Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Practice theory-based research has been established theoretically as an answer to health and social problems, but its use in empirical research is still emerging. We conducted a scoping review in accordance with JBI guidelines for evidence synthesis to identify methodological characteristics of practice theory-based research concerning parenting. A total of 2681 abstracts were identified, with 214 retained for full text screening. A total of 33 articles were included in the review. The included studies in the review focussed on a range of practices relating to parenting including meal preparation and cooking, mobility and transport, homework and school engagement. Major findings from this scoping review identified the use of multiple methods to draw on different aspects of practice and a high variety of time frames for data collection. The tailoring of practice theory approaches was highly varied, and some studies also combined practice theory with alternate theory and concepts. The results reveal significant diversity in the use of social practice theory, the range of methodological approaches used and the application of a high variety of methods. All studies used some form of interview to investigate practices and ethnography was a main methodological approach adopted. Across the studies there were recommendations for expanding sampling and recruitment strategies. Given the call to adopt new approaches to parenting and child development research, our review serves as a mapping of the multitude of ways practice theory-based research can provide can be used to examine parenting.

Keywords

Knowledge translation social practice theory knowledge synthesis parenting

Introduction

Background

Health and social problems present considerable challenges to social and public health systems (Blue et al., 2016; Rittel and Webber, 1973; Walls, 2018). Health promotion strategies have had varying impact on addressing these problems, whilst policymakers continue to have difficulty responding effectively to issues including climate change, the obesity epidemic and food insecurity (Head, 2022; Hopson and Cram, 2018; Walls, 2018).

Individualistic theories of human behaviour have historically commandeered research and intervention focus. The effectiveness of such approaches remains limited and can lead to the adoption of victim blaming notions. There has been argument that they do not encapsulate the true cause or potential resolutions of such issues, leading to minimal change (Thompson and Kumar, 2011). Providing more knowledge with the assumption it will lead to lasting behaviour change has largely been proven to be ineffective (Delormier et al., 2009; Maller, 2015). It assumes if people are aware and capable of making better choices based on information provided to them, positive change will occur. Evidence shows this does not address elements of routine, habit and how different practices may combine to exacerbate or alleviate complex issues (Blue et al., 2016). Similarly, a focus on contextual factors alone fails to move focus away from the individual and their actions and choices (Cohn, 2014).

Research into how an alternative approach, such as using social practice theory is crucial to understanding how we can improve understanding and broaden examination in a range of health and social fields, one of which being parenting. There is an abundance of literature, including books, that provide high level explications of social practice theory (see, e.g. Hui et al., 2016; Nicolini, 2012; Schatzki, 2002; Shove et al., 2012) but researchers (especially those completing higher degrees or who are early career) would benefit from additional guidance to complement the complex, theoretical underpinnings of social practice theory. This review is presented as an attempt to catalyse this process. It aims to accentuate what contemporary social practice theory research looks like and what is being done as a means of orientation and clarification. Given how relatively new the field of empirical, social practice theory research is, we conducted a scoping review to contribute to ‘’on the ground’ knowledge and to provide guidance.

Brief overview of practice theory

The Ecological Model of Human Development is an example of how different layers of influence have been conceptualised to make sense of parental behaviours (Bronfenbrenner, 1993; Luster and Okyagaki, 2006). Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system consists of hierarchical stages, ranging from the micro to the macro. Working from a social practice theory lens differs from Bronfenbrenner’s work in two ways. First, a world populated by practice is nonhierarchical. Some theorists, such as Schatzki argue social practice theory has a ‘flat ontology’ (Schatzki, 2002). Second, where Bronfenbrenner’s model centres on behaviours, a social practice theory lens assumes the world around us is instead populated by practices. In this way, practice is neither big or small, micro or macro because no single practice is positioned above another. Instead, practices are connected and form bundles and networks within the social world.

Practice theory is presented as a novel way to not only examine phenomena but also explore ways different elements may be interconnected. It assumes neither individuals, materials or context is given priority over one another as they are all considered aspects of practice (Gherardi, 2019). In the last decade there has been a resurgence of the application of practice theory to a range of social issues (Nicolini, 2012; Shove et al., 2012). Social practice theory and its emergence in research across a range of social contexts moves away from focussing on individual behaviour. Social practice theory argues that everyday practices are bundled together and are interdependent on one another.

A practice-based approach shifts focus to the relationships between the individual and social structures. Shove et al. conceptualised practice as having three core components: meaning, materials and competence. Schatzki (2002) defines practice as a nexus of doings and sayings. One of the most prolific definition of practice within the research is provided by Reckwitz (2002):

“A routinised type of behavior which consists of several elements, interconnected to one other: forms of bodily activities, forms of mental activities, “things” and their use, a background knowledge in the form of understanding, know-how, states of emotion and motivational knowledge” (p. 249)

Any reference made to a practice-based approach must firstly acknowledge there is no (and should not be) one unified theory of practice. Practice theory is better described as a family of theories (Nicolini, 2012). Several works within the practice theory space stress the importance of a tailored practice approach dependent on the type of research questions being asked (Gherardi, 2019; Nicolini, 2012; Shove et al., 2012). One key premise within the practice ‘family’ is that social reality is made up of connections between activities and meaning. These are mediated by materials and further guided by space and time (Smagacz-Poziemska et al., 2021).

Nicolini (2012) provides five explanations for how a practice-based approach is radically different from an individualistic methodology. First, practice theory foregrounds the importance of activity and performance in the perpetuation of daily life. Second, a practice-based approach brings to the fore the role of the body and material in social contexts. Third, it places strong focus on individual agency and agents (meaning focus is on the practice and not the individual). Fourth, a practice approach transforms knowledge, meaning and discourse and finally, it places heavy emphasis on power, conflict and politics as elements of the social which we experience (Nicolini, 2012).

The vast amount of theory available within the practice realm is both exciting and daunting. Researchers have boundless avenues of opportunity when employing a practice-based approach. Corradi et al. (2010) examined the bandwagon of practice and provided an overview of varying definitions of practice found in the literature. Their paper provided examples of six different ways practice research is undertaken in education and organisation fields as a means of clarifying the range of similarities and differences seen in practice approaches.

This scoping review aims to reduce complexity by providing a map of relevant, contemporary parenting research utilising practice theory. We intend to present a snapshot of methodological and theoretical applications of practice theory in the field of parenting. It is anticipated this scoping review will act as a catalyst for researchers interested in using a practice-based approach to address persistent patterns of inequality and to solve complex issues (Shove et al., 2012).

There has been an evolution in methods used to synthesise diverse types of evidence (Peters et al., 2020). A scoping review is an ‘‘exploratory project that systematically maps the literature available on a topic, identifies key concepts, theories, sources of evidence and gaps in the research’ (Grimshaw, 2010). This means it is a suitable method to explore applications of practice theory to a range of social and health problems (Peters et al., 2020). In contrast to a systematic review, a scoping review does not seek to examine the effectiveness or feasibility of a certain practice, instead the scoping review aim to determine the breadth of a body of knowledge, the type of research being done and the way such research has been conducted (Munn et al., 2018).

For the purpose of this review, a practice-based approach has been defined as the utilisation of elements of practice theory from study inception and design through to data collection and analysis. A preliminary search of Figshare, Prospero and JBI Evidence Synthesis was conducted and no current or underway systematic reviews or scoping reviews on the topic were identified. Existing literature including Nicolini (2012), Gherardi (2019), Schatzki (2002) and Shove et al. (2012) have contributed significantly to building a strong theoretical base for practice-based studies as well as providing advice relating to methodology and study design, sometimes through empirical examples. They do not provide an in-depth exploration of the scope of contemporary, empirical research using practice theory. This review seeks to fill that gap given the growth of practice-based studies in the last decade alone (Smagacz-Poziemska et al., 2021). Providing a mapping of applications of practice theory in empirical research will give further insight into the current field of knowledge.

Aim

This scoping review aimed to identify methodologies, methods, research design and analytical tools used within practice-based research on parenting.

Research questions:

RQ1: What theories of practice are utilised in empirical studies relating to parenting and families?

RQ2: What methodologies and methods are used in practiced based research relating to parenting and families?

RQ3: What are the barriers and facilitators to using a practice-based approach when researching parenting and families?

Inclusion criteria

Eligibility criteria was defined through expansion of the PCC (population, concept and context) formula as recommended by JBI and detailed below.

Population

Empirical research which utilised a practice-based approach within qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies was included. The search was inclusive of all sectors and professions, however parents or family needed be identified as the target population within the study. This element of eligibility was kept broad given the vast uptake of practice perspectives in research across several different fields.

Concept

Eligible studies implemented a practice-based approach from study inception through to analysis. Studies were deemed eligible if they referenced an aspect of practice theory within their methodology, data collection and analysis. Studies which used practice theory for analysis were not included given this review aimed to examine a practice-based approach from study inception.

No limitations were placed on what theorist or elements of practice theory an eligible study adopted. The rich vastness of the practice theory perspectives available is one of the reasons it has the potential to elicit change and an examination of ways it has been utilised needed to be broad to maintain this benefit. Where other terms were used apart from practice theory or practice approach, papers were scrutinised to determine eligibility by confirming whether the study being described utilised a practice-based approach. The review included empirical research only.

Context

No limitation was placed on country or sector. This was kept deliberately broad as the key aim of the review was to examine and map the types of studies currently adopting a practice-based approach.

Language

Only papers retrieved from literature database records or full-text articles were included in the review.

Date

No limitation was applied regarding date of publication.

Types of sources

This scoping review considered published, peer reviewed papers reporting on empirical data from primary research. A search of Open Grey and British Library ETHOS was also completed. In addition, analytical observational studies including case-control studies, interviews, focus groups and analytical cross-sectional studies were considered for inclusion. This review will considered descriptive observational study designs including case series, individual case reports and descriptive cross-sectional studies. Studies that focussed on qualitative data including, but not limited to, designs such as phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, qualitative description, action research and feminist research were also considered.

Search strategy

Both published and unpublished studies were identified through the search. Searches combined terms from two themes; practice theory and parenting. An initial limited search of SCOPUS was undertaken to identify articles on the topic. The text words contained in the titles and abstracts of relevant articles, and the index terms used to describe the articles were used to develop a full search strategy. The search strategy, including all identified keywords and index terms, was used for each included database and information source. Additionally, the reference list of all included sources of evidence were screened for additional studies which were then assessed for eligibility.

Several test searches were conducted in collaboration with a librarian to ensure they yielded articles on the desired topic and an example of a full search strategy has been provided as Supplemental Material. The databases searched were Cochrane library, Cinahl, Medline, SCOPUS, PubMed and ProQuest. An additional search was undertaken through the e-thesis online service for the British Library (Ethos) and OpenGrey archive.

Method of the review

A scoping review protocol was published and registered with Open Science Framework (DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/P8SGH. The Joanna Briggs Institute Methods Manual for scoping reviews informed our method and reporting follows Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis for Protocols (PRISMA-P; Tricco et al., 2018). Given that full the full method is detailed in the protocol we have provided a brief outline below.

Data collection

Search results were screened using Covidence software in two stages (Veritas Health Innovation, 2023). Titles and abstracts were screened by two reviewers and included titles then underwent a full text review. Conflicts at each stage were resolved through discussion during team meetings and a third reviewer was not required. Covidence systematic review software was used to manage all article screenings and one reviewer had conducted several reviews using the software in the past. The final search was conducted in September 2022.

Data synthesis

Following full text review, included studies were inputted into a custom data extraction form developed collaboratively by authors. Data relating to the following study characteristics was extracted: author, year of publication, lead author contact details, country, timeframe of study, funding sources, limitations and conflicts of interests as reported by the author and population/participants descriptors (e.g. age of children, parent descriptors, social class and ethnicity). Key elements of study design were then identified: methodology, sampling and recruitment methods (e.g. convenience or snowball sampling and sampling from larger project), setting and context of study and methods used (e.g. whether study employed multiple methods, used interviews and observation) and recorded on a data extraction tool that was developed by two of the authors and piloted before use.

Additionally, the data extraction form included elements specifically related to practice theory, such as: which practice theory was applied (e.g. whether study used one theory or multiple, which theory, what elements from that theory were noted, definition of practice used), practices that were examined in the study, the analysis undertaken, how practice theory was applied throughout the study design and reporting and whether practice theory was used in conjunction with other theories. One researcher extracted each of the articles and completed the extraction sheet.

Results

After removing duplicates, the search strategy located a total of 2681 citations for screening. About 2455 citations were deemed irrelevant and the full text of 212 papers were retrieved and read to determine inclusion in the study (Figure 1). A further three papers were added through hand searching. From a total of 214 papers, 175 papers were assessed as not meeting inclusion criteria and were discarded. About 115 of the studies were excluded because they did not adopt a practice-based approach in their methods and/or analysis, 59 were excluded because they did not address parenting practices, 5 were excluded as they were not published in English, 4 studies were excluded because they adopted a practice-based approach retrospectively and 3 papers were excluded because they did not report on empirical data.

Figure 1.

PRISMA flow chart for search results.

The full text of one paper was not able to be located despite attempts to contact the author and assistance from a librarian. Additionally, for two of the studies, the author found and read additional papers to clarify details. Two studies (Molander, 2017; Molander and Hartmann, 2018) used the same data set and applied different practice theoretical frameworks. In total, 33 articles were included in the scoping review and have been detailed below (Table 1).

Table 1.

Summary of articles using practice theory to explore parenting.

Authors, year published and country	Title	Time frame	Methodology and methods	Practice theory	Additional theory	Recruitment	Participants	Data analysis	Practice studied
Aranda and Hart (2015) United States of America	Resilient moves: Tinkering with practice theory to generate new ways of thinking about using resilience.	2010–2012 (programmes delivered between 1 and 2 years)	Qualitative case study: Interview Focus group Questionnaire Reflective journals	Meanings, materials and competences (Shove et al., 2012) Gherardi (2009; practices from inside and outside)	Tinkering (Mol et al., 2010)	Participants recruited from existing project	Approximately 40 people across three projects	Aligned to an action-orientated resilience framework and Shove’s practice theory	Resilience as a social practice
Arnalds et al. (2021) Iceland	Construction of Childcare Practices Among Icelandic and Polish Parents Living in Iceland: Mixed-Methods Explorations	Data collected in 2013	Qualitative constant comparative method: Interview Questionnaire	Bourdieu (Habitus and family practices (Bourdieu, 1990; Morgan, 2011)	N/A	Purposive sampling using mail	1585 parents (661 Icelandic fathers, 42 Polish fathers, 835 Icelandic mothers, 50 Polish mothers).	Statistical differences analysed using range of methods (chi-square, logistic regression, t-test) Interviews were coded using constant comparative method.	Practices relating to how parents arrange care (legal prescriptions, economic constraints and cultural definitions)
Bach (2014) Denmark	Parenting among wealthy Danish families: A concerted civilising process	Field work completed between 2005 and 2008	Ethnography: Interview Observation Field work	Bourdieu (1990; Capital and power)	Concerted cultivation (Lareau, 2003) Concept of ‘civilising processes.’ (Elias, 1998)	Snow balling through researcher’s social periphery	15 families	Thematic analysis (multiple methods coded against theoretical framework)	School participation Sports participation Leisure practices of children
Bestman et al. (2020) Australia	‘Everyone knows grandma’. Pathways to gambling venues in regional Australia.	Data collected between April and October 2016	Qualitative: Interview	Bourdieu (1990; Habitus and capital)	N/A	Convenience, snowball and theoretical sampling used (from broader study)	27 families	Thematic analysis (themes tied to habitus)	Parents attending venues with Electronic Gambling Machines (EGM) with their children
Bønnelycke et al. (2019) Denmark	Household collectives: resituating health promotion and physical activity.	Project ran between 2013–2018	Household centred methodology: Interview Observation Calendar and photo exercises	Meanings, materials and competences (Shove et al., 2012)	Combining practices with ‘collective approach’ (Jesperson et al., 2013; Moreira, 2004)	Purposive recruitment via newspapers, posters and comms through local housing association.	15 families	Thematic analysis (Notion of household collective led to development of themes)	Household was framed as a node for practices relating to physical activity (motivation, a family outing, work and gender roles, health and media and games.)
Brembeck and Fuentes (2017) Sweden	Convenient Food for Baby: A Study of Weaning as a Social Practice	Data collected in 2014	Ethnography: Field work Interview (real time and asynchronous) Observation Photo data	Meanings, materials and competences (Shove et al., 2012) Schatzki (2002; projects and teleoaffective structures, positionings of materials) Reckwitz's definition of practice (Reckwitz, 2002)	Concept of scape (‘scape of weaning’; Appadurai, 1990)	Purposive (participants were attendants at the baby café)	19 mothers	Not reported	The embedding of convenience baby foods into routines and rhythms of everyday life and weaning as a social practice
Chan et al. (2010) Hong Kong	Childhood obesity in transition zones: an analysis using structuration theory.	Data collected over 12–18 months	Ethnography: Interview Observation Document analysis	Structuration theory/ Stones’ strong structuration theory. (Giddens, 1984; Stones, 2005)	‘Position– practices’ (Cohen, 1989) Ontological security (Giddens, 1981)	Not reported	Ten children	Thematic analysis, interpretive analysis of ethnographic observations of actions and interpretive analysis.	Eating and exercising in young children
Choi (2017) Hong Kong	Habitus, affordances and family leisure: Cultural reproduction through children’s leisure activities	Multiple visits to families homes each lasting 3-6 hours.	Visual ethnography: Interview Video data Home observation Photo data Video diaries	Bourdieu (1990)	‘Affordances’ theory (Gibson, 1986)	Not reported	Six 'nuclear families'	Thematic analysis	Children's play and leisure activities in home the environment
Daley (2022) United States of America	‘I can do this by my own self’: how four preschool-aged children navigated mobile technologies at home	Data collected over two year period	Ethnography: Interview Observation Case study Field analysis	Bourdieu (1990; artefacts and fields of practice)	N/A	Purposeful and convenience sampling	Two families each with two children	Thematic analysis (data coded to forms of capital)	Digital device use in the home
Ergler et al. (2013) New Zealand	Seasonal and locational variations in children’s play: Implications for wellbeing.	Data collected between January and December 2010	Qualitative: Interview Questionnaire Neighbourhood map	Bourdieu (1990; social class and habitus)	Ecological perceptual psychology (Gibson, 1986)	Convenience sample recruited through school and summer holiday programmes	20 children and their parents	Thematic analysis used theoretical lens	Locations and mechanisms relating to indoor and outdoor play of children
Franceschelli and O’Brien (2014) England	‘Islamic Capital’ and Family Life: The Role of Islam in Parenting	Not reported	Qualitative: Exploratory survey Interview Questionnaire	Bourdieu (1990; capital and intergenerational transmission of practice)	Family transmission of capital and social position (Lareau, 2003)	Sampling frame identified through exploratory survey and snowballing techniques	15 families	Thematic analysis (hierarchical step-based approach)	Islam within parenting and related themes such as issues of moderation, religious teaching, gender and social class, as well as development of concept of ‘Islamic capital.’
Groeninck et al. (2020) Belgium	Resilience in liminality: How resilient moves are being negotiated by asylum-seeking families in the liminal context of asylum procedures	Data collected in 2018	Qualitative case study: Interview Case report	Meanings, materials and competences (Shove et al., 2012)	Resilience theory- resilient moves (Hart et al., 2007)	Recruitment through reception centre	26 parents and 35 children between the ages of 8 and 12 years	Analysis framed around resilience	Daily life as a family in central reception centre focussed on experiences of parents and children
Hutchison (2012) Australia	A labour of love: Mothers, emotional capital and homework	Data collected over 12 months	Critical feminist ethnography: Interview Field work Video data Journals Case report Document analysis	Bourdieu (1990; habitus, field and capital)	Feminist theory (Boler, 1999)	Recruitment was school based	3 mother/child dyads	Transcripts of conversations during homework time were analysed and presented in the paper as case studies	Homework completion and specifically the emotional labour relating to homework from mothers
Karademir-Hazir (2021) England	How (not) to feed young children: A class-cultural analysis of food parenting practices.	Data collected over 2 years	Ethnography: Interview Observation	Bourdieu (1990; class consumption)	Food parenting	Recruited using established local networks and by distributing posters in family centres.	12 families	Thematic analysis	Feeding as a series of processes
Keller and Halkier (2014) Estonia	Positioning consumption: A practice theoretical approach to contested consumption and media discourse	First study example completed in 2008 and second was in 2012	Practice theoretical approach: Interview Observation Focus group	Predominantly Warde and Reckwitz with other elements of practice theory referenced (Reckwitz, 2002; Warde, 2005)	Positioning theory	Not reported	10 families, including 11 pre-schoolers (aged 4–7) and 12 adults.	Thematic analysis (practice elements used as analytic categories)	Shopping, bulk shopping, mobility, family provisioning, ‘thrift practices’, savings, consumption practices and childcare.
McGovern and Devine (2016) Ireland	The care worlds of migrant children- Exploring inter-generational dynamics of love, care and solidarity across home and school.	Data collected over a ‘number of school days and a weekend’	Deep ethnography: Interviews Observation Photo voice	Bourdieu (1990; habitus, field and capital)	‘Circle of care relation’ and ‘life worlds’ (Lynch et al., 2009)	Not reported	10 families	Findings presented under two main themes.	Practice relating to love and care
McLaren 2018 (2018) Canada	Parent-child mobility practices: revealing ‘cracks’ in the automobility system	Data collected over two years	Qualitative: Interview Questionnaire Neighbourhood observation	Meanings, materials and competences (Shove et al., 2012) Theories of practice as socio-technical systems (Watson, 2012)	Intersectional theory	Purposive sampling (Notices placed at venues in selected neighbourhoods)	52 parents and caregivers	Thematic and inductive analysis	Parent-child practices of auto dependency, multimodality and altermobility
Mennesson et al. (2019) France	Boys who don't like sports: family lifestyle and transmission of dispositions	Data collected over two years	Ethnography: Interview Questionnaire	Bourdieu (1990)	N/A	Not reported	6 boys and their parents	Thematic analysis	Leisure
Meyer and Fozdar (2022) Australia	Complex but ordinary: intercultural negotiations among mixed families in Australia	Not stated	Qualitative: Interview	Bourdieu (1990; Habitus)	N/A	Snowball sampling	13 Families (8 families and 5 parent couples)	Thematic analysis (broad themes concerning intercultural negotiation), discourse and conversational analysis	Food negotiation and preferences, school lunches, education, sleepovers and parties and teen/child social life
Molander (2017) Sweden	Not just a mother: embodied and positional aspects of consumer learning from a practice perspective	Seven months of dinner activities	Ethnography: Interviews Field work Photo data Commercial materials analysis	Schatzki (2002) and Reckwitz (2002) informed practice approach Warde’s (2005) approach to consumption Learning stages (Sennett, 2008) and understanding of the fluidity of life through the concept of positioning (Giddens, 1984)	Five stages of practice based learning (Dreyfus, 1996)	Not reported	10 Children were taken into consideration but focus of study was on the mothers.	Hermeneutic framework (moving between part and whole)	Making dinner for child and self.
Molander and Hartmann (2018) Sweden	Emotion and practice: Mothering, cooking and teleoaffective episodes	A 7 month study with 49 occasions and approximately 110 hours of field work	Ethnography: Observation Field work Interviews commercial materials analysis	Meanings, materials and competences (Shove et al., 2012) Teleoaffective structures (Schatzki, 2002)	N/A	Empirical research was part of a larger study	10 mothers	Hermeneutic framework (moving between part and whole)	Emotions are the focus but several activities are used as examples within mothering: cooking, preparing for rainy days, homemade food, good enough parenting, managing tasks when sick.
Muensit et al. (2019) Thailand	Practices of everyday life of teen mothers: Their use of habitus and symbolic power in the community	Data collected between January and August 2015	Phenomenology: Interview Life histories Observation	Bourdieu (practice of everyday life) (Bourdieu, 1990)	N/A	Purposive sampling	16 teen mothers	Content analysis over three levels; household, individual and community.	Social exchanges between mothers and their communities and how they managed this.
Nicholls and Strengers (2015) Australia	Peak demand and the ‘family peak’ period in Australia: Understanding practice (in)flexibility in households with children	Survey distributed in 2014 and interviews conducted March to May 2014	Practice based methodology: Interview Questionnaire Home tour	Meanings, materials and competences (Shove et al., 2012)	N/A	Purposive sampling using flyers, emails, posters, a project website and social media	44 families in interviews 547 households in survey	Practice conceptual approach	Three bundles of practices were studied: provisioning of the evening meal, ICT use and bath time for young children.
O’Donoghue (2013) Ireland	Putting working-class mothers in their place: Social stratification, the field of education and Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of practice	Longest interviews were 1–2 hours and all mothers were interviewed twice.	Exploratory case study: Focus group Interviews	Bourdieu (habitus) (Bourdieu, 1990)	N/A	Purposive sampling	Five mothers	Thematic analysis with categories mirroring core concerns raised by mothers	Mothers encounters with education
Rathod (2021) Sweden	The Intersection of ‘Outside’ Practices and Children’s Sedentary Behaviour at Home	Study completed over 15 months	Praxiography: Interview Observation/home tours	The interconnectedness of different practices, the way practices are tied into material arrangements and how practices are ‘partially determined by normativity.’ (Schatzki, 2002)	‘Porosity of the home’ (Tolia-Kelly, 2004)	Survey used to broach interest of eligible families	10 families (18 children)	Thematic analysis (linked to practical materials arrangements and understandings)	Home based sedentary behaviours are conceptualised as embodied in various processes as ‘nexuses of practices’.
Rozynek et al. (2022) Germany	The influence of limited financial resources on daily travel practices. A case study of low-income households with children in the Hanover Region (Germany)	Study completed March to September 2020	Qualitative case study: Interview Questionnaire	Meanings, materials and competences (Shove et al., 2012)	N/A	Purposive and snowball sampling through organisations working with researchers. Flyers were also distributed.	16 parents	Qualitative content analysis with deductive coding based on materials, meanings and competences.	Type analysis revealed four types of daily travel practices: (1) car-centred, (2) car-reduced, (3) public transport oriented and (4) non-motorised.
Schrodt et al. (2006) United States of America	The divorce decree, communication and the structuration of coparenting relationships in stepfamilies	Diaries completed over two week period	Qualitative: Interview Interaction diary	Structuration theory (Giddens, 1984)	N/A	Participants were already part of a larger investigation	21 participants across 18 families	Grounded theory	Interactions between co-parents relating to child care.
Shittu (2023) Nigeria	‘Almost Everything in the House Now Is Plastic’: Foregrounding Plastic Materiality in Household Routines and Practices	Not stated	Exploratory case study: Interview Home tour/Observation Photo data	Giddens (1984) Meanings, materials and competences (Shove et al., 2012) Schatzki (2002)	N/A	Snowball sampling with initial recruitment from research assistants.	12 households	Thematic analysis leading to development of a conceptual framework	Plastic use within the following domains; hygiene related, comfortability and entertainment, food-related and child-rearing.
Spear et al. (2022) England	Reimagining parental engagement in special schools: a practice theoretical approach	Data collected between January and April 2019	Practice theory ‘framing’: Interview Focus group	Practice Architectures (Kemmis, 2019) Reckwitz referenced in defining practice (Reckwitz, 2002)	‘Parental involvement continuum’ (Goodall and Montgomery, 2014)	Purposive sampling using mail	129 staff and 26 parents	Thematic analysis (practice theory was applied 'as a lens' to the data)	Researchers explored practice architectures that hold parenting and school practices in place.
Spotswood et al. (2021) England	‘We’re just stuck in a daily routine’: Implications of the temporal dimensions, demands and dispositions of mothering for leisure time physical activity.	Not stated	Qualitative: Interview Diary	Schatzki (2002) Kemmis (2019)	Theorisation of routines (Southerton, 2013)	Sampled using ‘maximum variation technique’ (recruited from close vicinity to children’s centres)	15 mothers	Thematic analysis	Mothering practices are understood as being interwoven with other practices that extend beyond house landscape
Tarleton and Turney (2020) England	Understanding ‘Successful Practice/s’ with Parents with Learning Difficulties when there are Concerns about Child Neglect: the Contribution of Social Practice Theory	Not stated	Qualitative case study: Case report Interviews Advisory group	Meanings, materials and competences (Shove et al., 2012) Hui et al. (2016) Reckwitz (2002) definition used.	N/A	Purposive sampling by members of the project team.	38 professionals 9 parents.	Thematic analysis	Professional practice relating to working with parents where there is concern about child neglect
Torkkeli et al. (2023) Finland	Adjusting the Coordination of Parental Foodwork Practices	Data collected over one week	Interview Video data	Warde’s consumption approach (Warde, 2005) Reckwitz (2002) is referenced and used to explain practice theory	N/A	Families volunteered by answering web-based questionnaire	Five families	Abductive and theoretical data analysis informed by two theoretical concept categories: coordination forms and elements of practice	Concept of foodwork used to refer to a bundle of cooking-related practices.
van Kesteren and Evans (2020) England	Cooking without thinking: How understanding cooking as a practice can shed new light on inequalities in healthy eating.	Data collected over one year	Ethnography: Interview Observation Practice diaries Questionnaire	Meanings, materials and competences (Shove et al., 2012) Schatzki (Schatzki, 2002) Warde’s (2005) approach is used to tie together practice Reckwitz definition used (Reckwitz, 2002)	Cognitive automaticity (Thaler and Sunstein, 2008)	Not reported	25 mothers of young children completed interviews 310 mothers responded to questionnaire.	Not reported	Cooking

Year of publication

Included studies were published over a 16-year period between 2006 and 2022. About 12 of the 33 articles were published from 2020 onwards and all bar one study were published from 2010 onwards (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Peer-reviewed articles by year of publication.

Geographical location

Most studies were conducted with samples in England (n = 6), followed by Sweden and Australia (n = 4), United States of America (n = 3) and Ireland and Hong Kong (n = 2; Table 2).

Table 2.

Geographic location of studies.

Country study conducted	Number of studies
Australia	4
Belgium	1
Canada	1
Denmark	2
England	6
Estonia	1
Finland	1
France	1
Germany	1
Hong Kong	2
Iceland	1
Ireland	2
New Zealand	1
Nigeria	1
Sweden	4
Thailand	1
USA	3

For fifteen of the studies, data was collected inside the family home. One study included analysis of the home environment with the social media sphere. Other settings included school (n = 2), organisation (n = 1), a combination of home, school and organisational contexts (n = 4). Other studies were completed in the community contexts of a neighbourhood, a grocery store and baby cafe. Two studies reported data was collected in a focus group. Five studies did not disclose the location of their data collection. However, these studies only conducted interviews and noted the location varied dependent on participant availability and preference. Select studies went so far as to disclose they were not as focussed on details relating to method and data collection but more so on practice as a theoretical and methodological concept itself.

Publication

Included studies were published in a wide array of journals. Three studies were published by Sociology of Health and Illness. The remaining studies were published in 30 different journals.

Timeframe

Included studies reported a wide range of time periods for data collection. Some studies reported in terms of frequency of interviews or discrete occasions of data collection, such as singular interviews or diary writing (n = 6). Others reported on hours spent completing field work, or the months during which field work was completed (n = 22). Time periods ranged from 1 week to 3 years, although the amount of data collected during the various timeframes of studies differed. Five of the studies did not disclose the timeframe for data collection.

Population and participants

The high degree of variance in methodology and study design resulted in a wide range of participants in terms of characteristics and number. Studies reported participants as families (n = 14), households (n = 2), parent and child dyads (n = 4), parents and other stakeholders such as school workers (n = 3), children (n = 2) and parents or caregivers (n = 8).

Sampling

Twenty-four studies disclosed their sampling and recruitment process. The majority of studies within this review employed purposive sampling (n = 14). Other sampling methods included snowball sampling (n = 3), convenience sampling (n = 1), recruitment from established networks (n = 2), sampling from researcher’s social periphery (n = 2) and use of maximum variation technique(n = 1). One study identified using a combination of convenience, snowball and theoretical sampling techniques.

Sampling varied across studies and included strategies such as; flyers, emails, posters, social media and survey. Seven studies did not disclose their sampling technique and three reported sampling was part of a larger research project using a subset of data/ participants. Four studies reported providing compensation for participation.

Practices studied

The studies included in this scoping review can be divided into two groups; those that analysed and investigated concrete nexuses of practices or isolated practices and those which utilised a practice theory approach to explore more abstract ideas of parenting or mothering as a practice in itself.

In terms of concrete activities as practice, most studies explored meal preparation and feeding. Other discrete practices that were analysed include daily travel practices, parent’s interactions with schooling and education, indoor and outdoor play, sports and leisure participation, bath time, computer/ technology use, food shopping and homework completion. These studies employed methods to look at discrete practices inside and outside of the home.

Other studies focussed on how teleoaffective structures and forms of capital are present across parenting as a nexus of practices. Schatzki (2002) defines teleoaffective structures as ‘a range of normativized and hierarchically ordered ends, projects and tasks, to varying degrees allied with normativized emotions and even moods’ (p. 83). A teleoaffective structure exists when there is general agreement about what is acceptable and unacceptable within a given practice, including elements like beliefs and rituals that belong to a given practice, not individual actors (Schatzki, 2002). Two studies focussed on emotional labour and its presentation across different aspects of parenting. Consumption of plastics was explored across facets of parenting and similarly co-parenting as a practice was examined by one study. One study focussed on the use of Islamic capital and two studies did not disclose any specific practices that they focussed on for analysis.

Practice theory use

Part of the inclusion criteria required studies to have utilised some form of practice theory within their study design so all included studies reported some form of practice theory. A summary of the different theoretical approaches taken by each study can be found in Table 1. Studies which identified one form of practice theory mostly used Shove, Pantzar and Watson’s theory (n = 5). Other theories used in isolation included Bourdieu (n = 13), Giddens’ Structuration theory (n = 2), Schatzki (n = 1) and Kemmis’ practice architectures (n = 1). For Bourdieu in particular, included studies were highly selective with which elements of the ‘logic of practice’ theory informed their design and analysis.

Twelve studies used multiple forms of practice theory. Some studies chose to combine the Shove et al. (2012) approach with the work of Schatzki (2002; n = 4), Giddens (1984) and Schatzki (n = 1), Hui et al. (2016; n = 1) or Gherardi (2019; n = 1). Other studies combined the work of Warde (2005), who is well known in the field of consumption, with the work of other practice theorists including Reckwitz (2002) and Halkier et al. (2011). Of the papers that specifically defined practice, most used the definition provided by Reckwitz (2002; n = 6), followed by a definition of practice that aligned with Schatzki (2002; n = 2) or a combination of Schatzki and Shove et al. (2012; n = 2).

Other theories

More than half (n = 17) of the included studies utilised practice theory alongside additional theory or concepts. The scope of application was broad and included: feminist theory, intersectional theory, concerted cultivation, tinkering, positioning theory, food parenting, cognitive automaticity, Affordances theory, food parenting, porosity of the home, the parental involvement continuum, Ecological perceptual psychology and circle of care relations. The remaining fifteen studies did not disclose any other theory which informed their methodology or study design and identified that practice theory or certain branches of practice theory were used in isolation.

Data analysis

About 31 of the 33 studies described their process for analysing data and the most common was thematic analysis (n = 15). Authors described using thematic analysis inductively to produce themes that were not specifically related to practice theory. Four additional studies performed thematic analysis but reported adopting a practice-theoretical based lens.

Other analytical processes reported included a hermeneutic approach (n = 2), analysis as case studies (n = 2), content analysis (n = 1), inductive and deductive language embedded analysis (n = 1) and analysis using an action-oriented resilience framework (n = 1). Other studies employed multiple analytical processes. One study employed iterative coding of interviews combined with descriptive statistics. Another study used abductive video and transcript data analysis, initially using thematic analysis and then using coordination forms and practice elements.

Methods and methodology

Table 1 shows the methodological approach taken by each study. The most common methodology employed was ethnography (n = 13) and four studies described a practice-based methodology (sometimes termed praxiography). There does not appear to be any temporal relations to the use of specific method or methodology in terms of year of publication.

All studies employed some form of qualitative method which always included some form of interview. Studies were identified as using mixed methods if more than one method was reported on (n = 23). Methods within the included studies were varied and some included utilisation of a survey to inform on demographic data prior to completing interviews (n = 8), as well as broader field-based studies using a multitude of innovative and sometimes practice specific methods including family interviews, go along interviews, observations, calendar and photo exercises. A full overview of methods can be found in Table 3. Three studies (Keller and Halkier, 2014; Molander, 2017; Spear et al., 2022) also reported using field notes in addition to the methods outlined in Table 3 and one study used an advisory group (Tarleton and Turney, 2020).

Table 3.

Methods of studies in scoping review.

Ethical reporting of included studies

Several studies reported gaining ethical approval from their institution and some studies involving video data discussed utilising ethical principles considering consent, access and vulnerabilities. Video and photographic data collection also raised issues around children’s privacy and were discussed in one paper. Other ethical issues which were raised in the studies pertained to outsider status and the importance of reflexivity, considerations for entering homes and private spaces, gaining children’s trust and the potential impact of pre-existing relationships between author and participants. Sixteen of the studies did not report on the ethical process for their research.

Reported limitations

Sixteen of the included studies self-reported limitations to their research. The most common reported limitations involved reduced generalisability to a broader population or small sample size (n = 9). Other reported limitations included sampling not including both parents (n = 2), a risk of families presenting self-desired accounts of practice and activity in interviews and the potential for pre-existing relationships with participants to impact data collection (n = 1). Three studies reported limitations relating specifically to practice and not addressing; meta practices (n = 1), how practices connected to one another (n = 1) or the make-up of examined practices (n = 1).

Discussion

Summary of evidence

Our initial aim was to determine what practice theory, methodology and methods have been used and to identify barriers and facilitators to practice-based research. In this scoping review we identified 33 studies which addressed parenting using a practice theoretical approach published between 2006 and 2022. Findings indicate the application of a broad range of methods, methodology and practice theoretical approach across a variety of settings. This is consistent with the ethos of practice theory and its historical development.

Methodology and methods

We did not identify differences in the application of methodology or methods over time. The use of ethnographic methodology and qualitative methods remained constant and formed the majority of practice-based studies included in this scoping review. The use of a wide variety of methods is a strength of the literature. Included studies came from a range of disciplines and backgrounds and this is reflected in the rich array of methods presented and the creativity across study design.

Although each of the studies used interviews, the type and frequency of interview varied broadly. The majority of studies identified using semi-structured interviews and some studies used interviews in isolation. Within practice theory, there is an ongoing debate regarding the utility of using solely interviews within empirical research. Bourdieu argues that interviews force the agent or actor to reflect post practice, which can provide insight but also limits the ability of the agent to express the truth of the practice. Similarly, Nicolini (2017) argued ‘by interviewing someone about their practice, you learn a lot about interviewing, their relationship and (usually very little) the actual practice under investigation’ (p. 29). Interviews can also be a means of enactment and can reveal hidden meaning relating to practice (Halkier et al., 2011). As seen in Table 3, most studies used multiple qualitative methods to collect data.

Studies can be seen as adopting a weak or strong programme of practice theory research (Jonas et al., 2017). A weak programme runs the risk of reducing practice theory to describing ‘what people do’. Whereas a strong programme goes a step further and strives to explain social matters and how they may change, emerge or disappear over time rather than only identifying what practices are being performed.

In this scoping review, select studies combined specific interview types (including practice theory specific forms such as ‘practice oriented’ and ‘go-along’ interviews) with additional methods including observation, video data and diary use. Employing a variety of methods may help to uncover the difference between what actors say they ‘do’ and what they actually ‘do’, as well as uncovering other actors and elements within the examined practice. Halkier and Jensen (2011) suggests practice-based research should employ various methods for data production to reveal tacit element as well as explicit elements of practice and the majority of studies adopted at least two methods within their research design.

Participants

Some studies recruited for parents but consistently this resulted in the recruitment of mothers. Fathers were included in studies that recruited on the basis of ‘family’, such as when using video data for family meals or homework completion. Some studies advised they advertised to all parents and the call was answered by mothers, others rationalised limited involvement given fathers were not as ‘relevant’ for the practices being examined, such as food and meal preparation. Theorists have previously confirmed the major importance food preparation plays in parenting (specifically motherhood) and this may also explain the high presence of mothers as participants across these studies (DeVault, 1991; Lupton, 1996).

There is a well-established gender skew in parenting tasks and labour which seems to be reflected in the data and recruitment. There were studies which included solely mothers in their sample, but in the cases where fathers were included in the study they were never included in isolation from mothers. Leach et al reasoned extremely low recruitment of fathers in parent-focussed studies may stem from low engagement with gender neutral parenting terms accompanied with a disproportionate saturation of mothers being exposed to their study advertisements, especially relating to online recruitment using social media. For future studies, findings suggest recruitment that targets fathers must be father-focussed and not limited to gender neutral strategies.

In addition to parents and children being involved in the studies, research also involved stakeholders and actors including school workers such as teachers and members of community organisations. Research revolved around human actors within the practices. There was also a paucity of research referencing materials.

Theory

Given using a practice-based approach was part of the inclusion criteria, all studies reported some theoretical standing relating to a branch of practice theory. This was most commonly supported by the definition of practice given by Reckwitz (2002) and usually focussed on theory from Bourdieu, Schatzki (2002) or Shove et al. (2012). This aligns with broader claims that most contemporary work in the practice theory sphere builds from these theorists (Maller, 2015).

Bourdieu (1990) in particular, has been identified as a popular theorist within broader parent-based research and this scoping review confirmed this popularity is mirrored in the practice theory field for parent research specifically (Lareau, 2003). With regards to practice theory, Bourdieu’s work, ‘The Logic of Practice’ in particular, is significant (Jonas et al., 2017). Bourdieu acknowledged his work needed to move beyond the abstract and be tested empirically (Lunnay et al., 2011). Bourdieu may not have developed a consistent theory of practice, however his writings were influential in introducing the idea of practice into wider social theory debate (Shove et al., 2012). Specifically, the recursive nature between Bourdieu’s concept of habitus and practice is of central concern within social practice theory (Bourdieu, 1990).

Nicolini (2017) acknowledges theory is necessary when conducting practice-based research authentically but argues the research must remain a methodological project. This approach was evident in studies where a practice approach informed not only the theoretical standpoint, but also methodological decisions and analysis. In contrast, some studies discussed practice theory whilst adopting a more traditional, qualitative analysis and methodology.

In this review, some studies investigated certain activities or ‘practices’ in isolation, whilst others allowed practice theory to permeate through their approach to the research. When a practice is empirically explored in isolation from others the power of such research is likely to be limited in its ability to both explain social issues and effect change or intervention (Maller, 2015).

Each of the included studies used practice theory to identify the aspects of practice that can be seen and observed. Additionally, some studies expanded further by analysing the invisible or implicit elements of practice and this could be likened to the concept of generative mechanisms associated with critical realism. Blom and Morén (2011) describe a five-step methodological process to identify, describe and explore generative mechanisms. If we were to reflect on the findings of studies within this scoping review using their frame it is evident that studies successfully describing and categorising empirical data to shed light on discrete practices (such as those examining meal preparation through observation and interviewing) and there are other others which also examined larger bundles of practice such as mothering and consumption moved beyond the ‘empirical’ world and into the ‘real’.

The studies in the latter category show evidence of abducting and retroducting observed, empirical happenings to draw conclusions on the more implicit elements of practice. Some studies were able to demonstrate how practices form larger nodes and networks within the social world by extrapolating from the observed data. For example, Aranda and Hart (2015) applied practice theory to examine the concept of resilience in a group of parent participants in resilience-based programmes. They state their research shows ‘how practice theory reveals entangled and emergent meanings, competencies and materials that constitute resilience as a social practice comprised of resilient moves.’ Their process is comparable to the concepts of contextualisation and concretisation as described by Blom and Morén (2011) and is an example of how empirical data can be used to examine the more abstract, underlying elements of practice and how elements such as norms are constituted. Eighteen studies merged aspects of practice theory with alternate theory or concepts. The breadth of different areas of research which have used practice theory to investigate parenting is evident in the fact no two papers used the same alternate theories or concepts alongside practice theory in their research.

Limitations of scoping review

The above findings should be addressed with consideration of the following limitations. To increase feasibility of the review and as stated in the PRISMA flow chart, five studies were excluded on the basis they were not published in English. The authors acknowledge that inclusion of articles written in all languages is recommended for scoping reviews (Peters et al., 2020). Expanding the constraints of the review to include articles published in languages other than English would have expanded the geographical spread of the data.

This scoping review emphasised the creativity that can be afforded when adopting a practice-based approach, in respect to method, theory and across a range of research fields. This impacted how elements of the included studies could be discussed and compared within the review and it meant that operational definitions of what a practice-based study was and what a parenting-based study were important to clarify and reflect on throughout the scoping review.

Given the large number of papers included in the initial search, the data were abstracted by one researcher and then verified by a second reviewer. A pilot test was conducted prior to each stage of the data abstraction to allow verification.

Conclusions

The goal of this scoping review was to provide a preliminary map of how practice theory is being used to investigate parenting in contemporary research. Although practice theory has a long-standing theoretical presence, its use in empirical research remains novel. The results show a high diversity of methodological and theoretical approaches to several aspects of parenting using a practice-based approach. Across the studies there were recommendations for expanding sampling and recruitment strategies and major findings from this scoping review include using multiple methods with participants to draw on different aspects of practice and tailoring practice theory approaches and sometimes combining with alternate theoretical concepts. Included studies recommended future research should focus on examining the connections between practices and this has identified as a contemporary need across social practice theory research more widely (Shove, 2023).

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-mio-10.1177_20597991231202897 – Supplemental material for Using social practice theory to examine parenting: A scoping review

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-mio-10.1177_20597991231202897 for Using social practice theory to examine parenting: A scoping review by Caitlan McLean, Linda Slack-Smith and Paul R Ward in Methodological Innovations

Footnotes

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) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was funded by the Australian Government through the Australian Research Council Discovery Project: DP210101166.

ORCID iD

Caitlan McLean

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Author biographies

Caitlan McLean is a PhD candidate with the Research Centre for Public Health, Equity and Human Flourishing at Torrens University Australia. Her PhD is investigating social practices relating to oral health, natural parents and preschool aged children in Australia. A background working in pediatric and community based occupational therapy sparked an interest in social and health research.

Linda Slack-Smith is a social epidemiologist using qualitative, quantitative and translation approaches (including policy) in her research. Internationally she is Editor Emerita of the journal Gerodontology, President of the Geriatric Oral Health Research Group of the International Association for Dental Research (IADR), and IADR ANZ Division President 2015-2017. She was Co-Chair of theMelbourne 2021 World Congress of Epidemiology. Linda was recent President of the Australasian Epidemiological Association and was Scientific Committee Chair for the Public Health Congress in 2015 and co-recipient and senior author of the international Giddon Award for Distinguished Research in the Behavioral Sciences awarded in London in 2018.

Professor Paul Ward is Professor of Public Health and Director of the Research Centre for Public Health, Equity and Human Flourishing (PHEHF) at Torrens University, Australia. Paul’s research is situated at the intersections of health, medicine, risk, trust, (in)equality and lay epidemiology, and the theoretical and methodological lenses that we bring to these intersections. Paul’s main research interests are around socio-spatial inequalities and inequities in health, medicine usage and the provision of health and social care. Paul also has a particular interest in research around lay and professional perceptions, knowledge and understandings of health, healthcare, medicines, risk and trust. In addition, given Paul’s experience in both qualitative and quantitative research, he has an interest in research which seeks to utilise the benefits of a pluralistic and multi-disciplinary approach.

References

Appadurai

(1990) Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy. Theory, Culture & Society 7: 295–310.

Aranda

Hart

(2015) Resilient moves: Tinkering with practice theory to generate new ways of thinking about using resilience. Health (United Kingdom) 19(4): 355–371.

Arnalds

ÁA

Eydal

Skaptadóttir

(2021) Construction of childcare practices among icelandic and polish parents living in iceland: Mixed-methods explorations. Journal of Comparative Family Studies 52(4): 623–647.

Bach

(2014) Parenting among wealthy Danish families: A concerted civilising process. Ethnography and Education 9(2): 224–237.

Bestman

Thomas

Randle

, et al. (2020) “Everyone knows grandma.” Pathways to gambling venues in regional Australia. Health Promotion International 35(6): 1273–1282.

Blom

Morén

(2011) Analysis of generative mechanisms. Journal of Critical Realism 10(1): 60–79.

Blue

Shove

Carmona

, et al. (2016) Theories of practice and public health: Understanding (un)healthy practices. Critical Public Health 26(1): 36–50.

Boler

(1999) Feeling Power: Emotions and Education. Milton Park: Routledge.

Bønnelycke

Sandholdt

Jespersen

(2019) Household collectives: Resituating health promotion and physical activity. Sociology of Health and Illness 41(3): 533–548.

10.

Bourdieu

(1990) The Logic of Practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.

11.

Brembeck

Fuentes

(2017) Convenient food for baby: A study of weaning as a social practice. Food, Culture and Society 20(4): 569–586.

12.

Bronfenbrenner

(1993) Ecological model of human development. In: Gauvain

Cole

(eds) Readings on the Development of Children, 2nd edn. NY: Freeman, pp. 37–43.

13.

Chan

Deave

Greenhalgh

(2010) Childhood obesity in transition zones: An analysis using structuration theory. Sociology of Health and Illness 32(5): 711–729.

14.

Choi

(2017) Habitus, affordances, and family leisure. Ethnography 18(4): 427–449.

15.

Cohen

(1989) Structuration Theory: Anthony Giddens and the Constitution of Social Life. New York: Macmillan.

16.

Cohn

(2014) From health behaviours to health practices: An introduction. Sociology of Health and Illness 36(2): 157–162.

17.

Corradi

Gherardi

Verzelloni

(2010) Through the practice lens: Where is the bandwagon of practice-based studies heading? Management Learning 41(3): 265–283.

18.

Covidence systematice review software. Veritas Health Innovation: Melbourne, Australia. Available at www.covidence.org.au

19.

Daley

(2022) ‘I can do this by my own self’: How four preschool-aged children navigated mobile technologies at home. Early Child Development and Care 192(14): 2296–2310.

20.

Delormier

Frohlich

Potvin

(2009) Food and eating as social practice – understanding eating patterns as social phenomena and implications for public health. Sociology of Health and Illness 31(2): 215–228.

21.

DeVault

(1991) Feeding the Family : The Social Organization of Caring as Gendered Work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

22.

Dreyfus

(1996) The current relevance of merleau-ponty’s phenomenology of embodiment. The Electronic Journal of Analytic Philosophy 4: 1–16.

23.

Elias

(1998) The civilizing of parents. In: Goudsblom

Menell

(eds) The Norbert Elias Reader. New Jersey: Blackwell, pp. 189–211.

24.

Ergler

Kearns

Witten

(2013) Seasonal and locational variations in children’s play: Implications for wellbeing. Social Science and Medicine 91: 178–185.

25.

Franceschelli

O’Brien

(2014) ‘Islamic capital’ and family life: The role of islam in parenting. Sociology 48(6): 1190–1206.

26.

Gherardi

(2009) Introduction: The critical power of the ‘Practice Lens.’ Management Learning 40: 115–128.

27.

Gherardi

(2019) How to Conduct a Practice-Based Study: Problems and Methods, Second Edition. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

28.

Gibson

(1986) The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

29.

Giddens

(1981) Modernity and Self-Identity. Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.

30.

Giddens

(1984) The Constitution of Society : Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.

31.

Goodall

Montgomery

(2014) Parental involvement to parental engagement: A continuum. Educational Review 66(4): 399–410.

32.

Grimshaw

(2010) A Guide to Knowledge Synthesis. Ottawa: Canadian Institutes of Health Research [Preprint].

33.

Groeninck

Meurs

Geldof

, et al. (2020) Resilience in liminality: How resilient moves are being negotiated by asylum-seeking families in the liminal context of asylum procedures. Journal of Refugee Studies 33(2): 358–370.

34.

Halkier

Jensen

(2011) Methodological challenges in using practice theory in consumption research. Examples from a study on handling nutritional contestations of food consumption. Journal of Consumer Culture 11(1): 101–123.

35.

Halkier

Katz-Gerro

Martens

(2011) Applying practice theory to the study of consumption: Theoretical and methodological considerations. Journal of Consumer Culture 11(1): 3–13.

36.

Hart

Blincow

Thomas

(2007) Resilient Therapy: Working With Children and Families. Milton Park: Routledge.

37.

Head

(2022) Wicked Problems in Public Policy: Understanding and Responding to Complex Challenges. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.

38.

Hess

Handel

(1959) Family Worlds: A Psychological Approach to Family Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

39.

Hopson

Cram

(2018) Tackling Wicked Problems in Complex Ecologies: The Role of Evaluation. Redwood City, California: Stanford University Press.

40.

Hui

Schatzki

Shove

(2016) The Nexus of Practices. London: Routledge.

41.

Hutchison

(2012) A labour of love: Mothers, emotional capital and homework. Gender and Education 24(2): 195–212.

42.

Jesperson

Bonnelycke

Eriksen

(2013) Careful science? Bodywork and care practices in randomised clinical trials. Sociology of Health & Illness 36(5): 665–669.

43.

Jonas

Littig

Wroblewski

(2017) Methodological Reflections on Practice Oriented Theories. Cham: Springer.

44.

Karademir-Hazır

(2021) How (not) to feed young children: A class-cultural analysis of food parenting practices. British Journal of Sociology 72(5): 1200–1213.

45.

Keller

Halkier

(2014) Positioning consumption: A practice theoretical approach to contested consumption and media discourse. Marketing Theory 14(1): 35–51.

46.

Kemmis

(2019) A Practice Sensibility – An Invitation to the Theory of Practice. New York: Springer.

47.

Kusenbach

(2018) Go-alongs. In: Flick

(ed.) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection. California: Sage, pp. 344–361.

48.

Lareau

(2003) Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. Berkeley: University of California Press.

49.

Lunnay

Ward

Borlagdan

(2011) The practise and practice of Bourdieu: The application of social theory to youth alcohol research. International Journal of Drug Policy 22(6): 428–436.

50.

Lupton

(1996) Food, the Body and the Self. London: Sage Publications.

51.

Luster

Okyagaki

(2006) Parenting: An Ecological Perspective. Oxfordshire: Routledge.

52.

Lynch

Baker

Lyons

(2009) Affective Equality: Love, Care and Injustice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

53.

Mackenzie

Kerr

(2012) Head-mounted cameras and stimulated recall in qualitative sport research. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 4(1): 51–61.

54.

Maller

(2015) Understanding health through social practices: Performance and materiality in everyday life. Sociology of Health & Illness 37(1): 52–66.

55.

McGovern

Devine

(2016) The care worlds of migrant children – exploring inter-generational dynamics of love, care and solidarity across home and school. Childhood 23(1): 37–52.

56.

McLaren

(2018) Parent–child mobility practices: Revealing ‘cracks’ in the automobility system. Mobilities 13(6): 844–860.

57.

Mennesson

Bertrand

Court

(2019) Boys who don’t like sports: Family lifestyle and transmission of dispositions. Sport, Education and Society 24(3): 269–282.

58.

Meyer

Fozdar

(2022) Complex but ordinary: Intercultural negotiations among mixed families in Australia. Journal of Family Studies 28(4): 1504–1526.

59.

Mol

Moser

Pols

(2010) Care in Practice: On Tinkering in Clinics, Homes and Farms. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.

60.

Molander

(2017) Not just a mother: Embodied and positional aspects of consumer learning from a practice perspective. Consumption Markets and Culture 20(2): 131–152.

61.

Molander

Hartmann

(2018) Emotion and practice: Mothering, cooking, and teleoaffective episodes. Marketing Theory 18(3): 371–390.

62.

Moreira

(2004) Self, agency and the surgical collective: Detachment. Sociology of Health & Illness 26: 32–49.

63.

Morgan

(2011) Locating ‘family practices.’ Sociological Research Online 16(4): 174–182.

64.

Muensit

Thongyu

Lapanun

(2019) Forecasting equilibrium quantity and price on the world natural rubber. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences 40: 186–192.

65.

Munn

Peters

MDJ

Stern

, et al. (2018) Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology 18(1): 143.

66.

Nicholls

Strengers

(2015) Peak demand and the “family peak” period in Australia: Understanding practice (in)flexibility in households with children. Energy Research and Social Science 9: 116–124.

67.

Nicolini

(2012) Practice Theory, Work and Organisation. UK: Oxford University Press.

68.

Nicolini

(2017) Practice theory as a package of theory, method and vocabulary: Affordances and limitations. In: Jonas

Littig

Wroblewski

(eds) Methodological Reflections on Practice Oriented Theories. Cham: Springer, pp. 19–34.

69.

O’Donoghue

(2013) Putting working-class mothers in their place: Social stratification, the field of education, and Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of practice. British Journal of Sociology of Education 34(2): 190–207.

70.

Peters

MDJ

Marnie

Tricco

, et al. (2020) Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis 18(10): 2119–2126.

71.

Rathod

(2021) The intersection of ‘outside’ practices and children’s sedentary behavior at home. Home Cultures 18(1): 47–67.

72.

Reckwitz

(2002) Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory 5(2): 243–263.

73.

Rittel

Webber

(1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4: 155–169.

74.

Rozynek

Schwerdtfeger

Lanzendorf

(2022) The influence of limited financial resources on daily travel practices. A case study of low-income households with children in the Hanover Region (Germany). Journal of Transport Geography, 100: 103329.

75.

Schatzki

(2002) The Site of the Social: A Philosophical Account of the Constitution of Social Life and Change. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press. Available at: https://www.degruyter.com/cover/covers/9780271023717.jpg. (accessed 31 July 2022).

76.

Schrodt

Baxter

McBride

, et al. (2006) The divorce decree, communication, and the structuration of coparenting relationships in stepfamilies. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 23(5): 741–759.

77.

Seidman

(2013) Interviewing as Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.

78.

Sennett

(2008) The Craftsman. Yale: Yale University Press.

79.

Shittu

(2023) ‘Almost everything in the house now is plastic’: Foregrounding plastic materiality in household routines and practices. Sociological Research Online 28(1): 132–149.

80.

Shove

(2023) Connecting Practices: Large Topics in Society and Social Theory. London: Routledge.

81.

Shove

Pantzar

Watson

(2012) The Dynamics of Social Practice: Everyday Life and How it Changes. London: Sage.

82.

Smagacz-Poziemska

Bukowski

Martini

(2021) Social practice research in practice. Some methodological challenges in applying practice-based approach to the urban research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 24(1): 65–78.

83.

Southerton

(2013) Habits, routines and temporalities of consumption: From individual behaviours to the reproduction of everyday practices. Time & Society 22(3): 335–355.

84.

Spear

Spotswood

Goodall

, et al. (2022) Reimagining parental engagement in special schools–a practice theoretical approach. Educational Review 74(7): 1243–1263.

85.

Spotswood

Nobles

Armstrong

(2021) “We’re just stuck in a daily routine”: Implications of the temporal dimensions, demands and dispositions of mothering for leisure time physical activity. Sociology of Health and Illness 43(5): 1254–1269.

86.

Stones

(2005) Structuration Theory. London: Palgrave-Macmillan.

87.

Tarleton

Turney

(2020) Understanding “successful practice/s” with parents with learning difficulties when there are concerns about child neglect: The contribution of social practice theory. Child Indicators Research 13(2): 387–409.

88.

Thaler

Sunstein

(2008) Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. Yale: Yale University Press.

89.

Thompson

Kumar

(2011) Responses to health promotion campaigns: Resistance, denial and othering. Critical Public Health 21(1): 105–117.

90.

Tolia-Kelly

(2004) Locating processes of identification: Studying the precipitates of re-memory through artefacts in the British Asian Home. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 29(3): 314–329.

91.

Torkkeli

Mäkelä

Seitamaa-Hakkarainen

(2023) Adjusting the coordination of parental foodwork practices. Cultural Sociology 17(3): 309–330.

92.

Tricco

Lillie

Zarin

, et al. (2018) PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine 169(7): 467–473.

93.

van Kesteren

Evans

(2020) Cooking without thinking: How understanding cooking as a practice can shed new light on inequalities in healthy eating. Appetite 147: 104503.

94.

Walls

(2018) Wicked problems and a “wicked” solution. Globalization and Health 14: 34.

95.

Warde

(2005) Consumption and theories of practice. Journal of Consumer Culture 5(2): 131–153.

96.

Watson

(2012) How theories of practice can inform transition to a decarbonised transport system. Journal of Transport Geography 24: 488–496.

97.

Witzel

Reiter

(2012) The Problem-Centred Interview. California: Sage.

98.

Zimmerman

Weider

(1983) The diary: Diary interview method – an approximation to direct observation in field research. In Smith

Manning

(eds) A Handbook of Social Science Methods. Florida: Ballinger, pp.115–144.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.01 MB