The growing integration of technology in visual methodologies highlights its transformative impact on research in today’s digital world. It is essential to consider contexts where technology is used, ensuring that principles of community, human connection, and action remain central. Employing a duoethnographic approach, we draw lessons from two studies applying participatory visual methods with young people in Malawi that utilized technology through photovoice, WhatsApp, Zoom, and Flickr. We argue that if not guided by Ubuntu principles of sharing and collaborative knowledge-making, technology supporting qualitative inquiry in African contexts poses risks of participatory research excluding marginalized communities.
AbubakreM.FaikI.MkansiM. (2021). Digital entrepreneurship and indigenous value systems: An Ubuntu perspective. Information Systems Journal, 31(6), 838–862. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12343
2.
BellD. A.MetzT. (2011). Confucianism and Ubuntu: Reflections on a dialogue between Chinese and African traditions. Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 38(s1), 78–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6253.2012.01690.x
3.
BernardH. R. (2006). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (4th ed.). New York, NY: AltaMira Press.
4.
BurkholderC.MakramallaM.AbdouE.KhojaN.KhanF. (2015). Why study power in digital spaces anyway? Considering power and participatory visual methods. Perspectives in Education, 2015(4), 33.
5.
CammarotaJ. (2015). The praxis of ethnic studies: Transforming second sight into critical consciousness. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 19(2), 233–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2015.1041486
6.
CampbellS.GreenwoodM.PriorS.ShearerT.WalkemK.YoungS.BywatersD.WalkerK. (2020). Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing: JRN, 25(8), 652–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206
7.
ChamdimbaE. (2025). Indigenous ethics through a research advisory group of persons with albinism: Umunthu practices for decolonizing and (re-)centering othered voices in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004251322728
8.
ChamdimbaE.KabiruC.W.UshieB.A.MunthaliA.ThakwalakwaC.AjayiA.I. (2023). Naïve, uninformed and sexually abused: circumstances surrounding adolescent pregnancies in Malawi. Reproductive Health, 20(114), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-023-01655-3
9.
ChilisaB. (2019). Indigenous research methodologies. Sage Publications.
10.
ChinkondenjiP. (2022). Schoolgirl pregnancy, dropout or pushout?: an Ubuntucentric re-construction of the education for student mothers in Malawi. Gender and Education, 34(6), 738–753. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2022.2061922
11.
ChinkondenjiP. (2023). The Im/possibilities of (Un)making In-school Pregnancy and Student Motherhood [as Praxis]: Schooling Post-Pregnancy Amidst Health and Social Crises in Malawi. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Amherst, College of Education Dissertations Collection.
12.
ChinkondenjiP. (2025). ‘Having a child is not a barrier:’ an African-feminist perspective in (un)making schooling for pregnant learners and re-integration of student mothers. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2025.2452472
13.
ChinkondenjiP.ChamdimbaE. (2024) (Submitted for publication). Through the eyes of Umunthu: Participatory visual research with marginalized youth in Afrocentric indigenous research ethics. [Redacted].
14.
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
15.
DaveyN. G.BenjaminsenG. (2021). Telling tales: Digital storytelling as a tool for qualitative data interpretation and communication. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211022529
16.
de JagerA.FogartyA.TewsonA.LenetteC.BoydellK. M. (2017). Digital storytelling in research: A systematic review. Qualitative report (22, pp. 2548–2582). Peace and Conflict Studies.
17.
DurantK. L.Kortes-MillerK. (2023). “And then COVID hit”: (Re)flexibility of digital storytelling in qualitative health research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231170953
18.
GamaL. C.ChipetaG. T.ChawingaW. D. (2022). Electronic learning benefits and challenges in Malawi’s higher education: A literature review. Education and Information Technologies, 27(8), 11201–11218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11060-1
19.
Gómez-CruzE.HorstH.SilesI.SorianoC. (2023). Beyond the tropicalization of concepts: Theorizing digital realities with and from the Global South (introduction to a special issue). Communication, Culture & Critique, 16(4), 217–220.
20.
GubriumA.HarperK. (2016). Participatory visual and digital methods. Routledge.
21.
HampshireK.Mwase-VumaT.AlemuK.AbaneA.MunthaliA.AwokeT.MariwahS.ChamdimbaE.OwusuS. A.RobsonE.CastelliM.ShkedyZ.ShawaN.AbelJ.KasimA. (2021). Informal mhealth at scale in Africa: Opportunities and challenges. World development Development, 139(105257). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105257
22.
HanauerD. (2021). Poetic writing research: The history, methods, and outcomes of poetic (auto)ethnography. In DonaldK.ArthurM. J. (Eds.), Handbook of empirical literary studies (pp. 421–448). De Gruyter.
23.
JohnsonA. T. (2013). Exploring the Use of Mobile Technology in Qualitative Inquiry in Africa. The Qualitative Report, 18(22), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2013.1512
24.
KayangeG. M. (2018). Meaning and truth in African philosophy: Doing African philosophy with language. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
25.
KeenS.Lomeli-RodriguezM.JoffeH. (2022). From challenge to opportunity: Virtual qualitative research during COVID-19 and beyond. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221105075
26.
KhombaJ. K.Kangaude-UlayaE. C. (2013). Indigenisation of corporate strategies in Africa: Lessons from the African Ubuntu philosophy. China-USA Business Review, 12(7), 672–689.
27.
LiteratI. (2013). “A pencil for your thoughts”: Participatory drawing as a visual research method with children and youth. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 12(1), 84–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691301200143
28.
LuscheiT. F. (2016). Translating ubuntu to Spanish: Convivencia as a framework for re-centring education as a moral enterprise. International Review of Education, 62(1), 91–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-016-9543-z
MarovahT.MutangaO. (2023). Decolonising participatory research: Can Ubuntu philosophy contribute something?International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 27(5), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2023.2214022
31.
MilnerH. R. (2007). Race, culture, and researcher positionality: Working through dangers seen, unseen, and unforeseen. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 388–400. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x07309471
32.
MitchellC.De LangeN.MoletsaneR. (2017). Participatory visual methodologies: Social change, community and policy. Sage Publications.
33.
MugumbateJ.NyanguruA. (2013). Exploring African philosophy: The value of Ubuntu in social work. African Journal of Social Work, 3(1), 82–100.
34.
NguyenX. T. (2018). Critical disability studies at the edge of global development: Why do we need to engage with Southern theory?Canadian Journal of Disability Studies, 7(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.15353/cjds.v7i1.400
35.
NorrisJ.BhattacharyaK.PowellK. (2020). Embodying moral discourses through arts-based methodologies: Poetry, visual arts, movement, sounds, and performance. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 20(1), 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532708619890384
36.
NyariroM. (2021). “We have heard you but we are not changing anything”: Policymakers as audience to a photovoice exhibition on challenges to school re-entry for young mothers in Kenya. Agenda, 35(1), 94–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/10130950.2020.1855850
37.
PaulusT. M.JacksonK.DavidsonJ. (2017). Digital tools for qualitative research: Disruptions and entanglements. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(10), 751–756. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800417731080
38.
RahmanS. A.TuckermanL.VorleyT.GherhesC. (2021). Resilient research in the field: Insights and lessons from adapting qualitative research projects during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211016106
39.
SaldañaJ. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
40.
SawyerR. D.NorrisJ. (2013). Duoethnography: Understanding qualitative research. Oxford University Press.
41.
SimeD. (2008). Ethical and methodological issues in engaging young people living in poverty with participatory research methods. Children's Geographies, 6(1), 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733280701791926
42.
VaughnL. M.JacquezF. (2020). Participatory research methods–Choice points in the research process. Journal of Participatory Research Methods, 1(1), Article 13244. https://doi.org/10.35844/001c.13244
43.
WangC.BurrisM. A. (1997). Photovoice: Concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs assessment. Health Education & Behavior: The Official Publication of the Society for Public Health Education, 24(3), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019819702400309
44.
WangC.BurrisM. A.PingX. Y. (1996). Chinese village women as visual anthropologists: A participatory approach to reaching policymakers. Social Science & Medicine (1982), 42(10), 1391–1400. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(95)00287-1
45.
WangC. C. (1999). Photovoice: A participatory action research strategy applied to women’s health. Journal of Women’s Health, 8(2), 185–192. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.1999.8.185
