This comparative review seeks to explore how international, innovative, multimodal and representative the scholarship published in two visual communication journals, Visual Communication (VC) and Visual Communication Quarterly (VCQ), is over a 25-year period (from VCQ’s founding in 1994 and from VC’s founding in 2002 through 2019). Through examining all 544 research articles published in these journals over this timeframe, an understanding can be achieved regarding which countries and geographic regions have received attention, the methods and means used to advance the authors’ arguments, the visuals under consideration and the authors’ focus and aims, which sometimes overlap with the visuals under consideration and are sometimes distinct from them. The results inform areas of potential future exploration, focus and attention for these two journals but are grounded in an understanding that systemic conditions also influence the types and designs of research that can be published and recognized.
BarnhurstKGVariMRodríguezÍ (2004) Mapping visual studies in communication. Journal of Communication54(4): 616–644.
3.
BarryAM (2009) Mirror neurons: How we become what we see. Visual Communication Quarterly, 16(2): 79–89.
4.
BicketDPackerLA (2004) An early ‘denial of ekphrasis’: Controversy over the breakout of the visual in the Jazz Age tabloids and the New York Times. Visual Communication3(3): 360–379.
BrantnerCGeiseSLobingerK (2012) Fractured paradigm? Theories, concepts and methodology of visual framing research: A systematic review. Paper presented at the International Communication Association, London.
7.
BredekampH (2007) Bilder bewegen: Von der Kunsrkammer zum Endspiel. Berlin: Wagenbach.
8.
ChenAMachinD (2014) The local and the global in the visual design of a Chinese women’s lifestyle magazine: A multimodal critical discourse approach. Visual Communication13(3): 287–301.
9.
CorbinJStraussA (2014) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
DissanayakeW (1989) Paradigm dialogues: A Europocentric universe of discourse. In: DervinB, et al. (eds) Rethinking Communication: Vol. 1: Paradigm Issues. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 166–168.
11.
ElkinsJ (2003) Visual Studies: A Skeptical Introduction. New York, NY: Routledge.
12.
EmmisonMSmithP (2000) Researching the Visual: Images, Objects, Contexts and Interactions in Social and Cultural Enquiry. London: Sage.
13.
GastnerMTSeguyVMoreP (2018) Fast flow-based algorithm for creating density-equalizing map projections. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences115(10): E2156–E2164.
14.
GogginM (2004) Visual rhetoric in pens of steel and inks of silk: Challenging the great visual/verbal divide. In: HillCAHelmersM (eds) Defining Visual Rhetorics. New York, NY: Routledge.
15.
HinthorneLLSimpson ReevesL (2015) Using purpose-made objects for visual research: An exploratory case study. Visual Communication14(2): 155–178.
16.
HoffmanDD (2000) Visual Intelligence: How We Create What We See. New York, NY: WW Norton & Company.
17.
HollowayDBeckJ (eds) (2005) American Visual Cultures. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
18.
JewittC, et al. (2002) Editorial. Visual Communication1(1): 5. DOI: 10.1177/147035720200100101.
19.
JosephsonSKellyJSmithK (eds) (2020) Handbook of Visual Communication: Theory, Methods, and Media. New York, NY: Routledge.
20.
KenneyK (1994) Editorial statement. Visual Communication Quarterly1(1): 20. DOI: 10.1080/15551393.1994.10387489.
21.
LobingerK (2012) Visuelle Kommunikationsforschung: Medienbilder als Herausforderung für die Kommunikations-und Medienwissenschaft. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
22.
MiikeY (2006) Non-Western theory in Western research? An Asiacentric agenda for Asian communication studies. Review of Communication6(1/2): 4–31.
23.
MoriartySBarbatsisG (2005) Introduction: From an oak to a stand of aspen: Visual communication theory mapped as rhizome analysis. In: SmithKL, et al. (eds) The Handbook of Visual Communication: Theory, Methods, and Media. Milton Park, Oxfordshire: Taylor & Francis.
24.
MoriartySEKenneyK (1995) Visual communication: A taxonomy and bibliography. Journal of Visual Literacy15(2): 7–156.
25.
MüllerMG (2007) What is visual communication? Past and future of an emerging field of communication research. Studies in Communication Sciences7(2).
26.
NewtonJH (2002) Commentary. Visual Communication Quarterly9(1): 3. DOI: 10.1080/15551390209363472.
27.
OlsonLC (2007) Intellectual and conceptual resources for visual rhetoric: A re-examination of scholarship since 1950. Review of Communication7(1): 1–20. DOI: 10.1080/15358590701211035.
28.
PauwelsL (2012) Contemplating the state of visual research: An assessment of obstacles and opportunities. In: PinkS (ed.) Advances in Visual Methodology. London: Sage, 248–264.
29.
PauwelsL (2019) Interrogating Boundaries and Frontiers of Visual Communication Studies. Keynote speech presented at the International Communication Association: Crossing Boundaries in Visual Communication Research Pre-Conference, Washington, DC.
30.
ProsserJ (ed.) (1998) Image-Based Research: A Sourcebook for Qualitative Researchers. Hove, East Sussex: Psychology Press.
31.
RandhawaB (1976) Visual literacy: Prospectus for the future. Association for Educational Communications and Technology5(3): 16–17.
32.
RossmanGBRallisSF (2012) Learning in the Field: An Introduction to Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
33.
RubyJ (2005) The last 20 years of visual anthropology: A critical review. Visual Studies20(2): 159–170.
34.
SchillD (2012) The visual image and the political image: A review of visual communication research in the field of political communication. Review of Communication12(2): 118–142.
35.
StraussACorbinJ (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
