Studying visual literacy: Research methods and the use of visual evidence

Abstract

The proliferation of images and their increased use in academic and everyday information practices has sparked an interest in visual literacy as an area of research and library instruction. Teaching approaches and student learning are examined using a variety of research methods and utilizing images in the research process. This paper provides a review of research methodology adopted in empirical studies of visual literacy that were published in academic journals between 2011 and 2017. The results indicate that one third (33%) of the examined studies adopted a quantitative approach with surveys being the most popular strategy. Qualitative and mixed-methods studies were a minority but represented a greater variety of strategies and data collection techniques. One third (33%) of the studies in the sample did not report any research methodology. Most of the studies (87%) used visual evidence in the research process.

Keywords

Images qualitative research methods quantitative research methods research methodology visual literacy visual materials

Introduction

Visual literacy represents a set of essential competencies for modern learners in academic and everyday information practices. Image users are not only viewers, but also creators and active contributors of visual information. Visual literacy has traditionally been affiliated with art history and art education but is now becoming an important concept across academic disciplines and in social media environments. Advances in digital technology have contributed to the proliferation of images and increased the relevance of visual literacy. Images are used in professional, scholarly, and daily information practices (Beaudoin, 2014; Ewalt, 2016; Yoon, 2011). The abundance of visual resources has opened new possibilities for teaching and learning in an academic environment (Elkins, 2007; Matusiak, 2013; Ulbig, 2010). Among many literacy types, it is the visual one that is often recognized as the most essential for 21st-century learners (Avgerinou, 2009; Felten, 2008; Hattwig et al., 2013).

The importance of visual literacy skills has increased with the development of the Web as a highly visual medium and the ease of taking images and sharing them. Images are an essential component of communication in the social media environment. Online users can post images on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, and other applications. Visual information is an important element of messages shared on Twitter (Thelwall et al., 2016; Yoon and Chung, 2016). However, being surrounded by visual media does not necessarily mean that users know how to create images or interpret their meaning. In the Web 2.0 environment, people are not only consumers but also producers of visual content and need adequate skills in creating and processing images. In addition, evaluation skills are extremely critical as images are easily manipulated and used in creating distorted messages. In the world of fake news, users need to be multi-literate and be able to evaluate the authenticity and credibility of textual as well as visual information (Cooke, 2018; Shen et al., 2019).

With the expanding roles of images in communication, education, and everyday life practices, visual literacy is gaining more attention in research and in library practice. The concept of visual literacy has been debated for over five decades (Michelson, 2017). However, empirical studies investigating how individuals select, evaluate, and use images, or create and share visual content, are relatively new and often multidisciplinary. They present new opportunities as well as challenges in the selection of research methodology and the type of collected data. Researchers with diverse educational and disciplinary backgrounds may choose different research methods and strategies. Data can be collected in multiple forms of representation. In addition to textual and numeric data, researchers can use visual resources in the research process and collect data in the visual form.

The emerging character of visual literacy practices provides a fertile ground for studying the evolving field of research methodologies. Use of images in teaching and student learning with visual resources can be examined using a variety of research methods and sources of data. As Berg and Banks (2016: 470) note, “research does not only require a static set of skills and abilities (competencies), but rather the readiness to continually evolve and grow in experience, knowledge, and abilities”. This paper reports the findings from a study that examined the use of research methodologies in empirical studies of visual literacy practices and investigated the type of visual evidence gathered during the research process.

Background

Literacy practices mediated by digital technology involve interaction with resources in many different modes of representation and require multiple literacy skills. Information literacy has been at the center of library and information science (LIS) research and practice, but the LIS field is also acknowledging other literacy types and exploring the relationships between them. A taxonomy of literacies identifies multiple dimensions and lists a number of literacy types, including digital, information, scientific, media, technological, etc. (Stordy, 2015). The conceptual frameworks recognize the complexity of what it means to be literate in the digital environment and attempting to combine or unify different literacy types. Visual literacy is a key component of metaliteracy and transliteracy frameworks that identify a wide range of required literacy competencies and combine or integrate different literacy types (Ipri, 2010; Mackey and Jacobson, 2014; Thomas et al., 2007). Interestingly, visual literacy predates many of the newer literacy types and frameworks. It is even older than the concept of information literacy. Many definitions of visual literacy exist, and it has been only recently that researchers began to reach some agreement on the meaning of the term (Michelson, 2017).

Defining visual literacy

The early definitions of visual literacy were introduced in the pre-digital era. John Debes is generally credited with developing the first definition of visual literacy in the 1960s (Michelson, 2017). Debes and other scholars from the Rochester School emphasized the development of vision-competencies and their integration with other sensory experiences. This definition has been adopted by the International Visual Literacy Association (IVLA) and is featured on the organization’s website (IVLA, 2019). Early concepts emphasized visual cognition and perception, and the processes involved in understanding and interpreting visual resources. The skills in creating or processing images for the purpose of making meaning were generally overlooked, since at that time visual design was considered the domain of artists and craftsmen. Considine (1986) was one of the few scholars who emphasized comprehension as well as skills in creating images. The combination of skills in understanding and generating visual content became even more important when digital technology enabled users to create and share images easily.

Visual literacy is understood broadly and refers to the competencies in using and interpreting a variety of resources in the visual mode of representation, including still images, photography, film, video, mass media, and 3D objects (Chauvin, 2003; Messaris, 1994; Spalter and Van Dam, 2008). In many cases, visual and media literacy overlap. Visual literacy is listed in the UNESCO (2013) media and information literacy guidelines. The current understanding of visual literacy emphasizes visual cognition and perception as well as skills in visual design. The shift towards understanding visual literacy as going beyond “reading” and interpreting images has been evident in research literature since the late 2000s (Avgerinou, 2009; Brumberger, 2011; Felten, 2008; Spalter and Van Dam, 2008).

The Visual Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education, proposed by the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL), emphasize visual literacy as a multidimensional phenomenon, defining it as “a set of abilities that enables an individual to effectively find, interpret, evaluate, use, and create images and visual media” (ACRL, 2011). The document provides a foundation for developing a standard-based curriculum for library instruction to teach students skills and critical thinking with regard to visual materials (Hattwig et al., 2013). The Visual Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education identify seven areas of competencies for visually literate individuals, including needs assessment and skills in finding, interpreting, evaluating, and using images. Design and creation of images and visual media features prominently as a separate standard. In addition to a set of standards, the framework also includes a list of associated performance indicators and learning outcomes. Visual literacy is also closely aligned with the current ACRL Framework for Information, particularly regarding the active role of users in the information creation process (ACRL, 2015).

Visual literacy has been defined and conceptualized in a variety of ways in the last 50 years since Debes proposed the first definition. Despite many reviews and theoretical discussions, however, multiple definitions prevail. Kędra (2018) attributes this lack of consensus to the multidisciplinary and elective nature of the field. The author argues that researchers should put aside the debate on definitions and focus on competencies evaluating what visually literate means. The focus on competencies and academic practices should help move research forward on visual literacy instruction and visual practices, and contribute to systematic education of visually literate individuals.

Teaching visual literacy

Recognition of the importance of visual competencies in the digital environment is accompanied by calls for teaching skills in visual literacy, especially that instruction in higher education has been traditionally focused on materials in the textual mode (Avgerinou, 2009; Felten, 2008). As Messaris (1994) points out, education focused on visual resources has been neglected by educational institutions despite visual modes of representation being more accessible than text alone. Most first-time viewers can interpret images on some level without preexisting skills. However, images can have several layers of meaning that are inaccessible to inexperienced viewers but can be revealed with more exposure and instruction. Research on visual literacy in higher education emphasizes the need to teach visual literacy across disciplines (Felten, 2008; Little et al., 2010; Milbourn, 2013; Schoen, 2015).

Academic libraries have traditionally been involved in teaching information literacy through a variety of strategies, including one-shot library sessions, course-integrated instruction, and online tutorials. Visual literacy intersects with information literacy and typically emphasizes skills in selecting and evaluating resources. Visual literacy can be a component of library information literacy workshops, or entire sessions can be devoted to visual literacy concepts and competencies as is often the case in art, art history, and communications curricula (Schoen, 2015). Harris (2010) is a strong proponent of integrating visual literacy and information literacy instruction and offers a number of practical suggestions for incorporating visual literacy into library practice and theory. In addition to library workshops, visual literacy instruction can be embedded into classroom activities and taught in the context of disciplinary content (Milbourn, 2013; Schwartz, 2018)

LIS literature recognizes the importance of visual competencies for 21st-century learners and provides useful guidelines for integrating visual literacy into library instruction sessions or embedding it into the curriculum (Beatty, 2013; Harris, 2010; Hattwig et al., 2013). However, a recent survey of academic libraries in the United States indicates the lack of awareness of the Visual Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education and limited visual literacy instruction (Schwartz, 2018). The majority of academic librarians (62.7%) who participated in the survey stated that they did not teach visual literacy; 53.4% were not aware of the Visual Literacy Standards. Schwartz (2018) conducted follow-up interviews with 16 participants and found that those academic librarians who are interested in visual literacy use creative approaches to incorporate it into instruction.

Methodological approaches

With the expanding role of images in an academic environment and social media and the calls for teaching visual competencies, visual literacy is becoming a new area of research investigations. In empirical studies, researchers can select from a variety of methodological approaches, strategies, and data collection techniques to study participants’ skills in creating, interpreting or evaluating visual resources. Research in the LIS field tends to adopt methodological approaches established in social sciences, including quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method designs (Connaway and Radford, 2017; Creswell, 2013). Research practitioners in the library field typically use social science methods, although they often report lack of adequate training in research methodologies (Alemanne and Mandel, 2018; Kennedy and Brancolini, 2012, 2018; Luo, 2011).

Early methodological reviews of LIS publications distinguish between qualitative and quantitative types of research and consider a combination of both (Järvelin and Vakkari, 1990). Furthermore, the authors identify research strategies, such as historical research, survey, case study, bibliometric analysis, and experiment. Data collection techniques include questionnaires, interviews, observations, thinking aloud, citation analysis, content analysis, and historical source analysis. Hider and Pymm (2008) adopted this classification and added new data collection techniques, such as focus groups, journal entries, transaction log analysis, and task analysis.

The typology of research approaches as qualitative and quantitative is now well established in the LIS field. Recognition of the mixed-method design, however, is relatively new. Fidel (2008) examined the use of the mixed-method approach and concluded that the implementation of this research design is minimal in LIS, accounting for 5% of surveyed publications. Low adoption of mixed-method approaches was also found in the methodological review of research studying information behavior of image users (Matusiak, 2017). Comprehensive reviews of research methods in LIS research studies indicate that surveys are one of the most frequently adopted methods (Aytac and Slutsky, 2015; Chu, 2015; Luo, 2011; Luo and McKinney, 2015; Matusiak, 2017).

Literature review of studies examining visual literacy provides examples of survey and case study research as well as attempts to adopt new research strategies. Brumberger (2011) conducted a survey of college students and evaluated their skills in interpreting images and in producing and editing visual communications. Emanuel and Challons-Lipton (2013) undertook a similar study surveying the visual skills of digital natives and focusing on image recognition. Case studies offer insight into teaching visual literacy in disciplinary contexts and provide examples of classroom activities (Beaudoin, 2016; Bell, 2014; Matusiak, 2013; Ravas and Stark, 2012). Matusiak et al. (2019a, 2019b) examined students’ visual literacy skills and the use of images in the context of academic work in a qualitative exploratory study. The researchers adopted Consensual Qualitative Research (CQR), a method developed in counseling psychology.

However, the literature review provides only a snapshot of research methods used in studying visual literacy practices. The purpose of this study was to examine the research methods in a systematic manner and to investigate the use of visual evidence collected during the research process.

Methodology

This study undertakes a systematic review of the research methodology employed in the study of visual literacy. It conducts content analysis of the articles on visual literacy in terms of research strategies within the quantitative and qualitative traditions and mixed-methods designs, data collection techniques, user populations, and use of visual materials in the research process. The following research questions have been posed for the study:

What types of participants are involved in the studies of visual literacy?

What research methods are used in the studies exploring visual literacy?

What type of visual evidence is used in the research process?

For the purpose of this study, the author analyzed empirical research studies of visual literacy published between 2011 and 2017 and indexed in two databases: Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA) and Communication and Mass Media Complete (CMMC). The selection of the date range is based on the literature review that indicates the scarcity of empirical studies in the early research on visual literacy (Hattwig et al., 2011; Schwartz, 2018). The publication of the ACRL Visual Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education (2011) sparked more interest in this area of research.

This study consisted of two phases: (1) the identification of empirical studies that report research on visual literacy (2) content analysis of the sample. The core list of publications was identified through a series of structured queries using “visual literacy” or a combination “visual or image*” AND literacy in the subject field of LISTA and CMMC databases. All queries were limited to publications in English. After the duplicates were removed, the initial list of publications was further reviewed and filtered to focus on empirical studies. Many results retrieved from the LISTA and CMMC databases on the topic of visual literacy represented theoretical papers and were not selected for this analysis. The review process yielded a total of 30 empirical studies. Ten studies in the sample did not explicitly state the research methodology although they reported findings from informal observations and examples of interactions with visual materials. They were included in the analysis. The unit of analysis in this study is a research publication.

In the second phase of the study, the selected publications were reviewed and analyzed systematically for the research methodology in approaches, strategies, and the use of data collection methods, as well as reporting of data about user populations and types of visual materials used in the research process. Content analysis was used as a method of examining and coding the variables. The following variables have been examined in the study:

Research approach is an overall plan or design for conducting research, not just a method of data analysis (Creswell 2012; 2013). The typology used in social science research includes three approaches:

Qualitative

Quantitative

Mixed methods

Research strategies are types of qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-method approaches that provide a specific direction for procedures and the selection of methods in data collection and analysis.

Survey and experimental design are common strategies within the quantitative approach.

Examples of strategies within the qualitative approach include ethnographic research, case study, grounded theory, narrative, and phenomenology (Creswell, 2012).

Data collection methods include techniques used to collect data; examples include questionnaires, interviews, and observations.

Types of participants represent individuals recruited for the studies.

Types of visual evidence used in the research process encompass two categories:

Types of visual resources selected from secondary sources;

Types of images created by participants during the research process.

Findings

The articles in the analyzed sample were published in 14 journals. The largest number of articles (n = 14, 47%) were published in the Journal of Visual Literacy, followed by Art Documentation: Bulletin of the Art Libraries Society of North America (n = 4, 13%) and Journal of Documentation (n = 2, 7%). Ten journals were a source of one study (33%). The international coverage was extremely limited with 25 studies (83%) taking place in the United States and two (7%) in Sweden. Three countries were a place of one reported study: Cyprus, Nigeria, and Puerto Rico. The selection of the LISTA and CMMC databases as a source of publications and restricting the queries to English likely contributed to the limited international coverage of the sample.

Most of the reported studies were conducted in educational settings, including elementary schools, high schools, and universities. Academic libraries and university classrooms provided fertile ground for examining student visual literacy competencies and testing the impact of instruction. As demonstrated in Figure 1, many studies (n = 18, 60%), engaged undergraduate, graduate, or a mix of undergraduate and graduate students. While architecture, visual studies, and art history students (24%) were represented heavily in the sample, several studies also involved participants from the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines (18%), education (18%), cultural studies (4%), and library and information science (4%). A significant portion of the studies was conducted with undergraduate students across multiple disciplines (32%).

Figure 1.

Types of participants reported in the articles (n = 30).

The studies analyzed in the sample represent the three research approaches: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods. As Figure 2 demonstrates, 10 studies in the sample (33%) were conducted using quantitative methodology, 27% (n = 8) were qualitative, and a smaller number of studies (n = 2) undertook a mixed-method approach. Five studies in the quantitative category used surveys as a data collection technique. These surveys focused on the participants’ skills in recognizing iconic pictures and symbols or interpreting images. Four studies in the quantitative category adopted experimental design by conducting comparison between groups that received no intervention and those that were exposed to a form of visual literacy instruction or worked with visual materials. Case studies, grounded theory, ethnography, and design-based research were used as qualitative strategies. Qualitative studies demonstrated a higher number and a greater variety of data collection techniques with a combination of observations, interviews, and content analysis. The two studies classified as mixed-methods consisted of quantitative and qualitative data collection techniques, such as questionnaires and observations, but also employed quantitative and qualitative approaches to data analysis and reporting.

Figure 2.

Research approaches adopted in the examined studies (n = 30).

Ten articles (33%) did not discuss the research methodology. The studies could be classified as case studies as they described participant interaction with visual resources and visual literacy instruction in specific classroom or workshop contexts. However, the case descriptions were based on the instructor’s informal classroom observations and description of student work rather than systematic data collection and analysis.

The use of visual resources as a source of data in the research process is a unique aspect of studies focused on visual literacy practices. Most of the studies in the sample (n = 26, 87%) used images in the research process. Both analog and digital formats were present. The images were selected from secondary sources (n = 18, 60%) or produced by participants during the research process (n = 11, 37%). Three studies involved the combination of images from secondary sources as well as those made as part of a research project. Visual materials were used to elicit comments, as a subject of content analysis, or as a component of observation or testing of participant skills. Table 1 lists types of visual resources selected from secondary sources, provides source information (when reported in the study; otherwise is marked as NA – not available), and relates the use of images to the research strategy.

Table 1.

Types of visual resources selected from secondary sources.

Image type	Image source	No. of studies	Research strategy
Digitized photographs and artwork	Digital image collections	3	Qualitative case studies
Paintings and icons	Web	3	Quantitative surveys
Digital photographs	Web	3	Qualitative case study; ethnography experimental design
Diagrams, maps, and visualizations	Scholarly publications	2	Experimental design; design-based research
Cartoons	NA	2	Case study; experimental design
Pictures in books	Books	2	Case study – classroom observation
Graphics	Graphic novels	1	Case study – classroom observation
Images of paintings	NA	1	Mixed-methods
Film	NA	1	Case study – classroom observation
Total		18

As Table 1 demonstrates, the studies employed a wide range of visual resources from picture books to images selected from digital cultural heritage collections. The studies that included images in surveys or in classroom instruction focused on participants’ skills in analyzing and interpreting images.

More than one-third of the studies (n = 11, 37%) analyzed images produced by participants and involved the investigation of participants’ competency in interpreting images and creating visual forms of communication. Table 2 lists types of materials generated by participants and used actively during the research process. Three studies adopted comparative experimental design and quantitative analysis. Many of the studies in this category are classified as case studies that relied on informal classroom or workshop observations.

Table 2.

Types of images created by participants during the research process.

Image type	No. of studies	Research strategy
Drawings	2	Experimental design;case study – classroom observation
Photographs	2	Ethnographycase study – classroom observation
Art work	1	Case study – workshop observation
Cartoons	1	Experimental design;
Digital posters	1	Experimental design;
Graphic novels	1	Case study – classroom observation
Posters	1	Mixed-methods
Video	1	Case study – classroom observation
Visualization	1	Case study – classroom observation
Total	11

A significant number of studies using visual materials in the research process is understandable and expected in research of visual literacy. The variety of image types and sources points to the prevalence of visual materials and wealth of sources that can be used by students, librarians, and instructors for learning and teaching purposes and for researchers as a form of data. The types of visual materials identified in this study demonstrate the diversity of the modern information environment and the need to teach visual literacy competencies.

Discussion

The findings of this study indicate that empirical research of visual literacy practices is a new and multidisciplinary area. The diverse background of participants with students from art as well as STEM disciplines indicates a multidisciplinary character of visual literacy research. The examined studies included participants from multiple disciplines and were made up of university students and school children of different ages. The studies were conducted in libraries but also in the classroom and other educational settings. The findings about the type of participants signify that visual literacy is no longer an exclusive domain of art history and art education at universities. Research on visual literacy has expanded to other disciplines and school environments.

A relatively small number of studies indexed in the LISTA and CMMC databases points to the emergent character of this research. The limited number of visual literacy studies is somewhat surprising, especially that images are prevalent in social media and everyday practices but may reflect the traditional focus on text as a primary source of knowledge in academia. Visual literacy is still on the margins of academic discourse despite calls for making it part of the core curriculum in liberal education (Elkins, 2007; Little et al., 2010). The results are also aligned with recent studies on library instruction and students’ skills and perceptions. Schwartz (2018), who reported the lack of awareness of the Visual Literacy Competency Standards, pointed to the lack of training in visual literacy in the LIS programs as one of the reasons for the limited adoption of visual literacy in academic libraries. Information literacy with its focus on textual resources remains at the center of library instruction. Studies reporting the students’ lack of basic skills in selecting, evaluating, and using images for academic work relate it to the limited library and classroom instruction in visual literacy concepts and competencies (Matusiak et al., 2019b).

The methodological approaches of the studies in the sample mirror the trends in LIS empirical research. The dominance of the quantitative approach with the use of experiments and surveys and a lower number of qualitative and mixed-methods strategies were also found in other content analysis or survey studies (Aytac and Slutsky, 2015; Chu, 2015; Luo, 2011; Matusiak, 2017). However, the high number of studies that relied on informal observations as opposed to a systematic data collection found in this study is unusual. Many studies in the sample were conducted by practicing librarians or teachers, and as Aytac and Slutsky (2015) note, practitioner research tends to be descriptive and site specific. The lack of reporting on research designs and data analysis in those studies may also be related to the limited training in research methods in LIS education that was discussed in previous research (Alemanne and Mandel, 2018; Kennedy and Brancolini, 2012, 2018; Luo, 2011).

Kennedy and Brancolini (2012, 2018) identified a number of factors that contribute to the successful completion and dissemination of research by library practitioners, including confidence, mentorship, institutional support, and training. Interestingly, 77% of academic librarians participating in the recent survey reported conducting research, but only 17% believed that their LIS Master’s degree adequately prepared them to conduct original research (Kennedy and Brancolini, 2018). The call for new approaches to teaching research methods in LIS programs has been a reoccurring theme in literature. The authors emphasize the need to go beyond basic overview courses, diversifying course offerings, and incorporating hands-on experience in collecting and analyzing data (Alemanne and Mandel, 2018; Evans et al., 2013; Luo, 2017). The exposure to research methodologies beyond fundamentals of qualitative and quantitative research is important for researcher practitioners who are interested in exploring new research areas, such visual literacy practices.

The use of visual materials as a source of research data is a unique aspect of the studies in the sample. Most of the studies reported the use of images in the research process but did not describe the approaches to analyzing visual evidence. The authors of examined publications reported almost no information how visual evidence was analyzed and integrated with other data collected from surveys, observations, or interviews. As Rose (2016) emphasized, researching with visual materials is challenging as images are constructed through various social practices and are open to multiple interpretations. Visual culture and arts-based research developed visual research methods and guidelines for analyzing evidence (Prosser and Loxley, 2008; Rose, 2016; Weber, 2008). Information science research also offers examples of adopting visual analysis techniques to analyzing information concepts (Hartel, 2017). In addition to adopting formal methods to analyzing visual data, studies of visual literacy and other empirical research that utilizes images as data can benefit from employing a variety of research methods and engaging multiple researchers in data collection and analysis (Matusiak et al., 2019b).

Conclusion

This paper provides an overview of research methods and the types of images used in empirical studies of visual literacy practices. It contributes to the discussion about the uniqueness of visual literacy studies by examining the research methodology in a systematic way and highlighting the use of images in the research process. Although this study finds few unique methodological strategies, the analyzed sample does reveal an emergent, multidisciplinary character of visual literacy research and an opportunity for library practitioners to engage in this new area of literacy research and practice. This study advances LIS research by highlighting the importance of visual literacy in the current information environment and the need for studying literacy practices through a variety of research methods. Research such as this study raises awareness of the importance of selecting an appropriate research strategy and points to the diversity of available research methods and types of data. It supports the argument for expanding training in research methods in LIS education and teaching diverse methods. Studying literacy in the current information environment requires researchers to explore new methodological approaches and research data that go beyond words and numbers.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Krystyna Matusiak

References

Alemanne

Mandel

(2018) Developing research practitioners: Exploring pedagogical options for teaching research methods in LIS. Journal of Education for Library & Information Science 59(3): 26–40.

Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL) (2015) Framework for information literacy for higher education. Available at: http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework (accessed 24 May 2019).

Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL) (2011) ACRL Visual Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. Chicago, IL: Association of College & Research Libraries. Available at: http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/visualliteracy (accessed 24 May 2019).

Avgerinou

(2009) Re-viewing visual literacy in the ‘Bain d’images’ era. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning 53(2): 28–34.

Aytac

Slutsky

(2015) Published librarian research, 2008 through 2012: Analyses and perspectives. Collaborative Librarianship 6(4): 147–159.

Beatty

(2013) Cognitive visual literacy: From theories and competencies to pedagogy. Art Documentation: Bulletin of The Art Libraries Society of North America 32(1): 33–42.

Beaudoin

(2014) A framework of image use among archaeologists, architects, art historians and artists. Journal of Documentation 70(1): 119–147.

Beaudoin

(2016) Describing images: A case study of visual literacy among library and information science students. College & Research Libraries 77(3): 376–392.

Bell

(2014) Visual literacy skills of students in college-level biology: Learning outcomes following digital or hand-drawing activities. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 5: 1–16.

10.

Berg

Banks

(2016) Beyond competencies: Naming librarians’ capacity for research. Journal of Academic Librarianship 42(4): 469–471.

11.

Brumberger

(2011) Visual literacy and the digital native: An examination of the millennial learner. Journal of Visual Literacy 30(1): 19–47.

12.

Chauvin

(2003) Visual or media literacy? Journal of Visual Literacy 23(2): 119–128.

13.

Chu

(2015) Research methods in library and information science: A content analysis. Library & Information Science Research 37(1): 36–41.

14.

Connaway

Radford

(2017) Research Methods for Library and Information Science. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.

15.

Considine

(1986) Visual literacy and children’s books: An integrated approach. School Library Journal (September): 38–42.

16.

Cooke

(2018) Fake News and Alternative Facts: Information Literacy in a Post-Truth Era. Chicago, IL: American Library Association.

17.

Creswell

(2012) Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

18.

Creswell

(2013) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

19.

Elkins

(2007) Visual Literacy. New York: Routledge.

20.

Emanuel

Challons-Lipton

(2013) Visual literacy and the digital native: Another look. Journal of Visual Literacy 32(1): 7–26.

21.

Evans

Dresang

Campana

, et al. (2013) Research in action: Taking classroom learning to the field. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science 54(3): 244–252.

22.

Ewalt

(2016) Image as evidence: A citation analysis of visual resources in American history scholarship, 2010–2014. Art Documentation: Journal of the Art Libraries Society of North America 35(2): 206–217.

23.

Felten

(2008) Visual literacy. Change 40(6): 60–64.

24.

Fidel

(2008) Are we there yet? Mixed-methods research in library and information science. Library & Information Science Research 30(4): 265–272.

25.

Harris

(2010) Blurring borders, visualizing connections: Aligning information and visual literacy learning outcomes. Reference Services Review 38(4): 523–535.

26.

Hartel

(2017 Adventures in visual analysis. Visual Methodologies 5(1): 80–91.

27.

Hattwig

Bussert

Medaille

, et al. (2013) Visual literacy standards in higher education: New opportunities for libraries and student learning. portal: Libraries and the Academy 13(1): 61–89.

28.

Hider

Pymm

(2008) Empirical research methods reported in high-profile LIS journal literature. Library & Information Science Research 30(2): 108–114.

29.

International Visual Literacy Association (IVLA) (2019) Visual literacy explained. Available at: https://ivla.org/about-us/visual-literacy-explained/ (accessed 24 May 2019).

30.

Ipri

(2010) Introducing transliteracy: What does it mean to academic libraries? College & Research Libraries News 71(10): 532.

31.

Järvelin

Vakkari

(1990) Content analysis of research articles in library and information science. Library & Information Science Research 12(4): 395–422.

32.

Kędra

(2018) What does it mean to be visually literate? Examination of visual literacy definitions in a context of higher education. Journal of Visual Literacy 37(2): 67–84.

33.

Kennedy

Brancolini

(2012) Academic librarian research: A survey of attitudes, involvement, and perceived capabilities. College & Research Libraries 73(5): 431–448.

34.

Kennedy

Brancolini

(2018) Academic librarian research: An update to a survey of attitudes, involvement, and perceived capabilities. College & Research Libraries 79(6): 822–851.

35.

Little

Felten

Berry

(2010) Liberal education in a visual world. Liberal Education 96(2): 44–49.

36.

Luo

(2011) Fusing research into practice: The role of research methods education. Library & Information Science Research 33(3): 191–201.

37.

Luo

(2017) Diversified research methods education in LIS: Thinking outside the box. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science 58(2): 49–63.

38.

Luo

McKinney

(2015) JAL in the past decade: A comprehensive analysis of academic library research. Journal of Academic Librarianship 41(2):123–129.

39.

Mackey

Jacobson

(2014) Metaliteracy: Reinventing Information Literacy to Empower Learners. Chicago, IL: Neal-Schuman.

40.

Matusiak

(2013) Image and multimedia resources in an academic environment: A qualitative study of students’ experiences and literacy practices. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64 (8): 1577–1589.

41.

Matusiak

(2017) Studying information behavior of image users: An overview of research methodology in LIS literature, 2004–2015. Library and Information Science Research 39 (1): 53–60.

42.

Matusiak

Harper

Heinbach

(2019a) Use and reuse of visual resources in student papers and presentations. The Electronic Library 37 (3): 490–505.

43.

Matusiak

Heinbach

Harper

, et al. (2019b) Visual literacy in practice: Use of images in students’ academic work. College & Research Libraries 80(1).

44.

Messaris

(1994) Visual Literacy: Image, Mind, and Reality. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

45.

Michelson

(2017) A short history of visual literacy: The first five decades. Art Libraries Journal 42(2): 95–98.

46.

Milbourn

(2013) A big picture approach: Using embedded librarianship to proactively address the need for visual literacy instruction in higher education. Art Documentation: Bulletin of The Art Libraries Society of North America 32(2): 274–283.

47.

Prosser

Loxley

(2008) Introducing visual methods. National Centre for Research Methods Review Paper. Available at: http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/420/1/MethodsReviewPaperNCRM-010.pdf (accessed 24 May 2019).

48.

Ravas

Stark

(2012) Pulitzer-prize-winning photographs and visual literacy at the University of Montana: A case study. Art Documentation: Bulletin of The Art Libraries Society of North America 31(1): 34–44.

49.

Rose

(2016) Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to Researching with Visual Materials. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

50.

Schoen

(2015) Teaching visual literacy skills in a one-shot session. Visual Resources Association Bulletin 41(1): 1–12.

51.

Schwartz

(2018) Visual literacy: Academic libraries address 21st century challenges. Reference Services Review 46(4): 479–499.

52.

Shen

Kasra

Pan

, et al. (2019) Fake images: The effects of source, intermediary, and digital media literacy on contextual assessment of image credibility online. New Media & Society 21(2):438–63.

53.

Spalter

van Dam

(2008) Digital visual literacy. Theory into Practice 47(2): 93–101.

54.

Stordy

(2015) Taxonomy of literacies. Journal of Documentation 71(3): 456–476.

55.

Thelwall

Goriunova

Vis

, et al. (2016) Chatting through pictures? A classification of images tweeted in one week in the UK and USA. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 67(11) 2575–2586.

56.

Thomas

Joseph

Laccetti

, et al. (2007) Transliteracy: Crossing divides. First Monday 12(12). Available at: https://firstmonday.org/article/view/2060/1908

57.

Ulbig

(2010) A picture is worth what? Using visual images to enhance classroom engagement. International Journal of Instructional Media 37(2): 185–200.

58.

UNESCO (2013) Media and Information Literacy Policy and Strategy Guidelines. Paris: UNESCO. Available at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000225606 (accessed 24 My 2019).

59.

Weber

(2008) Visual images in research. In: Knowles

Cole

(eds) Handbook of the Arts in Qualitative Research. Los Angles, London: SAGE, pp 44–45.

60.

Yoon

(2011) Searching images in daily life. Library & Information Science Research 33(4): 269–275.

61.

Yoon

Chung

(2016) Image use in social network communication: A case study of tweets on the Boston marathon bombing. Information Research 21(1).