This article offers emergent methodological frameworks toward sensuously analyzing go-along interviews. Recently, scholars have called for analyses of go-alongs that include affective moments and experiences of the go-alongs to offer insight into everyday experiences beyond the words spoken during the interview. This article offers analytical narratives of a study with trans, queer, and non-binary youth that focus on such moments during go-alongs when the act of doing research brought conversations to a halt. Such attention allows for deeper understanding of how senses experienced during interviews impact that which was produced, and not just what was said, during go-alongs.
BrockenbroughE. (2015). Queer of color agency in educational contexts: Analytic frameworks from a queer of color critique. Educational Studies, 51(1), 28–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2014.979929
2.
CarpianoR. M. (2009). Come take a walk with me: The “go-along” interview as a novel method for studying the implications of place for health and well-being. Health and Place, 15(1), 263–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2008.05.003
3.
CastrodaleM. A. (2018). Mobilizing dis/ability research: A critical discussion of qualitative go-along interviews in practice. Qualitative Inquiry, 24(1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800417727765
4.
CohenC. J. (1997). Punks, bulldaggers, and welfare queens: The radical potential of queer politics?GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 3(4), 437–465. https://doi.org/10.1215/10642684-3-4-437
EllsworthE. A. (2005). Places of learning: Media, architecture, pedagogy. RoutledgeFalmer.
7.
FlickU.HirselandA.HansB. (2019). Walking and talking integration: Triangulation of data from interviews and go-alongs for exploring immigrant welfare recipients’ sense(s) of belonging. Qualitative Inquiry, 25(8), 799–810. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800418809515
8.
GarciaC. M.EisenbergM. E.FrerichE. A.LechnerK. E.LustK. (2012). Conducting go-along interviews to understand context and promote health. Qualitative Health Research, 22(10), 1395–1403. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732312452936
LorimerH. (2015). Afterward: Non-representational theory and me too. In VanniniP. (Ed.), Non-representational methodologies: Re-envisioning research (pp. 177–187). Routledge.
MacLureM.HolmesR.JonesL.MacRaeC. (2010). Silence as resistance to analysis: Or, on not opening one’s mouth properly. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 492–500. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410364349
O’DonoghueD. (2013). “The otherness that implicates the self”: Towards an understanding of gendering from a theory of proximity. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(4), 400–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2013.765611
PortaC. M.CorlissH. L.WolowicJ. M.JohnsonA. Z.FogelK. F.GowerA. L.. . . EisenbergM. E. (2017). Go-along interviewing with LGBTQ youth in Canada and the United States. Journal of LGBT Youth, 14, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2016.1256245
17.
RamsdenH. (2014). A walk around the block: Creating spaces for everyday encounters. In ShortellT.BrownE. (Eds.), Walking in the European city: Quotidian mobility and urban ethnography (pp. 225–244). Ashgate Publishing.
ShortwellT.BrownE. (2014). Walking in the European city: Quotidian mobility and urban ethnography. Ashgate Publishing.
20.
SpinneyJ. (2015). Close encounters? Mobile methods, (post)phenomenology and affect. Cultural Geographies, 22(2), 231–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474474014558988
VanniniP.VanniniA. (2017). Wild walking: A twofold critique of the walk-along method. In BatesC.Rhys-TaylorA. (Eds.), Walking through social research (pp. 179–195). Routledge.
