trust and the gatekeeper in the researcher-participant relationship. Sociological Research Online, 12(2). Retrieved from doi: 10.5153/sro.1512 on 19 March 2013.
    Etherington, K. (1996). The counsellor as researcher: Boundary issues and critical dilemmas. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 24, 339–346.
    Etherington, K. (2001). Research with ex-clients: A celebration and extension of the therapeutic process. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 29(1), 5–19.
    Etherington, K. (2007). Working with traumatic stories: From transcriber to witness. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 10(2), 85–97.
    Evans, A., Elford, J. & Wiggins, D. (2008). Using the internet for qualitative research. In C.Willig & W.Stainton-Rogers (eds), The Sage handbook of qualitative research in psychology (pp. 315–333). London: Sage.
    Eve, J. (2008). Writing a research proposal: Planning and communicating your research ideas effectively. Library and Information Research, 32(102), 18–28.
    Eysenbach, G. & Till, J. (2001). Ethical issues in qualitative research on internet communities. British Medical Journal, 323, 1103–1105.
    Farquhar, C. & Das, R. (1998). Are focus groups suitable for sensitive topics? In R.Barbour & J.Kitzinger (eds), Developing focus group research: Politics, theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Faulkner, A. (2004). The ethics of survivor research: Guidelines for the ethical conduct of research carried out by mental health service users and survivors. Bristol: Polity Press.
    Fernandez, C., Gao, J., Strahlendorf, C., Moghrabi, A., Davis Pentz, R., Barfield, R., Baker, J., Santor, D., Weijer, C. & Kodish, E. (2009). Providing research results to participants: Attitudes and needs of adolescents and parents of children with cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 27(6), 878–883.
    Field, M. & Behrman, R. (eds) (2004). Ethical conduct of clinical research involving children. Washington: Institute of Medicine, the National Academic Press.
    Fink, A. (2005). Conducting research literature reviews: From the internet to paper (
    Second edition
    ). London: Sage.
    Finlay, L. (2002). ‘Outing’ the researcher: The provenance, process, and practice of reflexivity. Qualitative Health Research, 12(4), 531–545.
    Finlay, L. (2003). The reflexive journey: Mapping multiple routes. In L.Finlay & B.Gough (eds), Reflexivity: A practical guide for researchers in health and social sciences (pp. 3–20). Oxford: Blackwell.
    Fisher, C., Hoagwood, L., Boyce, C., Duster, T., Frank, D., Grisso, T., Levine, R., Macklin, R., Spencer, M., Takanishi, R., Trimble, J. & Zayas, L. (2002). Research ethics for mental health science involving ethnic minority children and youths. American Psychologist, 57(12), 1024–1040.
    Flewitt, R. (2005). Conducting research with young children: Some ethical considerations. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), 553–565.
    Flynn, N. (2004). Instant messaging rules: A business guide to managing policies, security, and legal issues for safe IM communication. Saranac Lake, NY: AMACOM.
    Fontes, T. & O'Mahony, M. (2008). In-depth interviewing by Instant Messenger. Social Research update, 53, online. Retrieved from on 20 February 2013.
    Fox, J., Murray, C. & Warm, A. (2003). Conducting research using web-based questionnaires: Practical, methodological, and ethical considerations. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 6(2), 167–180.
    Francis, J., Johnston, M., Robertson, C., Glidewell, L., Entwistle, V., Eccles, M. & Grimshaw, J. (2010). What is adequate sample size? Operationalising data saturation for theory-based interview studies. Psychology and Health, 25(10), 1229–1245.
    Fraser, M. & Fraser, A. (2001). Are people with learning disabilities able to contribute to focus groups on health promotion?Journal of Advanced Nursing, 33(2), 225–233.
    Freeman, M. & Mathison, S. (2009). Researching children's experiences. New York: The Guildford Press.
    Gallacher, L-A. & Gallagher, M. (2008). Methodological immaturity in childhood research? Thinking through ‘participatory methods’. Childhood, 15(4), 499–516.
    Gallagher, M. (2008). ‘Power is not an evil’: Rethinking power in participatory methods. Children's Geographies, 6(2), 137–150.
    Gans, J. & Brindis, C. (1995). Choice of research setting in understanding adolescent health problems. Journal of Adolescent Health, 17, 306–313.
    Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Malden, USA: Blackwell.
    Garth, B. & Aroni, R. (2003). I value what you have to say’. Seeking the perspective of children with a disability, not just their parents. Disability and Society, 18(5), 561–576.
    Gaskell, G. (2000). Individual and group interviewing. In M.Bauer & G.Gaskell (eds), Qualitative researching with text, image and sound (pp. 38–56). London: Sage.
    Geluda, K., Bisaglia, J., Moreira, V., Maldonado, B. M., Cunha, A. & Trajman, A. (2005). Third-party informed consent in research with adolescents: The good, the bad and the ugly. Social Science and Medicine, 61, 985–988.
    Gibbs, G., Friese, S. & Mangabeira, W. (2002). The use of new technology in qualitative research. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 3(2), online. Retrieved from on 25 March 2013.
    Gilgun, J. (2005). ‘Grab’ and good science: Writing up the results of qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 15(2), 256–262.
    Giordano, J., O'Reilly, M., Taylor, H. & Dogra, N. (2007). Confidentiality and autonomy: The challenge(s) of offering research participants a choice of disclosing their identity. Qualitative Health Research, 17(2), 264–275.
    Goering, P., Boydell, K. & Pignatiello, A. (2008). The relevance of qualitative research for clinical programs in psychiatry. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 53, 145–151.
    Goldblatt, H., Karnieli-Miller, O. & Neumann, M. (2011). Sharing qualitative research findings with participants: Study experiences of methodological and ethical dilemmas. Patient Education and Counseling, 82, 389–395.
    Gollop, M. (2000). Interviewing children: A research perspective. In A.Smith, N.Taylor & M.Gollop (eds), Children's voices: Research, policy and practice (pp. 18–34). New Zealand: Longman.
    Goodare, H. & Lockwood, S. (1999). Involving patients in clinical research. British Medical Journal, 319, 724–725.
    Gordner, C. & Burkett, L. (2012). Writing a poster abstract: Guidelines for success. PENS Reporter, 3, 5–6.
    Gough, B. (2003). Deconstructing reflexivity. In L.Finlay & B.Gough (eds), Reflexivity: A practical guide for researchers in health and social sciences (pp. 21–36). Oxford: Blackwell.
    Grady, C. (2005). Payment of clinical research subjects. The Journal of Clinical Investigation, 115 (7), 1681–1687.
    Grant, J. & Luxford, Y. (2009). Video: A decolonising strategy for intercultural communication in child and family health within ethnographic research. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 3, 218–232.
    Green, A., Rafaeli, E., Bolger, N., Shrout, P. & Reis, H. (2006). Paper or plastic? Data equivalence in paper and electronic diaries. Psychological Methods, 11(1), 87–105.
    Green, J., Franquiz, M. & Dixon, C. (1997). The myth of the objective transcript: Transcribing as a situated act. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 172–176.
    Greenhalgh, T. (1997). How to read a paper: Getting your bearings (deciding what the paper is about). British Medical Journal, 315, 243–246.
    Greenhalgh, T. & Taylor, R. (1997). How to read a paper: Papers that go beyond numbers (qualitative research). British Medical Journal, 315, 740–743.
    Gregory, D., Russell, C. & Phillips, L. (1997). Beyond textual perfection: Transcribers as vulnerable persons. Qualitative Health Research, 7(2), 294–300.
    Greig, A., Taylor, J. & MacKay, T. (2007). Doing research with children (
    Second edition
    ). London: Sage.
    Grimandi, S. (2007). Commentary: Some reflections on the use of video recordings. Infant Observation, 10(10), 89–90.
    Grimshaw, A. (1982). Sound-image data records for research on social interaction: Some questions and answers. Sociological Methods and Research, 11, 121–144.
    Grol, R. & Grimshaw, J. (2003). From best evidence to best practice: Effective implementation of change in patients' care. Lancet, 362, 1225–1230.
    Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. (2004). Competing paradigms in qualitative research: Theories and issues. In S.Hesse-Biber & P.Leavy (eds), Approaches to qualitative research: A reader on theory and practice (pp. 17–38). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Halcomb, E. & Davidson, P. (2006). Is verbatim transcription of interview data always necessary?Applied Nursing Research, 19, 38–42.
    Halliwell, E., Main, L. & Richardson, C. (2007). The fundamental facts: The latest facts and figures on mental health. The Mental Health Foundation.
    Hamilton, R. & Bowers, B. (2006). Internet recruitment and e-mail interviews in qualitative studies. Qualitative Health Research, 16(6), 821–835.
    Hammersley, M. (1985). Ethnography: What it is and what it offers. In S.Hegarty & P.Evans, (eds), Research and evaluation methods in special education (pp. 152–163). Philadelphia: NFER-Nelson.
    Hammersley, M. (2010). Reproducing or constructing? Some questions about transcription in social research. Qualitative Research, 10(5), 553–569.
    Hamo, M., Blum-Kulka, S. & Hacohen, G. (2004). From observation to transcription and back: Theory, practice, and interpretation in the analysis of children's naturally occurring discourse. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 37(1), 71–92.
    Happell, B. (2007). Hitting the target! A no tears approach to writing an abstract for a conference presentation. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 16, 477–452.
    Happell, B. (2009). Presenting with precision: Preparing and delivering a polished conference presentation. Nurse Researcher, 16(3), 45–55.
    Harden, J., Scott, S., Backett-Milburn, K. & Jackson, S. (2000). Can't talk, won't talk: Methodological issues in researching children. Sociological Research Online 5. Retrieved from on 16 January 2013.
    Hart, N. & Crawford-Wright, A. (1999). Research as therapy, therapy as research: Ethical dilemmas in new-paradigm research. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 27(2), 205–214.
    Heath, C. (2004). Analysing face-to-face interaction: Video, the visual and material. In D.Silverman (ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (
    Second edition
    ) (pp. 266–282). London: Sage.
    Heath, S., Charles, V., Crow, G. & Wiles, R. (2004). Informed consent, gatekeepers & go-betweens. Paper presented at The Ethics & Social Relations of Research conference (Sixth International Conference on Social Science Methodology): Amsterdam.
    Heath, S., Charles, V., Crow, G. & Wiles, R. (2007). Informed consent, gatekeepers and go-betweens: Negotiating consent in child and youth-oriented institutions. British Educational Research Journal, 33 (3), 403–417.
    Hepburn, A. & Bolden, G. (2013). The conversation analytic approach to transcription. In T.Stivers & J.Sidnell (eds), The Blackwell handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 57–76). Oxford: Blackwell.
    Heptinstall, E. (2000). Gaining access to looked after children for research purposes: Lessons learned. British Journal of Social Work, 30, 867–872.
    Herring, A. (1996). Linguistic and critical analysis of computer-mediated communication: Some ethical and scholarly considerations. The Information Society, 12(2), 153–168.
    Hewson, C., Laurent, D. & Vogel, C. (1996). Proper methodologies for psychological and sociological studies conducted via the internet. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 28, 186–191.
    Hill, M. (1997). Participatory research with children. Child and Family Social Work, 2, 171–183.
    Hinchcliffe, V. & Gavin, H. (2009). Social and virtual networks: Evaluating synchronous online interviewing using instant messenger. The Qualitative Report, 14(2), 318–340.
    Hoagwood, K., Burns, B., Kiser, L., Ringeisem, H. & Schoenwald, S. (2001). Evidence-based practice in child and adolescent mental health services. Psychiatric Services, 52(9), 1179–1189.
    Hoagwood, K., Jensen, P. & Fisher, C. (1996). Toward a science of ethics in research on child and adolescent mental disorders. In K.Hoagwood, P.Jensen & C.Fisher (eds), Ethical issues in mental health research with children and adolescents (pp. 3–14). New Jersey: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
    Holmes, D., Hodgson, P., Nishmura, R. & Simari, R. (2009). Manuscript preparation and publication. Circulation, 120, 906–913.
    Holmes, S. (2009). Methodological and ethical considerations in designing an internet study of quality of life. A discussion paper, International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46, 394–405.
    Holoday, B. & Turner-Henson, A. (1989). Response effects in surveys with school-age children. Nursing Research, 38, 248–250.
    Holt, L. (2004). The ‘voices’ children: De-centring empowering research relations. Children's Geographies, 2(1), 13–27.
    Hookway, N. (2008). Entering the blogosphere: Some strategies for using blogs in social research. Qualitative Research, 8, 91–113.
    Hoppe, M., Wells, E., Morrison, D., Gillmore, M. & Wilsdon, A. (1995). Using focus groups to discuss sensitive topics with children. Evaluation Review, 19(1), 102–114.
    Horstman, M., Aldiss, S., Richardson, A. & Gibson, F. (2008). Methodological issues when using the draw and write technique with children aged 6–12 years. Qualitative Health Research, 18(7), 1001–1011.
    Hubbard, G., Backett-Milburn, K. & Kemmer, D. (2001). Working with emotion: Issues for the researcher in fieldwork and teamwork. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 4(2), 119–137.
    Hudson, J. & Bruckman, A. (2004). ‘Go away’? Participant objections to being studied and the ethics of chatroom research. The Information Society, 20(2), 127–139.
    Hunt, N. & McHale, S. (2007). A practical guide to the e-mail interview. Qualitative Health Research, 17, 1415–1421.
    Hunter, D. & Pierscionek, B. (2007). Children, Gillick competency and consent for involvement in research. Journal of Medical Ethics, 33, 659–662.
    Hutchby, I. (2002). Resisting the incitement to talk in child counselling: Aspects of the utterance ‘I don't know’. Discourse Studies, 4(2), 147–168.
    Hutchby, I. & Wooffitt, R. (2008). Conversation analysis (
    Second edition
    ). Oxford: Blackwell.
    Irwin, L. & Johnson, J. (2005). Interviewing young children: Explicating our practices and dilemmas. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 821–831
    Ison, N. (2009). Having their say: Email interviews for research data collection with people who have verbal communication impairment. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 12(2), 161–172.
    Israel, B., Schulz, A., Parker, E. & Becker, A. (1998). Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annual Review Public Health, 19, 173–202.
    Jacelon, C. & Imperio, K. (2005). Participant diaries as a source of data in research with older adults. Qualitative Health Research, 15(7), 991–997.
    James, A. (2001). Ethnography in the study of children and childhood. In P.Atkinson, A.Coffey, S.Delamont, J.Lofland & L.Lofland (eds), Handbook of ethnography (pp. 256–257). London: Sage.
    James, N., and Busher, H. (2006). Credibility, authenticity and voice: Dilemmas in online interviewing. Qualitative Research, 6(3), 403–420.
    Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H.Lerner (ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    Joffe, H. & Yardley, L. (2004) Content and thematic analysis. In D.Marks & L.Yardley (eds), Research methods for clinical and health psychology (pp. 56–68). London: Sage.
    Johns, C. & Freshwater, D. (1998). Transforming nursing through reflective practice. London: Blackwell Science.
    Johnson, B. & Macleod-Clark, J. (2003). Collecting sensitive data: The impact on researchers. Qualitative Health Research, 13(3), 421–434.
    Johnson, T. (2008). Tips on how to write a paper. Journal American Academy Dermatology, 59(6), 1064–1069.
    Jordhoy, M., Kaasa, S., Fayers, P., Ovreness, T., Underland, G. & Ahlner-Elmqvist, M. (1999). Challenges in palliative care research; recruitment, attrition and compliance: Experience from a randomized controlled trial. Palliative Medicine, 13, 299–310.
    Jowett, A., Peel, E. & Shaw, R. (2011). Online interviewing in psychology: Reflections on the process. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 8, 354–369.
    Kaiser, K. (2009). Protecting respondent confidentiality in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 19(11), 1632–1641.
    Karchmer, R. (2001). The journey ahead: Thirteen teachers report how the internet influences literacy and literacy instruction in their K-12 classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 442–466.
    Kearney, M. (2001). Levels and applications of qualitative research evidence. Research in Nursing and Health, 24, 145–153.
    Keen, S. & Todres, L. (2007). Strategies for disseminating qualitative research findings: Three exemplars. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 8(3), Art 17, Retrieved from on 11 April 2013.
    Kerrison, S., McNally, N. & Pollock, A. (2003). United Kingdom research governance strategy. British Medical Journal, 327, 553–556.
    Kidd, J. & Finlayson, M. (2006). Navigating unchartered water: Research ethics and emotional engagement in human inquiry. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 13, 423–428.
    King, N. & Churchill, L. (2000). Ethical principles guiding research on child and adolescent subjects. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12(6), 710–724.
    Kitchener, K. (1988). Dual role relationships – what makes them so problematic?Journal of Counseling and Development, 67, 217–221.
    Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: The importance of interaction between research participants. Sociology of Health and Illness, 16, 103–121.
    Knupfer, A. (1996). Ethnographic studies of children: The difficulties of entry, rapport, and presentation of their worlds. Qualitative Studies in Education, 9(2), 135–149.
    Koo, M. & Skinner, H. (2005). Challenges of internet recruitment: A case study with disappointing results. Journal of Med Internet Research, 7(1), e6.
    Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Kuper, A., Lingard, L. & Levinson, W. (2008). Critically appraising qualitative research. British Medical Journal, 337, 687–689.
    Kuper, A., Reeves, S. & Levinson, W. (2008). An Introduction to reading and appraising qualitative research. British Medical Journal, 337, 404–407.
    Kvale, S. (2006). Dominance through interviews and dialogues. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(3), 480–500.
    Kvale, S. & Brinkman, S. (2009). Interviewing: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (
    Second edition
    ). London: Sage.
    Lalor, J., Begley, C. & Devane, D. (2006). Exploring painful experiences: Impact of emotional narratives on members of a qualitative research team. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 56(6), 607–616.
    Lapadat, J. (2000). Problematizing transcription: Purpose, paradigm and quality. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 3(3), 203–219.
    Lapadat, J. & Lindsay, A. (1999). Transcription in research and practice: From standardization of technique to interpretive positioning. Qualitative Inquiry, 5(1), 64–86.
    LeCompte, M. and Goetz, J. (1982). Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 52(1), 31–60.
    Lenhart, A. & Madden, M. (2007). Teens, privacy and online social networks: How teens manage their online identities and personal information in the age of MySpace. Washington: DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
    Levine, C., Faden, R., Grady, C., Hammerschmidt, D., Eckenwiler, L. & Sugarman, J. (2004). The limitations of ‘vulnerability’ as a protection for human research participants. The American Journal of Bioethics, 4(3), 44–49.
    Lewis, A. (1992). Group child interviews as a research tool. British Educational Research Journal, 18(4), 413–421.
    Lewis, K., Kaufman, J., Gonzalez, M., Wimmer, A. & Christakis, N. (2008). Tastes, ties, and time: A new social network dataset using Social Networks, 30, 330–342.
    Liamputtong, P. (2007). Researching the vulnerable: A guide to sensitive research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Liebling, A. (1999). Doing research in prison: Breaking the silence?Theoretical Criminology, 3(2), 147–173.
    Liegghio, M., Nelson, G. & Evans, S. (2010). Partnering with children diagnosed with mental health issues: Contributions of a sociology of childhood perspective of participatory action research. American Journal of Psychology, 46, 84–99.
    Lincoln, Y. & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Livingstone, S. (2003). Children's use of the internet: Reflections on the emerging research agenda. New Media & Society, 5(2), 147–166.
    Lowcay, B. & McIntyre, E. (2005). Research posters – the way to display. British Medical Journal, December, 251–252.
    Lucas, K. (2010). A waste of time? The value and promise of researcher completed qualitative data transcribing. Northeastern Educational Research Association Conference Proceedings, paper 24. Retrieved from on 5 May 2012.
    MacDonald, K. (2008). Dealing with chaos and complexity: The reality of interviewing children and families in their own homes. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 17(23), 3123–3130.
    Mackrill, T. (2008). Solicited diary studies of psychotherapy in qualitative research – pros and cons. European Journal of Psychotherapy and Counselling, 10(1), 5–18.
    Magnuson, S., Wilcoxon, S.A. & Norem, K. (2000). A profile of lousy supervision: Experienced counselors' perspectives. Counselor Education and Supervision, 39, 189–202.
    Mander, R. (1992). Seeking approval for research access: The gatekeeper's role in facilitating a study of the care of the relinquishing mother. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 17, 1460–1464.
    Markham, M. (2006). Providing research participants with findings from completed cancer-related clinical trials: Not quite as simple as it sounds. Cancer, 106, 1421–1424.
    Marshall, M. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13(6), 522–525.
    Mauthner, M. (1997). Methodological aspects of collecting data from children; lessons from three research projects. Children and Society, 11, 16–28.
    Mayer, M. & Till, J. (1996). The internet: A modern Pandora's box?Qualitative Life Research, 5, 568–571.
    Mays, N. & Pope, C. (2000). Quality in qualitative health research. In C.Pope & N.Mays (eds), Qualitative research in health care (pp. 89–102). London: BMJ Books.
    McCormick, L., Crawford, M., Anderson, R., Gittelsohn, J., Kingsley, B. & Upson, D. (1999). Recruiting adolescents into qualitative tobacco research studies: Experiences and lessons learned. Journal of School Health, 69(3), 95–99.
    McCosker, H.Barnard, A. & Gerber, R. (2001). Undertaking sensitive research: Issues and strategies for meeting the safety needs of all participants. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 2(1). Retrieved from on 14 May 2014.
    McNeill, P. (1997). Paying people to participate in research: Why not? A response to Wilkinson and Moore. Bioethics, 11(5), 390–396.
    McPherson, A. (2010). Involving children: Why it matters. In S.Redsell & A.Hastings (eds), Listening to children and young people in healthcare consultations (pp. 15–30). Oxford: Radcliffe Publishing.
    McWhinney, I., Bass, M. & Donner, A. (1994). Evaluation of a palliative care service: Problems and pitfalls. British Medical Journal, 309, 1340–1342.
    Meho, L. (2006). E-mail interviewing in qualitative research: A methodological discussion. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(10), 1284–1295.
    Melo-Martin, I. & Ho, A. (2008). Beyond informed consent: The therapeutic misconception and trust. Journal of Medical Ethics, 34, 202–205.
    Meltzer, D., Fryers, T. & Jenkins, R. (eds) (2004). Social inequalities and the distribution of the common mental health disorders. Hove: Psychology Press.
    Mental Health Foundation (1999). What is mental capacity? Retrieved from on 20 November 2012.
    Merriam, S. (2002). Assessing and evaluating qualitative research. In S.Merriam et al. (eds), Assessing and evaluating qualitative research in practice (pp. 18–33). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Miles, B. (2006). Moving out of the dark ages: An argument for the use of digital video in social work research. Journal of Technology in Human Services. 24(2/3): 181–196.
    Mondada, L. (2007). Commentary: Transcript variations and the indexicality of transcribing practices. Discourse Studies, 9(6), 809–821.
    Moreno, M., Fost, N. & Christakis, D. (2008). Research ethics in the MySpace era. Pediatrics, 121(1), 157–161.
    Moreno, M., Grant, A., Kacvinsky, L., Moreno, P. & Fleming, M. (2012). Older adolescents' views regarding participation in Facebook research. Journal of Adolescent Health, 51(5), 439–444.
    Morgan, A. (2010). Discourse analysis: An overview for the neophyte researcher. Journal of Health and Social Care Improvement, May, 1–7.
    Morgan, M., Gibbs, A., Maxwell, K. & Britten, N. (2002). Hearing children's voices: Methodological issues in conducting focus groups with children aged 7–11 years. Qualitative Research, 2(1), 5–20.
    Morrow, V. & Richards, M. (1996). The ethics of social research with children: An overview. Children and Society, 10, 90–105.;2-Z
    Munford, R. & Sanders, J. (2004). Recruiting diverse groups of young people to research: Agency and empowerment in the consent process. Qualitative Social Work, 3(4), 469–482.
    Murray, R. (2006). How to write a thesis (
    Second edition
    ). Berkshire: Open University Press.
    Nadin, S. & Cassell, C. (2006). The use of a research diary as a tool for reflexive practice: Some reflections from management research. Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management, 3(3), 208–217.
    Nightingale, D. & Cromby, J. (eds) (1999). Social constructionist psychology: A critical analysis of theory and practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.
    Nikander, P. (2008). Working with transcripts and translated data. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 5, 225–231.
    Nolan, M. & Grant, G. (1993). Service evaluation: Time to open both eyes. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 18, 1434–1442.
    Norman, K., Friedman, Z., Norman, K. & Stevenson, R. (2001). Navigational issues in the design of on-line self-administered questionnaires. Behaviour and Information Technology, 20(1), 37–45.
    Nosek, B., Banaji, M. & Greenwald, A. (2002). E-Research: Ethics, security, design, and control in psychological research on the internet. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 161–176.
    Ochs, E. (1979). Transcription as theory. In E.Ochs & B.Schiefflin (eds), Developmental Pragmatics (pp. 43–72). New York: Academic Press.
    O'Connor, H. & Madge, C. (2001). Cyber-mothers: Online synchronous interviewing using conferencing software. Sociological Research Online, 5(4). Retrieved from on 25 March 2013.
    Oeye, C., Bjelland, A. & Skorpen, A. (2007). Doing participant observation in a psychiatric hospital – research ethics resumed. Social Science and Medicine, 65, 2296–2306.
    Oliver, P. (2010). The student's guide to research ethics (
    Second edition
    ). Berkshire: Open University Press.
    Onwuegbuzie, A. & Leech, N. (2007). A call for qualitative power analyses. Quality & Quantity: An International Journal of Methodology, 41, 105–121.
    Opdenakker, R. (2006). Advantages and disadvantages of four interview techniques in qualitative research. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 7(4), online. Retrieved from on 18 March 2013.
    O'Reilly, M. (2005a). Active noising: The use of noises in talk, the case of onomatopoeia, abstract sounds and the functions they serve in therapy. TEXT25(6), 745–761.
    O'Reilly, M. (2005b). ‘Disabling essentialism’: Accountability in family therapy: Issues of disability, complaints and child abuse. Unpublished PhD thesis, Loughborough University.
    O'Reilly, M. (2006). Should children be seen and not heard? An examination of how children's interruptions are treated in family therapy. Discourse Studies.8(4), 549–566.
    O'Reilly, M., Cook, L. & Karim, K. (2012). Complementary or controversial care? The opinions of professionals on complementary and alternative interventions for Autistic Spectrum Disorder. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, e-pub = doi: 10.1177/1359104511435340.
    O'Reilly, M., Dixon-Woods, M., Angell, E., Ashcroft, R. & Bryman, A. (2009). Doing accountability: A discourse analysis of research ethics committee letters. Sociology of Health and Illness, 31(2), 246–291.
    O'Reilly, M., Karim, K., Taylor, H. & Dogra, N. (2012). Parent and child views on anonymity: ‘I've got nothing to hide’. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 15(3), 211–224.
    O'Reilly, M. & Parker, N. (2013a). Unsatisfactory saturation': A critical exploration of the notion of saturated sample sizes in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 13(2), 190–197.
    O'Reilly, M. & Parker, N. (2013b). ‘You can take a horse to water but you can't make it drink’: Exploring children's engagement and resistance in family therapy. Contemporary Family Therapy, 35(3), 491–507.
    O'Reilly, M., Parker, N. & Hutchby, I. (2011). Ongoing processes of managing consent: The empirical ethics of using video-recording in clinical practice and research. Clinical Ethics, 6, 179–185.
    O'Reilly, M., Ronzoni, P. & Dogra, N. (2013). Research with children: Theory and practice. London: Sage.
    O'Reilly, M., Taylor, H. & Vostanis, P. (2009). ‘Nuts, schiz, psycho’: An exploration of young homeless people's perceptions and dilemmas of defining mental health. Social Science and Medicine, 68, 1737–1744.
    Pantell, R., Stewart, T., Dias, J., Wells, P. & Ross, W. (1982). Physician communication with children and parents. Pediatrics, 70(3), 396–402.
    Parker, N. & O'Reilly, M. (2012). ‘Gossiping’ as a social action in family therapy: The pseudo-absence and pseudo-presence of children. Discourse Studies, 14(4), 1–19.
    Parker, N. & O'Reilly, M. (2013) ‘We are alone in the house’: A case study addressing researcher safety and risk. Qualitative Research in Psychology, doi: 10.1080/14780887.2011.64726.
    Parry, G. (1996). Writing a research report. In G.Parry & F.Watts, Behavioural and mental health research: A handbook of skills and methods (
    Second edition
    ) (pp. 137–156). Hove, UK: Earlbaum.
    Pascale, C-M. (2011). Cartographies of knowledge: Exploring qualitative epistemologies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Paterson, B., Gregory, D. & Thorne, S. (1999). A protocol for researcher safety. Qualitative Health Research, 9(2), 259–269.
    Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (
    Second edition
    ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Paul, M., Newns, K. & Creedy, K. (2006). Some ethical issues that arise from working with families in the National Health Service. Clinical Ethics, 1, 76–81.
    Paulus, T., Lester, J. N. & Dempster, P. (2014). Digital tools for qualitative research. London: Sage.
    Pearlman, L. & Saakvitne, K. (1995). Trauma and the therapist: Counter-transference and vicarious traumatisation in psychotherapy with incest survivors. London: Norton.
    Perakyla, A. (2004). Reliability and validity in research based on naturally occurring social interaction. In D.Silverman (ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (
    Second edition
    ) (pp. 283–304). London: Sage.
    Perakyla, A. (2006). Observation, video and ethnography: Case studies in AIDS counselling and greetings. In P.Drew, G.Raymond & D.Weinberg (eds), Talk and Interaction in Social Research Methods (pp. 81–96). London: Sage.
    Peters, S. (2010). Qualitative research methods in mental health. Evidence Based Mental Health, 13(2), 35–40.
    Pierce, M. (1998). Doing research in general practice: Advice for the uninitiated. Diabetic Medicine, 15 (Suppl. 3), S25–S28.
    Piercy, H. & Hargate, M. (2004). Social research on the under-16s: A consideration of the issues from a UK perspective. Journal of Child Health Care, 8(4), 253–263.
    Plowman, L. & Stephen, C. (2008). The big picture? Video and the representation of interaction. British Educational Research Journal, 34(4), 541–565.
    Pomerantz, A. & Fehr, B. J. (1997). Conversation analysis: An approach to the study of social action as sense making practices. In T.van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as social interaction (pp. 64–91). London: Sage.
    Potter, J. (1996). Representing reality: Discourse, rhetoric and social construction. London: Sage.
    Potter, J. (2002). Two kinds of natural. Discourse Studies.4(4), 539–542.
    Potter, J. & Hepburn, A. (2005). Qualitative interviews in psychology: Problems and possibilities. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2, 1–27.
    Potter, J. & Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology. London: Sage.
    Powell, R., Single, H. & Lloyd, K. (1996). Focus groups in mental health research: Enhancing the validity of user and provider questionnaires. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 42(3), 193–206.
    Punch, K. (2000). Developing effective research proposals. London: Sage.
    Punch, S. (2002). Research with children: The same or different from research with adults?Childhood, 9(3), 321–341.
    Punch, S. (2007). ‘I felt they were ganging up on me’: Interviewing siblings at home. Children's geographies, 5(3), 219–234.
    Radden, J. (2002). Psychiatric ethics. Bioethics, 16(5), 397–411.
    Ranse, J. & Hayes, C. (2009). A novice's guide to preparing and presenting an oral presentation at a scientific conference. Journal of Emergency Primary Health Care, 7(1), article 5, available at: on 11 April 2013.
    Rauktis, M., Fiedler, K. & Wood, J. (1998). Focus groups, program evaluation and the mentally ill: A case study. Journal of Health and Social Policy, 10(2), 75–92.
    Rawson, R., McCann, M., Huber, A., Marinelli-Casey, P. & Williams, L. (2000). Moving research into community settings in the CSAT Methampehetamine treatment project: The coordinating center perspective. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 32(2), 201–208.
    Rew, L., Taylor-Seehafer, M. & Thomas, N. (2000). Without parental consent: Conducting research with homeless adolescents. Journal of the Society of Pediatric Nurses, 5(3), 131–138.
    Rice, M., Bunker, K., Kang, D., Howell, C. & Weaver, M. (2007). Accessing and recruiting children for research in schools. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 29(4), 501–514.
    Richards, H. & Emslie, C. (2000). The ‘doctor’ or the ‘girl from the University’? Considering the influence of professional roles on qualitative interviewing. Family Practice, 17(10), 71–75.
    Richards, H. & Schwartz, L. (2002). Ethics of qualitative research: Are there special issues for health services research?Family Practice, 19, 135–139.
    Richardson, A. (1994). The health diary: An examination of its use as a data collection method. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19, 782–791.
    Riessman, C. K. (2005). Narrative analysis. In N.Kelly, C.Horrocks, K.Milnes, B.Roberts & D.Robinson (eds), Narrative, memory and everyday life (pp. 1–7). Huddersfield: University of Huddersfield.
    Rishel, C. (2007). Evidence-based prevention practice in mental health: What is it and how do we get there?American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 77(1), 153–164.
    Roberts, F. & Robinson, J. (2004). Interobserver agreement on first-stage conversation analytic transcription. Health Communication Research, 30(3), 376–410.
    Robson, C. (2011). Real world research (
    Third edition
    ). Oxford: Blackwell.
    Roszkowski, M. & Bean, A. (1990). Believe it or not! Longer questionnaires have lower response rates. Journal of Business and Psychology, 4(4), 495–509.
    Roulston, K. (2006). Close encounters of the ‘CA’ kind: A review of literature analysing talk in research interviews. Qualitative Research, 6(4), 515–534.
    Roulston, K. (2010). Considering quality in qualitative interviewing. Qualitative Research, 10(2), 199–228.
    Rowan, M. (1997). Qualitative research articles: Information for authors and peer reviewers. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 157, 1442–1446.
    Roy-Chowdhury, S. (2003). Knowing the unknowable: What constitutes evidence in family therapy?Journal of Family Therapy, 25, 64–85.
    Rycroft-Malone, J., Harvey, G., Seers, K., Kitson, A., McCormack, B. & Titchen, A. (2004). An exploration of the factors that influence the implementation of evidence into practice. Issues in Clinical Nursing, 13, 913–924.
    Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A. & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.
    Sampson, H. (2004). Navigating the waves: The usefulness of a pilot in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 4(3), 383–402.
    Sampson, H., Bloor, M. & Fincham, B. (2008). A price worth paying? Considering the ‘cost’ of reflexive research methods and the influence of feminist ways of ‘doing’. Sociology, 42(5), 919–933.
    Sandelowski, M. (2004). Using qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 14(10), 1366–1386.
    Sandelowski, M. & Barroso, J. (2002). Reading qualitative studies. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(1), article 5. Retrieved from on 11 January 2013.
    Sandelowski, M. & Barroso, J. (2003). Writing the proposal for a qualitative research methodology project. Qualitative Health Research, 13(6), 781–820.
    Schmidt, W. (1997). World-wide web survey research: Benefits, potential problems, and solutions. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 29, 274–279.
    Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
    Scott, J., Wishart, J. & Bowyer, D. (2006). Do current consent and confidentiality requirements impede or enhance research with children with learning disabilities?Disability and Society, 21(3), 273–287.
    Sharpe, D. & Baker, D. (2007). Financial issues associated with having a child with autism. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 28, 247–264.
    Sharples, M., Graber, R., Harrison, C. & Logan, K. (2009). E-safety and Web 2.0 for children aged 11–16. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25, 70–84.
    Shaw, I. (2008). Ethics and the practice of qualitative research. Qualitative Social Work, 7(4), 400–414.
    Sieber, J. (1992). Planning ethically responsible research: A guide for students and internal review boards. Newbury Park: Sage.
    Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text and interaction (
    Third edition
    ). London: Sage.
    Silverman, D. (2009). Doing qualitative research (
    Third edition
    ). London: Sage.
    Sinding, C. & Aronson, J. (2003). Exposing failures, unsettling accommodations: Tensions in interview practice. Qualitative Research, 3(1), 95–117.
    Singh, I. & Keenan, S. (2010). The challenges and opportunities of qualitative health research with children. In I.Bourgeault, R.Dingwall & R.DeVries (eds), The Sage handbook of qualitative methods in health research (pp. 696–713). London: Sage.
    Skukauskaite, A. (2012). Transparency in transcribing: Making visible theoretical bases impacting knowledge construction from open-ended interview records. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 13(1). Retrieved from on 14 May 2014.
    Small, S. (2005). Bridging research and practice in the family and human sciences. Family Relations, 54, 320–334.
    Smith, B. (1999). Ethical and methodologic benefits of using a reflexive journal in hermeneutic-phenomenologic research. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 31(4), 359–363.
    Smith, J. A. (2004). Reflecting on the development of interpretative phenomenological analysis and its contribution to qualitative research in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 1, 39–54.
    Social Research Association (2005). ‘Staying safe: A code of practice for the safety of social researchers’. Retrieved from on 18 October 2012.
    Sparrman, A. (2005). Video recording as interaction: Participant observation of children's everyday life. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2, 241–255.
    Speer, S. (2002). ‘Natural’ and ‘contrived’ data: A sustainable distinction?Discourse Studies, 4(4), 511–525.
    Speer, S. & Hutchby, I. (2003). From ethics to analytics: Aspects of participants' orientations to the presence and relevance of recording devices. Sociology, 37(2), 315–337.
    Spencer, L., Ritchie, J., Lewis, J. & Dillon, L. (2003). Quality in qualitative evaluation: A framework for assessing research evidence. Government Chief Social Researcher's Office, Prime Minister's strategy Unit, London. Retrieved from on 29 January 2013.
    Stein, A. (2010). Sex, truths, and audiotape: Anonymity and the ethics of public exposure in ethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39(5), 554–568.
    Stewart, K. & Williams, M. (2005). Researching online populations: The use of online focus groups for social research. Qualitative Research, 5(4), 395–416.
    Stratton, P. (2010). The evidence base of systematic family and couples therapies. London: The Association for Family Therapy & Systemic Practice.
    Tapscott, D. & Williams, A. (2008). Wikinomics: How mass collaboration changes everything. New York: Portfolio.
    Tates, K. & Meeuwesen, L. (2000). Let mum have her say: Turn-taking in doctor-parent-child communication. Patient Education and Counseling, 40, 151–162.
    Taylor, H., Stuttaford, M., Broad, B. & Vostanis, P. (2006). ‘Why a roof is not enough’: The characteristics of young homeless people referred to a designated mental health service. Journal of Mental Health, 15(4), 491–501.
    Teijlingen (van), E., Rennie, A. M., Hundley, V. & Graham, W. (2001). The importance of conducting and reporting pilot studies: The example of the Scottish births survey. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 34(3), 289–295.
    Ten Have, P. (2002). Ontology or methodology? Comments on Speer's ‘natural’ and ‘contrived’ data: A sustainable distinction?Discourse Studies, 4(4), 527–530.
    Terry, W., Olson, G., Ravenscroft, P., Wilss, L. & Boulton-Lewis, G. (2006). Hospice patients' views on research in palliative care. Internal Medicine Journal, 36, 406–413.
    Testa, A. & Coleman, L. (2006). Accessing research participants in schools: A case study of UK adolescent sexual health survey. Health Education Research, 21(4), 518–526.
    Themessl-Huber, M., Humphris, G., Dowell, J., Macgillivray, S., Rushmer, R. & Williams, B. (2008). Audio-visual recording of patient-GP consultations for research purposes: A literature review on recruiting rates and strategies. Patient Education and Counseling, 71, 157–168.
    Thomas, N. & O'Kane, C. (1998). The ethics of participatory research with children. Children and Society, 12, 336–348.
    Thompson, D., Kirkman, S., Watson, R. & Stewart, S. (2005). Improving research supervision in nursing. Nurse Education Today, 25, 283–290.
    Thorne, S. (2000). Data analysis in qualitative research. Evidence Based Nursing, 3, 68–70.
    Thorne, S. (2009). The role of qualitative research within an evidence-based context: Can metasynthesis be the answer?International journal of Nursing Studies, 46, 569–575.
    Tilley, S. (2003). Transcription work: Learning through coparticipation in research practices. Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(6), 835–851.
    Tilley, S. & Powick, K. (2002). Distanced data: Transcribing other people's research tapes. Canadian Journal of Education, 27(2/3): 291–310.
    Tishler, C. (2011). Pediatric drug-trial recruitment: Enticement without coercion. Pediatrics, 127(5), 949–954.
    Trivedi, P. & Wykes, T. (2002). From passive subjects to equal partners: Qualitative review of user involvement in research. British Journal of Psychiatry, 181, 468–472.
    Tuckett, A. (2004). Part 1: Qualitative research sampling – the very real complexities. Nurse Researcher, 12(1), 47–61.
    Tufte, B. (2006). Tweens as consumers – with focus on girls‘ and boys’ internet use. Child and Teen Consumption, 53, 1–18.
    Unger, J., Kipke, M., Simon, T., Montomery, S. & Johnson, C. (1997). Homeless youths and young adults in Los Angeles: Prevalence of mental health problems and the relationship between mental health and substance abuse disorders. American Journal of Community Psychology, 25, 371–394.
    Valke, M., De Wever, B., Van Keer, H. & Schellens, T. (2011). Long-term study of safe internet use of young children. Computers and Education, 57, 1292–1305.
    Waddell, C. & Godderis, R. (2005). Rethinking evidence-based practice for children's mental health. Evidence Based Mental Health, 8, 60–62.
    Waller, T. & Bitou, A. (2011). Research with children: Three challenges for participatory research in early childhood. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19(1), 5–20.
    Warming, H. (2011). Getting under their skins? Accessing young children's perspectives through ethnographic fieldwork. Childhood, 18(1), 39–53.
    Wartella, E. & Jennings, N. (2000). Children and computers: New technology-old concerns. The Future of Children, 10(2), 31–43.
    Watson, R. (1997). Ethnomethodology and textual analysis. In D.Silverman (ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (pp. 80–98). London: Sage.
    White, P. (2009). Developing research questions: A guide for social scientists. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
    Widdowson, H. G. (2004). Text, context, pretext: Critical studies in discourse analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
    Wilkinson, M. & Moore, A. (1997). Inducement to research. Bioethics, 11(5), 373–389.
    Wilkinson, S., Joffe, H. & Yardley, L. (2004). Qualitative data collection: Interviews and focus groups. In D.Marks & L.Yardley (eds), Research methods for clinical and health psychology (pp. 38–55). London: Sage.
    Williamson, E., Goodenough, T., Kent, J. & Ashcroft, R. (2005). Conducting research with children: The limits of confidentiality and child protection protocols. Children and Society, 19, 397–409.
    Willig, C. (2001). Introducing qualitative research: Adventures in theory and method. Buckingham: Open University Press.
    Willmott, A., (2010). Involving children: How to do it. In S.Redsell & A.Hastings (eds), Listening to children and young people in healthcare consultations (pp. 45–55). Oxon: Radcliffe Publishing.
    Wilson, J. & Hunter, D. (2010). Research exceptionalism. The American Journal of Bioethics, 10(8), 45–54.
    Wilson, C. & Powell, M. (2001). A Guide to interviewing children: Essential skills for counsellors, police, lawyers and social workers. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
    Wind, G. (2008). Negotiated interactive observation: Doing fieldwork in hospital settings. Anthropology and Medicine, 15(2), 79–89.
    Wong, P-H. J. & Poon, K-L. M. (2010). Bringing translation out of the shadows: Translation as an issue of methodological significance in cross-cultural qualitative research. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 21(2), 151–158.
    Woodhead, M. & Faulkner, D. (2000). Subjects, objects or participants? Dilemmas of psychological research with children. In P.Christensen & A.James (eds), Research with children: Perspectives and practices (pp. 9–35). London: Falmer Press.
    Wooffitt, R. (2005). Conversation analysis and discourse analysis: A comparative and critical introduction. London: Sage.
    Wooffitt, R. & Widdicombe, S. (2006). Interaction in interviews. In P.Drew, G.Raymond & D.Weinberg (eds), Talk and interaction in social research methods (pp. 29–49). London: Sage.
    World Health Organization. (2011). Mental health: A state of well-being. Retrieved from on 18 January 2012.
    Wright, K., (2005). Researching internet-based populations: Advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(3), article 11. Retrieved from on 25 March 2013.
    Yip, K-S., (2006). Self-reflective practice: A note of caution. British Journal of Social Work, 36, 777–788.
    Zimmer, M. (2010). ‘But the data is already public’: On the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics and Information Technology, 12, 313–325.

    • Loading...
Back to Top