Posted by Glenn Omura Glenn Omura |
- Re: Cultural differences in picture taking behavior
Posted by Judy Weiser, Administrator
on 5/18/2007, 2:57 pm, in reply to "Cultural differences in picture taking behavior"
154.5.110.39thank you for posting your two messages to this website -- I will answer bot, so please look in both places for additional information.
First of all I am glad you have "found" us and will be happy to continue a dialogue here -- however I must admit that some of what you wrote puzzles me a bit.I think that this is because I tend to tell my students to avoid generalizations unless they can back them up with statistics -- and not to make a blatant statement of 'what is' unless it is true, and provable to be true, 100% of the time...
So my first question to you is how do you knowthat Canadian and UK parents take fewer family pictures than those in the US/Australia? Or did you mean that they seem to you to do this?
This makesa big difference to me, when considering how to respond to your message, because I need to ask where you get your data from that has you making such an absolute statement?
Next, re: your having done "quick comparisons of photo industry data"... I'm not sure that all "ordinary parents" would be visible and quantifiable in "photo-industry" data (unless they have somehow surveyed all parents with cameras in these countries).
Or perhaps you are basing this on some kind of "sort" re: the photos produced in labs? or was this through a focus group (or ZMET method? more about this in your other message)
Regardless, I'm curious to know the methodology involved in the statments you make as being true fact...
I'm not arguing with your statement, but rather just simply wondering what it was based on, so that I can understand your question better -- can you please elaborate???
Next, re: your statement that "I've tried looking in the phototherapy/sociology literature but it seems to be focused on the picture content, not on picture taking itself", I must also tell you that my own experience is very different from this re: what you say you found.
First of all, the literature I'm familiar with (and as the supposed "world-expert" in this field, I'm familiar with a LOT of it!), it is my opinion that, re: the photo content, this is not re: the visual details themselves, but rather -- and moreseo! -- about what these MEAN inside the mind and heart of each viewer!
There are about 300 articles on file here at the Centre, along with numerous books and book chapters (many of which are listed on the "Recommended Readings" pages of this site, and I must also tell you that my own findings from the literature shows that there are actually many articles and parts of book chapters, which DO focus on the photo-taking.
One other example I think I should show you is the page of this website that deals with the five major techniques of PhotoTherapy -- particularly the one for all five (see the bottom list), at:
http://www.phototherapy-centre.com/five_techniques.htmand then, more importantly, see the page specifically for the very first technique of the five ("Photos Taken the Client") -- that is described on its own page, at:
http://www.phototherapy-centre.com/photos_by_client.htmPerhaps, if finding more information about any of the above is important to you, you might want to arrange some consulting time wiht me and I will be happy to assist you further...
Also I am curious why, if you are interested in marketing and public consumption habits re: photo -taking, photo-viewing, and photo-keeping behavior, that you are searching PhotoTherapy literature rather than Therapeutic Photography literature?
I'm thinking that perhaps this is part of the problem in finding more about what you seek...
to better grasp the differences between these two things, please see the second half of the page at:
http://www.phototherapy-centre.com/comparisons.htmAgain, I'd be happy to assist you in finding more...
finally, as for:
Are Canadian and British parents more detached from their children and thereby do not feel a responsibility to preserve family pictures, or do pictures simply mean less to these respective cultures?....again I must admit to finding a bit of resistance raising in me in response to your rather basic generalizations above. I mean you no criticism of approach to your thinking, but.... in my field (psychology) we are taught to avoid simplistic deductions from an "outsider-observer" position (especially if doing research) and instead to focus on "participant-responsive" information gathered by the subjects, from the subjects.
I guess what I'm saying here is, Even if your first and final sentences are presented as fact, I do believe there are much better alternative realities to suggest to you, and particularly re: the final dichotomy presented, I believe that both assumptions are likely faulty in their simplicity...
i.e., even IF these behaviors are different, you cannot assume that you can guess their reasons without asking them to inform you re: their reasons, which might or might not be the ones you are guessing from "outside"...
I also ask you to re-examine a couple of other assumptions I note in your message: first you ask in your first sentence about "taking pictures" and yet in your final one you ask about "preserving" [keeping} these. In my experience with hundreds of parents/families/clients over the past 30+ years of doing therapy I can tell you that these two things are NOT the same, nor are they generalizable across families, much less across cultures.
Finally is there even such a thing as a U.S. "culture" or British "culture", when, in fact people in these countries come from so many different cultural backgrounds and other variables also impinge (such as the "youth culture" or various minorities living inside their borders)??
I guess what I am asking you, is to think more about what the photo MEANS to people and then investigate why this is so... for each potential consumer you are envisioning. I don't think the imposition of geographic filters is a successful generalization, though I will respect your desire to pursue investigating this...
regards, and now on to your other message,
Judy (Weiser)
- Re: Cultural differences in picture taking behavior
Posted by Glenn Omura
on 5/19/2007, 10:15 am, in reply to "Re: Cultural differences in picture taking behavior"
24.27.217.216Thanks for answering Judy. I'll try to respond to your questions. 1. Market research CLEARLY concludes that UK and Canadian consumers take fewer pictures per capita and have exhibited this behavior for decades.
2. I've actually done more than quick comparisons of data. I personally know the stats person at the Photo Marketing Association, the worldwide trade association for the photo industry, and asked him to send me comparable data across the four countries. The trade association has chapters in each of those countries. He was able to segment out respondents in their datasets to focus on Gen X females with children under 18. This is the common demographic profile that he has compared on various picture taking habits. The Gen X moms in the US and Australia are very similar, whereas this pair is very different from the Candian and UK Gen X moms. These data are self-report mail questionnaires administered by local professional market research agencies. The key behavior question asks for personal estimates of number of pictures taken. My conclusions are statistically supported (.05 level). Each country sample is at least several hundred. However, this is simply the most current data that supports what the industry knows as fact for decades. There are few things that can stated as fact, but it is a fact that people from some countries take fewer pictures per capita. The professional laboratories that for decades do the processing of film (and now, memory cards), also complain about the fewer per capita pictures taken by Canadian and British consumers.
3. I'm interested in why people take pictures, or more to the point, why entire cultures ACTUALLY do it less often. For that reason, I AM interested in Therapeutic Photography, and have opened some of the literature that you and your friends have so generously posted on you site. I had not found any literature on that list that suggests to me why different cultures take more or less pictures. However, thank you for your specific suggestions of literature. I will carefully review them and let you know of what relevance I perceive them to have in relation to my problem.
4. I appreciate your offer of consultation. I'm searching for a theory-based interpretation. I have several colleagues at universities in each of the other three countries who may be willing to collaborate on a cross-cultural study. Before we do so, we need theory to help us conceive the methodology. We certainly KNOW the behavior is different. Now, we want to develop and test a theory that can help explain it. What is so fascinating is that cross-cultural theorists often put down research among these four countries as not really being "cross cultural" because they are so "similar" in culture. This particular behavior that SEEMS so important in the US and Australia, SEEMS to be MUCH less important in two other English-speaking countries.
Thanks so much for your reply
Glenn
- Re: Cultural differences in picture taking behavior
Posted by Judy Weiser, Administrator
on 5/20/2007, 6:10 pm, in reply to "Re: Cultural differences in picture taking behavior"
207.216.241.253Wow, well yes, I do believe you now, since you added all this additional information that is provable fact -- although I must say that, personally, I still find it difficult to accept such big generalizations about countries of people that are made up of so many kinds of people in each one!.... and yet you do have the proof ... this fascinates me, yes...
However one thing that might be a key difference (at least moreso in the past, perhaps) between the US and Canada/UK is the proportion of non-Caucasian people in each -- maybe there is some sort of cultural differences that were not vectored for???
For example, although the "race question" is possibly no longer appropriate to ask, I'm nevertheless wondering about whether the data that was collected asked about whether respondents were from visible and/or ethnic minorities, as well???
I know that this might (or might not?) make a large significant difference, in that most of the minority populations I have worked with in U.S. and then Canada, seem to me to have a stronger value for extended family and emphasis on relationships more than personal property (check some of the comparisons done by Ziller in is work re: photo-taking by kids in Florida and Mexico, for example).
I don't want to make too much of this but.... just the simple question about whether cultural backgrounds of respondents were "controlled for" in some way so that the stats would be more parallel in findings???
And, being that most of my therapy work for many years was with Aboriginal Canadians (called "Native Americans" in the U.S.), I know that there is often a frustration about questionnaires that ask "Caucasian, African-American, *or* Hispanic" only but leave out their own on the list)...
and of course, even what I wrote above is helpful re: a possible answer -- it immediately is useless in that it does not do much at all for explaining the Australian stats...
I think that, for me at least, I'd need to know if the data you are referring to, also asked about cultural groups of origin, amount of time the person has been IN those countries (forever or one generation or ??)...
now if all this was done and the data is STILL what you say, then I'm even more puzzled!!
.... and also, I am curious what you yourself think the answer is (what is the "null hypothesis" you plan to check?) -- as well as telling us why you are so curious about this (i.e., what difference will this "difference that makes a difference" make to you, once you know it?).
Do you have a theory that you hope to check out?
One thought is that perhaps the TAKING of pictures is directly resulting from the choices/reasons of what will be done with these photos afterwards (i.e., if there's no tradition of photo-KEEPING, then why take them...???). That might be worth factoring in, in new questions you ask...
and ditto re: who are these being taken FOR (and WHY) -- and then perhaps working backwards from those investigations --
i.e., questions such as "If no-one besides you were ever going to see this photograph, would you still be taking it?"
I could, perhaps, hypothesize wildly about reasons that come to mind (as an "outside observer" of these groups of people), but I find it hard to generalize about "Americans" or "Canadians" in general, much less about any of their particular behaviors...
Perhaps some of Zaltman's methods could be very useful here!!!
One person whose work you might find useful (possibly) is: Robert Ziller -- his work re: photo-taking across cultures -- he's more of an academic than I am and perhaps has some ideas to share...
Also check Jay Ruby's publications about "death photography" across cultures... Although it's not directly what you are discussing here, there might be some serendipitous insights...
Also perhaps see if there are any stats re: similar population research from those "scrap-booking" companies that have become so popular over recent years...
They have major conferences and gatherings where you might be able to do some additional surveys -- and I'm sure marketers have long been interested in this phenomenon...
As for "theory-based interpretation", well... I'm interested in general, but I'm not primarily an academic (I don't do research per se, as I'm not "funded" or "grant-supported", and so I focus more on being a Private Scholar and consulting from within my own particular knowledge areas (which are, however, quite broad; for example, I have B.A.'s in both Anthropology and Sociology, along with my Psych degree and Counseling Masters). All these, have greatly informed my writing and theorizing about the emotional contents and purposes of personal photo-taking/viewing...)
Final comment??? All I can say is... "hmmm.... interesting!" -- and then wondering what you will be doing with these answers, once you get them???
re: "What is so fascinating is that cross-cultural theorists often put down research among these four countries as not really being "cross cultural" because they are so "similar" in culture" -- I have two thoughts about this above:
a) having been born in the U.S. and lived my first 28 years there (in Texas and New York, speaking of cultural differences inside one single country!) and then moving to Vancouver Canada and now living here since 1973 -- and having taught and lectured in England several times, ..... I can assure you that no, these are NOT similar in culture -- in many ways!!
But more importantly, the population of each country is not a single distinct "culture" itself (able to be generalized about as if it is only one thing), but rather made up of two parts at least:
groups of people from distinct sub-cultures of their own, and possibly more importantly, that those groups are always interconnected and cross-influenced by each other rather than living in distinct entities that supposedly have impermeable boundaries...
Finally, I'm glad you asked about all this -- hopefully others will answer and continue the stimulating dialogue!!
HOWEVER.... I won't be able to keep typing such long replies (my time is very very busy; usually I don't write long messages or send long e-mails), so while I'd be glad to continue these discussions, this would need to be by phone instead... And so I cannot promise to put much more onto this thread, sorry!
thanks for making me think so hard -- I enjoyed it!
Judy
- Re: Cultural differences in picture taking behavior
Posted by Glenn Omura
on 5/25/2007, 7:40 am, in reply to "Re: Cultural differences in picture taking behavior"
35.8.132.68As an academic researcher, I am quite satisfied with the methodological rigor of the photo industry studies. The sampling is designed to be demographically representative of the national demographics. Thanks for your Ziller and Ruby references; I’ll check them out.
Yes, I’ve seen the scrapbooking research also. In fact, that industry has just released a new study (that I haven’t seen yet).
My theory? My preliminary theoretical thinking is that there are national culture differences in family social decision making driving the differences in picture taking behavior.
The systematic behavioral differences among national cultures is important information for companies that market to international venues. Depending on the needs of the company, national buying tendencies may be sufficient knowledge, or segmented (regional, social class, etc.) approaches may be necessary. Editors of marketing journals frequently do not believe there are sufficient cultural differences among the English-speaking countries to allow a prospective author to label his/her research as “cross-cultural” when doing such cross national research. My discovery of systematic differences in picture taking behavior argues that, at least in this one behavioral category, there may be important culturally-driven reasons for consumer behavior. As an academic, I want to know what those drivers are and why they cause these behavioral differences. Any company in the photo industry marketing internationally would likely find the results of my research interesting, e.g., Kodak, HP, Shutterfly, etc. Further, while I claim NO expertise in photo therapy or therapeutic photography, I suspect if I can build and test theory to explain why there are such picture taking behavioral differences, it could have significant impact on your discipline, even if my research is built on national cultures as opposed to individual study. E.g., in one cross-national study, women in Great Britain were found to view children as less central to the family than men, compared to women in four other Western European countries. [Life's Greatest Joy?: European Attitudes toward the Centrality of Children, Rachel K. Jones, April Brayfield, Social Forces, Vol. 75, No. 4 (Jun., 1997), pp. 1239-1269]. What are the implications to photography? Does this mean that British women who view photographs of children will react differently to them than American women due to cultural reasons as opposed to individual dispositions? In the commercial photographic industry, this makes a big difference, as mothers tend to be the primary drivers to taking family pictures in the U.S., and the Jones and Brayfield study begins to provide a teaser of an explanation as to why there is less per capita consumption of picture taking in the U.K.
Glenn Omura
- Re: Cultural differences in picture taking behavior
Posted by Alison Pryor
on 1/13/2008, 11:13 pm, in reply to "Re: Cultural differences in picture taking behavior"
203.166.99.230I am social work clinician looking at this site doing some backgroud reading for presenting a phototherapy session with supervision group with colleagues. (I happen to have a presonal & family interest in photogrpahy)
my only qualification for commenting on this thread of cultural differences of taking photos is being Australian. So my comments are just a personal speculation.
Would the weather have something to do with why US / Australians take more photos? If a significant year is spend predominantly indoors locations due to colder weather ???? Australian culture has a outdoor element even if it only the backyard. It's may be harder to take visually pleasing images indoors (visual clutter tends to get in the way).
Alternative explanations may have to due with the adoption of technology, australians have relatively high penetration of new audiovisual technology - the digital photograpy uptake will be part of this, uptake of email etc.
My other speculation are they taking more photos form them selves or is to send to other people - the Aust population is relatively mobile (though no to the US extent) if you dont live near relatives / friends do you take more pictures to send soemwhere ??.
- Re: Cultural differences in picture taking behavior
Posted by Glenn Omura
on 1/14/2008, 6:13 am, in reply to "Re: Cultural differences in picture taking behavior"
35.8.207.106Good intuitive sense Alison. That hypothesis can be tested by looking at U.S. national data. One could hypothesize that regions with heavier cloud cover (Northwest) or colder climes would have lower pictures per capita than sunnier, warmer areas. That data show insignificant systematic differences when comparing regional differences. Thanks for your interest!
Glenn