Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Artistic research studies produce a felt and often physically embodied type of knowledge initiated in an artistic experience and consolidated as an art form. The actual art work as the outcome of these studies, complements other types of knowledge and therefore requires attention from systematic review authors who synthesize evidence from primary studies. Working with artistic research evidence in a systematic review context requires a different approach to searching, appraising, analysing and integrating research findings than what is usually promoted by international review organisations. In this paper we outline how the different steps in a systematic review process can be adapted to include art work as as a multimodal type of research evidence in systematic reviews. We discuss useful tactics of identifying artistic research evidence, judging its value, analysing and synthesizing such evidence, hereby building on iconographic, thematic and/or art and design related analytical frameworks. In addition, we feature a gallery approach to present artistic research evidence to end-users and feature a multimodal type of evidence synthesis in which individual art works are comprehensively integrated in an audio visual production.

Keywords

systematic review artistic research methods arts-based research Covid-19 qualitative evidence synthesis

Background

Artistic research (AR) has been described by Boeck (2022, p. 2) as ‘a means of approaching human subjects (including oneself), objects and contexts (current or historical) — an examination often combined with an interest in gaining concrete experiences in an endeavour to convey these in a sensorially perceptible form (to incite reflection, amusement, disturbance or provocation)’. AR should be distinguished from art research in which art items or art movements are taken as the study topic under investigation. AR shares some characteristics with other types of empirical research. It systematically uses the artistic process and the actual making of artistic products as a way of understanding and examining peoples individual or collective experiences (McNiff, 2008). In this particular context, the term systematicity does not refer to a fixed, linear or stepwise methodological approach that should be followed. Rather, the terms refers to the process of creating order in an otherwise chaotic field of data and impressions through acquiring a degree of organization and classification that facilitates intra-, inter-, multi- or transdisciplinary communication. The focus of AR is on how to make sense of the world, either as an individual art researcher or in co-creation with other stakeholders in society. Although AR may start from a particular research question, the most relevant questions in relation to the process of inquiry only become clear during the research process. This process is very similar to some of the more inductive research designs used in qualitative research studies.

Very often, AR provides a starting point for social action, behavioural change or health related interventions (Fancourt & Finn, 2019; Gerber et al., 2020). It is in this particular context that AR outcomes are relevant to be considered by the broader systematic review community. Several advantages of artistic research studies have been reported. For instance, they enable researchers to capture experiences that otherwise might be difficult to express in words or numbers and make research work accessible without oversimplifying it (Boydell et al., 2012). The potential for raising awareness, unsettling stereotypes, challenging dominant ideologies and strengthening critical consciousness of AR studies (Parker & Pollock, 2020) may steer interpretations from review authors and end users in different directions. For example, the art work ‘(Dis)Repair’ (Figure 1) from Archibald and Blines (2021), provides an interesting counter narrative for the standard definition of frailty in elderly populations often used to conceptualize review projects.

Figure 1.

(Dis)repair (Archibald & Blines, 2021).

The art work was produced in response to experiences shared by elderly populations interviewed by the authors. Many of the interviewees resisted the dominant narrative of frailty as an inevitable and unmodifiable result of ageing linked to concepts such as age-related disability, physical impairment and malfunctioning (Morley et al., 2013). The work invites reviewers to reconsider their conceptualization of frailty as a review phenomenon and present evidence that challenges the connotation of frailty as a deficit (Hendry et al., 2019; Jadczak et al., 2018). This shows the potential of AR studies to stimulate meaningful reflection upon, integration, and communication of evidence misalignments (Archibald & Blines, 2021).

Just like any other empirical study, AR studies are processes of inquiry supported by a reflexive methods base. New insights are produced during or alongside the creation process. AR studies produce a felt and physically embodied type of knowledge initiated in an artistic experience and consolidated as an art form, the art work. An art work gives a form to feelings and impressions identified and investigated. It provides a universal understanding of personal experience(s) (personal communication: Mae Jemison, 2020¹). Art work can therefore be considered research evidence in itself. This claim invites review authors to re-visit what qualifies as evidence. Rumbold (2014) emphasizes that objective evidence from the sciences, although presumed to represent the most efficacious, for example in the health and social care sector, is actually not always equated with the desirability of health and social care outcomes. AR, like qualitative research, is often developed from within social constructionism or critical theory. It is able to capture the nuanced and empathic human context. It focusses on the more subtle in-between, holistic phenomena of human experience (Hodgins, 2017) and amplifies our insights and understanding of the human condition necessary for making progress as an individual, an organisation and society more generally. Gerber’s (2022) invitation to acknowledge the usual but productive tensions between scientific accuracy and artistic interpretation when using art work as evidence is of particular importance in the context of revisiting the systematic review process to be inclusive of AR evidence. This tension manifests itself as early as the moment when a review team decides what is considered a relevant ingredient of a review. Art work may not always present itself as a conventional research report, article or book chapter. We encounter it in many different formats: as a graphic novel, a visual diary, a comic, a drawing or painting, a multimedia production, a (series of) photograph(s), a dance or theatre performance, music, poetry, an aesthetic installation or sculpture, a collage or upcycling work, crafts, quilts, graphic design or combinations of these (Wang et al., 2017; Leavy, 2020), a statement, a presentation, an individual action, experience or a collective social process (Toro-Pérez, 2009).

Art work as the outcome of AR could be considered an equivalent of research reports produced as the outcome from other types of primary research studies. It can be included in more conventional qualitative or mixed-method review projects on the level of study types and designs considered, to make the review more comprehensive. A review team that would opt in on this idea might need additional guidance in how to deal with such evidence on a more operational level. This is the focal point of this paper.

Objectives

The idea to include AR evidence in systematic reviews was first pitched at the 10^th edition of the International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry (Hannes, 2014). Currently, art work is not yet systematically considered as evidence for review projects. This has many reasons. First, review authors tend to focus on written research reports as their main source of information. Art work may not always serve the printed page because of its potential tangible nature and its appearance in (virtual) spaces where we might not be looking for research evidence. Alternative search strategies need to be developed in order to trace them. Second, review authors may be unfamiliar with the criteria used to judge the quality of AR studies and their outcome as these differ substantially from the criteria proposed for more conventional quantitative and qualitative research studies. Review authors might therefore be reluctant to engage with AR evidence. A third reason why review authors are potentially reluctant to include AR evidence is because they have not acquired the skills to analyze, interpret and represent other than narrative accounts of qualitative research.

The objective of this study is therefore to outline tactics that can support the strategy of including AR evidence in systematic reviews, with a focus on (a) how to potentially retrieve and assess the value of art work considered for inclusion in an evidence synthesis process and (b) how to analyze and synthesize art work as an outcome of AR. We will use publicly available art work to demonstrate these tactics, amongst them the artistic outcome of the international, transdisciplinary, pandemic related research project sustaining life on earth from the Arts-based Research Global Consortium (Gerber et al., 2022). A worked example of how different art works can be synthesized in a comprehensive audio-visual production will be featured.

I chose to use the term ‘artistic research’ (AR) rather than the more commonly used label arts-based research to situate art research work. I acknowledge the contribution of the arts based movement in challenging academic claims about what knowledge is and how it should be presented. However, in its effort to build a trustworthy and credible methods base it has borrowed substantially from other scholarly disciplines such as social and behavioral sciences. From a strategic point of view, this resulted in a higher level of acceptance of the movement in academia. My choice for the term artistic research is inspired by my personal interest in ensuring its usefulness as a tool of resistance against the potential risk of methodological determinism or colonization. For the remaining part of this paper, I deliberately choose to continue my writing in the ‘we’ form to acknowledge the multiple scholars who have profoundly inspired and challenged my thinking as a review author over time.

Strategies for Including Art Work in Systematic Reviews

Including art work in a systematic review project requires a flexible attitude in terms of completing the core steps in a review process. Art work usually is multimodal in nature and may combine visual, auditory or other sensory information layers with textual or numerical evidence. Similar to a research or review community, art and design communities propose, define, consolidate and renew criteria to create their own research frameworks. This requires review authors to liaise with art communities and discuss adaptations of their methodological strategies to be able to include art work as evidence. In the past, we extensively collaborated with the Arts-Based Research Global Consortium to pilot an integrative synthesis of artistic types of research evidence that emphasize the beauty and disruptive force of Covid-19 investigated by independent art researchers from across the globe (Gerber et al., 2020). In what follows, we report on what has been learned from this pilot while simultaneously presenting a way forward to adapt search and appraisal sections in reviews in which AR evidence is considered for inclusion in a synthesis project.

Identifying and Retrieving Artistic Research Evidence

The first repositories for AR studies were developed around 2005. The journal Liminalities provided a spot for art researchers and creative scholars from different disciplines to present their work differently, in the modality that came most natural to them. The Journal of Artistic Research, launched in 2010 by the Society of Artistic Research, and the journal w/k-Between Science & Art also allow art researchers to display videos and other types of creative multimedia productions, where appropriate accompanied by a short written statement in which the research context is explained. Art work as the outcome of an AR process does not automatically end up in formal scholarly repositories or major databases. While representations of art work are often digitalized for inclusion in journal articles, this often comes with a considerable time delay and mostly after the work has already been exhibited in multiple places. More often, AR evidence is on display on the web, in university depositories or on social media channels like Facebook and Instagram. These art works can be traced via handsearching, based on a predefined selection of web environments of research institutes or organisations featuring exhibition work and accompanying catalogues generated through research. An alternative strategy would be to engage in web scraping (also known as Screen Scraping, Web Data Extraction, and Web Harvesting etc.) is defined by Singrodia and colleagues (2019, p. 1) as ‘a procedure of automatic web data extraction instead of manually copying it. It is a technique in which meaningful data from the HTML of websites are extracted and stored into a central local database or spreadsheet.’ Web scraping is typically targeted towards retrieving well defined, specific types of data relevant to, in this case, the context of the conducted review project in which art work is included. Art work often presents itself on the web as an image or an audio file. This form can be specified as an eligible outcome of AR studies in the inclusion criteria of a review. A number of software packages and web scraping procedures have been developed to support the scraping of online content. Some require extensive programming expertise (e.g., in HTTP and HTML) for which additional expertise needs to be invited in the review team. Others are more user friendly and scrape web content based on URLs, user accounts or text words preselected by a review author and fed to the scraper. The software then converts and stores unstructured photo posts, video posts and accompanying storylines into a database to be consulted by the review team for extraction and analytical purposes. For example, Stogram allows review authors to scrape content from Instagram, a visually oriented social media platform, via the usernames of art researcher with an Instagram account. It can also scrape content based on specific hashtags related to the topic or subject of the review used in the search strategy. It allows review authors to filter by region and date of appearance. Content identified by scrapers is considered ‘available for public consumption’ but the ownership of the content remains with the creators. It is common courtesy to notify creators of a review team’s intention to include their work in a synthesis and request permission.

Quality Assessment of Artistic Research

According to Gerber (2022, p. 24) ‘a critical discussion of onto-epistemological perspectives is precursory and essential to shifting from the typical ways of thinking about research to those that involve imagination and inclusiveness by integrating diverse ways of knowing with pluralistic realities and methodologies’. She urges the review community to confront the ‘politics of domination’ in the academy and by extension the systematic review community where ‘unnecessary and competing hierarchies of thought’ are often established to create restrictive standards of excellence, acceptability or inferiority of particular types of scholarly work.

While the idea to develop criteria to judge the value of AR evidence is often met with resistance in the arts community, chances to develop a common language do to so are likely. A similar process of resistance has been witnessed in the qualitative research and review community approximately two decades ago, at the moment the integration of primary qualitative research evidence in systematic reviews was discussed (Hannes et al., 2013). In 2012, Hannes and Macaitis (2012) updated a review from Dixon Woods and colleagues on characteristics of published qualitative evidence syntheses in the field of health care (Dixon-Woods et al., 2007). It indicated that review authors gradually became more sympathetic to the idea of quality assessment of qualitative research evidence to be included in reviews. There was a strong push though, to tailor criteria to the specific qualitative research tradition and leave some space for authors to decide on either a list with design specific criteria, or a more general assessment approach taking into account the most crucial elements of quality such as richness, credibility and relevance of the research evidence studied for an argumentation in development. These findings are also in line with the concerns identified in a Delphi study on the usefulness of consolidating reporting criteria for qualitative research (Hannes et al., 2015) where similar arguments for resisting standard criteria were met.

Table 1 presents a summary of relevant criteria to judge the value of AR studies and their respective outcome identified in an ongoing systematic review from Van Even, Hannes and Zaman (2020). We take into account both the scientific level of quality of the AR studies and the artistic, aesthetic quality level of the work produced. We propose three clusters of quality criteria that are important to consider: normative criteria, substantive criteria and performative criteria (Lafrenière & Cox, 2013. Normative criteria guide the assessment of scientific soundness, data representation and ethics of research, dimensions we believe are relevant for an art work to be considered as research evidence. Substantive criteria address the level of technical skills featured in the work and whether the art work is produced according to the state of the art as defined by art communities. Performative criteria address the ability of an art work to generate an effect or affect in the end-user. The latter can only be evaluated when art researchers pay attention to the registration of relevant data concerning the impact of an artistic piece of evidence.

Table 1.

Identified Assessment Criteria for Artistic and Design Related Research Studies.

Normative criteria
Methodological soundness	The AR study has a purpose, a message, a meaning. The art work produced has relevance and/or societal value in the context within which it is created
	The design of the AR study is rigorous and trustworthy. The phases or process of the AR inquiry and production are transparently reported on
	The art researchers are open to critique and alternative models or explanations of the phenomenon under research
Reflexivity	The art researchers situate their own positionality towards the AR work and the context in which it is created. Personalization with respect to local audiences is considered. In participatory project this means providing support to the people involved in the creation phase
(Re)presentation of insights	The art researchers pay attention to issues of scale and magnitude. The specific position their work takes into a particular space (physical or virtual). They study phenomenon is accurately and comprehensively (re)presented through the art work created
Ethical appropriateness	The art researchers show proof of reflection on integrity markers such as anonymity, intellectual property, harms and benefits of the work, representation of voice, respect towards others, appropriateness of form and how the art researchers can be held accountable for the impact of their work on the public or society

Substantive criteria
Aesthetic standards	The artist researchers’ artistic elaboration meets the expected quality standard for the chosen arts medium in terms of perceptual quality and imageability. The art work evokes a clear mental image in the mind of the persons observing and relating to it
	The art researcher has the required artistic or mentoring skills to guide the art research process. The technical quality and realization level is acceptable
	The work is original, creative and/or innovative. Its aesthetic merit is secured through the unique contribution it makes to understanding the complexity of the study phenomenon
Coherence	The composition, display and organization of information in space of the AR work is balanced. It creates a sense of thematic unity
Conceptual clarity and alignment	The AR work is theoretically situated. The translation of ideas into form is accurate. It facilitates (a different) understanding of the study phenomenon in different populations of end-users

Performative criteria
Power to affect	The art work elicits something in the end-user in terms of feelings, emotions. It creates resonance with the end-user
Power to effect	Level 1:The art work makes knowledge accessible for end-users (through its interactive features)
	Level 2: The art work raises awareness and influences perspectives. It stimulates dialogue and discussion
	Level 3: The art work influences attitudes and behavior of end-users
	Level 4: The art work incites further action. It changes conditions, situations or activates other audiences
Leverage	The art work is situated in a broader context in terms of time and space dimensions. It can be retrieved and encountered beyond the deadline of its physical display

Because claims about social impact are not always consistently evaluated (Coemans et al., 2019), review authors might not be able to take along all relevant dimensions proposed in previous literature. They can decide amongst team members which criteria they find useful or choose to take along in their value assessment of art work considered for inclusion in a review and where available, its accompanying documentation. Applied to the art work ‘Disrepair’ (Figure 1) featured in the study from Archibald and Blines (2021) the following paragraph presents an outline of how the criteria facilitated our value judgment. This can potentially lead to a pass/fail approach in deciding on the usefulness or relevance of a particular work for inclusion in a systematic review.

“On the level of normative criteria the work scores exceptionally well on the level of methodological soundness. Its purpose is clearly situated in the critique provided on the commonly used definition of frailty which is a useful contribution to the field of elderly studies. The work is empirically situated in a qualitative research study that captures the experiences of elder people. It presents a counter-narrative sensitive to these people’s experiences and the contrasting evidence on how the concept frailty is used in practice.

On the level of substantive criteria the literal translation of a metaphor used by a participant (frailty is like breaking a cup) does not reflect originality in itself. However, the installation in which cups are connected to each other in the void and the central position of the work in the room available amplifies the scale of the problem accurately, which strengthens the message for the public. The balance between installation and accompanying text is accurate. The work speaks largely for itself but is supported by emotionally evoking quotes from primary research data.

On the level of performance the art work certainly has the power to affect the viewers and sensitize them for the inaccurate use of the concept frailty as a negative characteristic of the elderly population individual seniors should come to terms with (level 2). Consequently, it has the power to aeffect people’s attitudes towards the elderly (level 3) and could potentially lead to a shift in the way professionals and policy makers relate to the growing number of citizens in the general population. Based on this assessment I consider the work valuable for inclusion as evidence in a review on the subject frailty and healthy aging (K. Hannes).”

Analysis and Interpretation of Artistic Evidence

This part outlines how art work such as installations, exhibitions and performances stored or preserved in a digital format can be analysed. We propose three different options; thematic analysis, iconographic analysis and art and design related analysis, using evidence collected in the sustaining life on earth project. We will then illustrate how different art works can be merged to reach a level of integration that is more than the sum of the different art parts.

Thematic Analysis

Thematic analysis is the best option to choose when the narratives provided with the art works are considered the core unit of analysis. The general idea behind this approach is that an in-depth aesthetic experience of art researchers can be captured in a reflective textual translational narrative. Review authors typically collect, review, organize and assemble all dialogues of the primary researchers in relation to their art works and produce a synthesis. In the project sustaining life on earth (Gerber et al., 2022) a transdisciplinary research team organized the arts-based and narrative data based on a limited set of prespecified sensitizing concepts: emotional impact, social framing, and aesthetic power. In a thematic synthesis the art works are subjected to sensorial and conceptual coding. Analysts move from a touchable, sensory form of the art work (sense data) to a conceptual level. Sense data refer to the material layer of what is in the storyline. Conceptual layers transcend the particulars of the sensory dimension of each individual art work and represent a form of abstraction that suggests higher level thinking across art works as illustrated (Table 2). Works are clustered alongside the emerging concepts.

Table 2.

Clustering Art Works According to Similarity in Meaning.

Code	Description	(A priori concept)	Accompanying narrative
Safety/alienation	Feelings of isolation, self-alienation, disconnection; loss of sense of self	Emotional impact	More white and red paint* and a black border for the weight of it all and for the constraints, helplessness and smallness I feel (Rouse)
			Since I live alone and was cut off from social connections and everyday routines that give life direction, covid-19 was a period where I felt the need to look for new connections with my immediate environment. Both with my neighbors and the night sky (Dierckx)
			The state captured all my goods, has taken my providence and stripped me of my dignity. I Stand in a line begging for food (Carolus)

*In bold: sensorial dimension of coding.

Iconographic Analysis

Iconographic classification frameworks have been developed to extract relevant data from non-textual, visual research material. These frameworks generally work well for review author teams that prefer a more deductive approach to analysis, with a predefined coding list. A commonly used data extraction framework for visual art is the Iconclass system originally developed by Henri van der Waal in the late 40s and currently still used as the basis for the further development of automized visual data retrieval processes (Cetinic, 2021). It is a widely accepted scientific tool for the description of art work and visual data. Iconclass contains 10 core categories that list approximately 450 sub categories to group content characteristics of the art works included in a review. Core categories include for example Nature, Human beings, Society, Civilisation and culture and Abstract ideas and concepts. Frameworks such as Iconclass can assist review authors in structurally making sense of the symbolic content displayed in the art works. The example below outlines an iconographic, deductive analysis on one of the art works included in the ongoing synthesis process of the project sustaining life on earth (Table 3 and Figure 2).

Table 3.

Iconclass Thesaurus Applied to Art Work Figure 2 ‘Untitled’.

Main category iconclass
Human being, mankind in general
Subclass
Relations between individuals (could also be other than human agents)
Subclass
Non-aggressive relationships
Subclass
Human and environment
Subclass
Environmental conservation, protection	Corona pandemic
Environmental destruction

Figure 2.

Untitled (Creator: Chloé Dierckx for the sustaining life on earth project).

Depending on the specific interest of review authors, the art works can be mapped differently, for instance with a focus on time-related or geographical markers and researcher characteristics (when, where, by whom and how is the work created). This allows review authors to consider data such as gender, age, race or the intersections between these characteristics of the maker to better understand the context in which the work was created. Likewise, extracting data on how the art-research work has been produced can be important. Material characteristics of an art-work such as the use of smudgy chalk, viscous inks, soft fiber or cold steel influences people’s perception and the meaning assigned to a work of art. This could be important when interpreting art-research data in the analytical phase. The sensory dimensions embedded in the narrative from art researcher Rouse in Table 2 illustrates this principle.

More white and red paint, and a black border for the weight of it all and for the constraints, helplessness and smallness I feel (Rouse).

Art and Design Related Analysis

In more advanced aesthetically inspired analytical strategies art works are not only approached via their narrative or symbolic content but also from the set of intrinsic qualities embedded in the art work itself. These qualities are generally referred to as elements of art and principles of design (Table 4) Analyzing the outcome of AR study work requires imaginative sensory thinking to access the tacit layer of meaning on display in the work.

Table 4.

Elements of Art and Principles of Design.

Elements of art: qualities	Principles of design: relationship of qualities
Line	Balance
Shape/Form	Emphasis
Texture	Movement/Rhythm
Colour	Pattern/Repetition
Value/Tone	Variety
Space	Unity

The elements of art is a list of visual qualities used in art work, such as lines, shapes, colors and spatial magnitude. The principles of design are combinations of qualities that facilitate an in-depth interpretation of the meaning of a work in terms of how it wants to affect the viewer. The relationship between elements evokes a sense of meaning beyond words expressed (Hannes & Siegesmund, 2022). Review authors can be trained to recognize these qualities by focusing on the compositional modalities of the art work. Instead of asking what the art researcher wants to tell or show, the focus is on how the art researcher brings together different qualities to reflect or evoke emotion in the viewer, Here, the review team analyses how visual elements are organized and how this reveals different layers of expression that may either contrast or support the narrative, symbolic meaning of the work. The idea of reading an image through its qualities is illustrated below on the untitled art work (Figure 2 and Table 5) from the project sustaining life on earth.

Table 5.

Analytical Reading of Primary Visual Evidence From an Intrinsic Quality Perspective of Figure 2 ‘Untitled’.

Colour	The use of color contrast is attracting the attention of the viewer to the natural element on the image. The high-key (brilliant use of moonlight) scene of the image creates delicacy, lightness and focus in an otherwise dark painted portrait
Line	In the case of this painting vertical lines are used. Verticality implicates a feeling of strength. In this case, it underscores the distance between the human figure and the natural element, as well as its grandeur for the spectator which implies strength and force
Emphasis	The painting is created from a worm’s eye perspective. This kind of perspective makes the natural object taller and emanates a feeling of respect from the position of the human actor
Perspective
Emphasis	The artist-researcher makes use of the zoom functionality to create an illusion of moving closer or further away from the natural element. The zoom draws attention to specific detail, like the bird that is visible in the second part of the picture. The zoom function empowers the animal character that appears
Zoom

Specific guidance on how visual qualities can be read, interpreted or combined with narratives is readily available from most art schools and it has extensively been written about from multiple perspectives (Serafini, 2014; Brown & Collins, 2021; Hannes & Siegesmund, 2022). The analysis of intrinsic visual characteristics may capture content that an art researcher does not initially verbalize in a narrative (see thematic synthesis part) but is nevertheless evidenced. In case of the untitled art work, the choice of the artist for contrast, the use of a worm’s eye perspective and the combined use of vertical lines with a zoom function provides detail of the natural elements on display in the art work. It confirms her sense of the vast all-encompassing environmental character (Dierckx in Table 2) of place in pandemic lockdown situations.

An Integrative Synthesis

It is perhaps in the exercise of combining different analytical strategies that new synergies and models for an integrative synthesis of art work can be created. This is illustrated in the work conducted for the project sustaining life on earth (Gerber et al., 2022). Here, the research team opted for a mode of synthesis that captured the fluid and dynamic nature of a broad range of art works to prevent the loss of aesthetic information: the visual, the narrative and sonic dimensions of expression. An online gallery was developed to present individual art works included in the synthesis. All involved researchers curated the exhibition and merged thematic and symbolic content, theoretical framing and a reading of visual qualities into a consistent whole. While the gallery could be considered a curated form of synthesis in itself (Figure 3), the team also created a new audio-visual production that integrated qualities, concepts and narratives from the individual art works; an artistic type of synthesis on how people experienced the pandemic that can be accessed at the entrance of the gallery (Figure 4).

Figure 3.

Gallery of primary Artistic Research (AR) evidence.

Figure 4.

Integrated, audiovisual synthesis of primary AR evidence as included in the gallery.

The evidence gallery is a dynamic product. Its content can be adapted as time progresses. New layers of evidence can be added to the theme sustaining life on earth to build a more comprehensive, artistically inspired review zone. Visitors can walk into this exhibition of primary artistic research evidence and contribute to the evolving evidence base on experiences with the pandemic by engaging with the curator team (https://www.artsteps.com/view/6060c8876ef01bf10f661557?currentUser). The strength of an artistically inspired evidence synthesis is that its performative power will affect end-users differently. It also contributes to the general aim of making review insights accessible to all. While these claims need further testing, increasing the sensitivity of review authors for aesthetic dimensions of information in or as an art form would make systematic reviews most likely more comprehensive. Art work created as an outcome of AR studies certainly brings additional benefits to end users, beyond an the deadline of an AR project. It is through the art work that new insights are integrated and transferred to a public. While art work continues to have a positive impact on people’s compassion for others and increases empathy levels for those exposed to it at exhibits, physically or online (Bowen & Kisida, 2019), the evolving dialogue between members of the public is not always systematically registered. Developing some guidance for how such evaluation might work on a more global scale would be helpful, as is the development of a solid methods base in which different types of primary evidence can be merged to positively influence the completeness and comprehensibility of systematic review findings.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

I sincerely thank the scholars involved in the Arts-Based Research Global Consortium for the inspiring content we have created and the in-depth discussion that strongly influenced my thinking: Nancy Gerber, Richard Siegesmund, Marco Gemignani, Elisabetta Biffi, Sara Coemans, Madeline Centracchio and Lucia Carriera. I am grateful for the support of the Multimodality Methods Group (M3) and wish to recognize the impact of the informal intellectual exchanges with the young scholars in research group SoMeThin’K on the work I am presenting.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

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

Funding

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

ORCID iD

Karin Hannes

Note

References

Archibald

Blines

(2021). Metaphors in the making: Illuminating the process of arts-based health research through a case exemplar linking arts-based, qualitative and quantitative research data. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 1609406920987954. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920987954

Boeck

(2022). What is artistic research? w/k-Zwischen Wissenschaft & Kunst. https://between-science-and-art.com/what-is-artistic-research/ (Accessed December 27).

Bowen

D. H.

Kisida

(2019). Investigating causal effects of arts education experiences: Experimental evidence from houston’s arts access initiative. Research Report for the Houston Independent School District. Vol. 7, Issue 4. Houston education research Consortium.

Boydell

Gladstone

Volpe

Allemang

Stasiulis

(2012). The production and dissemination of knowledge: A scoping review of arts-based health research. Forum Qual Soc Res Sozialforschung, 13(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-13.1.1711

Brown

Collins

(2021). Systematic visuo-textual analysis: A framework for analysing visual and textual data. The Qualitative Report, 26(4), 1275–1290. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2021.4838

Cetinic

(2021). Towards generating and evaluating iconographic image captions of artworks. Journal of Imaging, 7(8), 123. https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging7080123

Coemans

Raymakers

A. L.

Vandenabeele

Hannes

(2019). Evaluating the extent to which social researchers apply feminist and empowerment frameworks in photovoice studies with female participants: A literature review. Qualitative Social Work, 18(1), 37–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325017699263

Dixon-Woods

Booth

Sutton

A. J.

(2007). Synthesizing qualitative research: A review of published reports. Qualitative Research, 7(3), 375–422. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794107078517

Fancourt

Finn

(2019). What is the evidence on the role of the arts in improving health and well-being? A scoping review. Health Evidence Network Synthesis Report, No. 67, Copenhagen: World Health Organisation. Retrieved from: http://www.euro.who.int/en/publications/abstracts/what-is-the-evidence-on-the-role-of-the-arts-in-improving-health-and-well-being-a-scoping-review-2019.

10.

Gerber

(2022). Imagination and arts-based practices for integration in research. Routledge.

11.

Gerber

Biffi

Biondo

Carriera

Centracchio

Gemignani

Hannes

Siegesmund

(2022). Sustaining life on earth: Arts-based responses to the lived experience of covid-19. In Qualitative Inquiry in the online technological realm. Presented at the 5th edition of the European Congress Qualitative Inquiry, Leuven, 01-04 Feb 2022.

12.

Gerber

Biffi

Biondo

Gemignani

Hannes

Siegesmund

(2020). Arts-based research in the social and health sciences: Pushing for change with an interdisciplinary global arts-based research initiative. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 21(2), 15. http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/fqs-21.2.3496

13.

Hannes

(2014). Including findings from arts based research in systematic reviews of qualitative research evidence: Setting the agenda for a collaborative research exercise. In International congress of qualitative inquiry. Location. Date: 2014/05/21-2014/05/24.

14.

Hannes

Booth

Harris

Noyes

(2013). Celebrating methodological challenges and changes: Reflecting on the emergence and importance of the role of qualitative evidence in cochrane reviews. Systematic Reviews, 2(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-84

15.

Hannes

Heyvaert

Slegers

Vandenbrande

Van Nuland

(2015). Exploring the potential for a consolidated standard for reporting guidelines for qualitative research: An argument Delphi approach. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 14(4), 160940691561152. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406915611528

16.

Hannes

Macaitis

(2012). A move to more systematic and transparent approaches in qualitative evidence synthesis: Update on a review of published papers. Qualitative Research, 12(4), 402–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111432992

17.

Hannes

Siegesmund

(2022). An analytical apparatus for visual imagery applied in a social-behavioral research. International Review of Qualitative Research, 15(2), 278–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/19408447221097061

18.

Hendry

Vanhecke

Carriazo

A. M.

López-Samaniego

Espinosa

J. M.

Sezgin

O’Donovan

Hammar

Ferry

Vella

Bacaicoa

O. A.

Braga

Ciutan

Velivasi

Lamprini Koula

Van der Heyden

Liew

O’Caoimh

(2019). Integrated care models for managing and preventing frailty: A systematic review for the European joint action on frailty prevention (ADVANTAGE JA). Translational Medicine @ UniSa, 19, 5–10. http://doi.org/10.14273/unisa-2730

19.

Hodgins

(2017). An introduction and overview of research knowledge and translation practices in a pan-Canadian arts-based health research study. Journal of Applied Arts & Health, 8(2), 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1386/jaah.8.2.225_1

20.

Jadczak

A. D.

Makwana

Luscombe-Marsh

Visvanathan

Schultz

T. J.

(2018). Effectiveness of exercise interventions on physical function in community-dwelling frail older people: An umbrella review of systematic reviews. JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports: March, 16(3), 752–775. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBISRIR-2017-003551

21.

Lafrenière

Cox

S. M.

(2013). ‘If you can call it a poem’: Toward a framework for the assessment of arts-based works. Qualitative Research, 13(3), 318–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112446104

22.

Leavy

(2020). Method meets art: Arts-based research practice. Guilford Publications.

23.

McNiff

(2008). Art-based research. In Handbook of the arts in qualitative research: Perspectives, methodologies, examples, and issues (pp. 29–40).

24.

Morley

J. E.

Vellas

van Kan

G. A.

Anker

S. D.

Bauer

J. M.

Bernabei

Cesari

Chumlea

W. C.

Doehner

Evans

Fried

L. P.

Guralnik

J. M.

Katz

P. R.

Malmstrom

T. K.

McCarter

R. J.

Gutierrez Robledo

L. M.

Rockwood

von Haehling

Vandewoude

M. F.

Walston

(2013). Frailty consensus: A call to action. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 14(6), 392–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2013.03.022

25.

Parker

Pollock

(2020). Old mistresses: Women, art and ideology. Bloomsbury Publishing.

26.

Rumbold

(2014). Evidence in practice: Nurturing aesthetic reflexivity. Journal of Arts and Health, 5(1), 263–271. https://doi.org/10.1386/jaah.5.2.263_1

27.

Serafini

(2014). Reading the visual: An introduction to teaching multimodal literacy. Teachers College Press.

28.

Singrodia

Mitra

Paul

(2019). A review on web scrapping and its applications, international conference on computer communication and informatics (ICCCI) (pp. 1–6). http://10.1109/ICCCI.2019.8821809

29.

Toro-Pérez

(2009). On the difference between artistic research and artistic practice (pp. 30-39. In Caduff

Siegenthaler

Wälchli

(Eds.), Art and artistic research. Scheidegger & Spiess.

30.

Van Even

Zaman

Hannes

(2020). Protocol for a systematic review on evaluation criteria for creative and interactive dissemination practices. Deliverable 3.2. Protocol for a systematic review on evaluation criteria for creative and interactive dissemination practices, Lappeenranta, Finland.

31.

Wang

Coemans

Siegesmund

Hannes

(2017). Arts-based methods in socially engaged research practice: A classification framework. Art/Research International, 2(2), 5–39. http://10.18432/R26G8P

Tactics in Support of the Strategy to Include Artistic Research as Evidence in Systematic Reviews

Abstract

Keywords

Background

Objectives

Strategies for Including Art Work in Systematic Reviews

Identifying and Retrieving Artistic Research Evidence

Quality Assessment of Artistic Research

Analysis and Interpretation of Artistic Evidence

Thematic Analysis

Iconographic Analysis

Art and Design Related Analysis

An Integrative Synthesis

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iD

Note

References