Drawing from experience: visualising the impact of COVID-19

References

• Arnheim, R. (1969). Visual thinking. University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, N. (2013). Drawing as a research process and drawing as research outputs- How acceptable are they in various disciplines? Tracey Drawing and Visualisation Research. https://www.lboro.ac.uk/microsites/sota/tracey/journal/edu/2013/PDF/Nina_Baker-TRACEY-Journal-DK-2013.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bell, S., & Morse, S. (2013). Rich pictures: A means to explore the ‘sustainable mind’? Sustainable Development, 21(1), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.497
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg, T., & Pooley, R. (2013). Contemporary iconography for rich picture construction. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 30(1), 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolland, A. C., Patterson, T., Roskos, B., Barth, J., & Bolland, J. M. (2022, May 26–30). Communicating Hope: A multi-data source study of young adolescents living in communities characterized by poverty. In Presentation at the 72nd Annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Paris, France.
   Google Scholar
• Bowen, T., & Evans, M. M. (2015). What does Knowledge look like? Drawing as a means of knowledge representation and knowledge construction. Education for Information, 31(1,2), 53–72. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-150947
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowen, T., & Evans, M. M. (2018). What does knowledge look like? Interpreting diagrams as contemporary hieroglyphics. Visual Communication, 18(4), 475–505. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357218775127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowen, T., & Evans, M. M. (2019). Shedding light on “knowledge”: Identifying and analyzing visual metaphors in drawings. Metaphor and Symbol, 34(4), 243–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2019.1683958
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dervin, B. (1999). Chaos, order, and sense-making: A proposed theory for information design. In R. Jackson (Ed.), Information design (pp. 35–57). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Donnelly, P., & Hogan, J. (2013). Engaging students in the classroom: ‘How can I know what I think until I see what I draw? European Political Science, 12(3), 365–383. https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2013.12
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drucker, J. (2014). Graphesis: Visual forms of knowledge production. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Engelhardt, Y. (2002). The Language of graphics: A framework for the analysis of syntax and meaning in maps, charts, and diagrams. Institute for Logic, Language and Computation.
   Google Scholar
• Gadelshina, G., Cornwell, A., & Spoors, D. (2019). Understanding corruption through freehand drawings: a case study of undergraduate business students’ visual learning in the classroom. Journal of Visual Literacy, 38(1–2), 142–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/1051144X.2018.1564608
   Google Scholar
• Gregory, N. (2017). Encountering drawing. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(13), 1236–1245. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2017.1336919
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guillemin, M. (2004). Understanding illness: Using drawings as a research method. Qualitative Health Research, 14(2), 272–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732303260445
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, K. (1999). On line and on paper: Visual representations, visual culture, and computer graphics in design engineering. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jellema, P., Annemans, M., & Heylighen, A. (2023). Drawing the researcher into data: drawing as an analytical tool in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 23(5), 1398–1417. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941221079530
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kearney, K. S., & Hyle, A. E. (2004). Drawing out emotions: the use of participant produced drawings in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Research, 4(3), 361–382. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794104047234
   Google Scholar
• Kocak, E., Nasir, V. A., & Turker, H. B. (2020). What drives Instagram usage? User motives and personality traits. Online Information Review, 44(3), 625–643. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-08-2019-0260
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kress, G. (2000). Design and transformation: New theories of meaning. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 153–161). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images: The Grammar of visual design. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, E., Lee, J., Moon, J. H., & Sung, Y. (2015). Pictures speak louder than words: motivations for using Instagram. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(9), 552–556. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0157
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, L. M. (2006). Child-centered? Thinking critically about children’s drawings as a visual method. Visual Anthropology Review, 22(1), 60–73. https://doi.org/10.1525/var.2006.22.1.60
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, C., Theron, L., Smith, A., & Stuart, J. (2011). Picturing research: Drawing as visual methodology. Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• New London Group. (1996). A Pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66, 60–92. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.66.1.17370n67v22j160u
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petherbridge, D. (2008). Nailing the liminal: The difficulties of defining drawing. In S. Garner (Ed.), Writing on drawing: Essays on drawing practice and research (pp. 27–41). Intellect Books.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, G. (2012). Visual Methodologies: An introduction to researching with visual materials. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Stafford, B. (2004). Visual pragmatism in a virtual world. In C. Handa (Ed.), Visual rhetoric in a digital world (pp. 209–222). Bedford/St. Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tversky, B. (2011). Visualizing thought. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3(3), 499–535. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01113.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tversky, B. (2015). The cognitive design of tools of thought. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 6(1), 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-014-0214-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar