Participant-led

Capturing day-to day interactions with place can reveal how people use and think about familiar spaces. The method can range from ‘shaddowing’ a participant throughout their day or asking them to keep their own record. The diarist is not a proxy observer and there is an element of performance and reflection inherent in the diarising process that has to be considered in the analysis.

• An initial meeting is held (either with an individual or group) to explain the activity and share any materials required – this could be notebooks, disposable cameras etc.
• Participants are asked to keep a diary (written or using photographs and recordings) over a fixed period that allows enough time to capture multiple engagements with the site (e.g. 1-2 weeks).
• Contact or support may be needed during the diary-keeping period.
• Once completed, the diary is shared as the basis for discussion at a second meeting (again, this could be one-to-one or in a group).

Both the in-person and diary-keeping versions of this method require repeated engagements or significant time commitment from the participants. It was not possible to trial them in the cases where they were proposed, Cables Wynd House and Kinneil House, even though these were two of the more extended studies.

It is worth considering the relationship development required ahead of this activity and additional support for the process beyond the time commitment for the task (this may come from other participants in a group context or be part of the facilitation of the exercise).

Transect walks, where a participant is accompanied by the researcher as they moved through the site, serves to connect the discussion with experiential and multi-sensorial aspects of place. For people with a known connection to a site, transect walks help to focus on specific attributes or locations associated with their memories or activities, and to bring these to conscious attention.

• As someone arrived at the site, they were approached, introduced to the research and asked if they would be willing to participate in a transect walk (be accompanied on their normal walk while talking about the site).
• If they agreed, the process was explained and participant information sheet and consent forms were shared and signed.
• The walks at this site lasted between 30 minutes and an hour.
• While walking participants were asked about their observations, thoughts, feelings and memories. Notes were taken while walking as prompts for more comprehensive writing up after the activity.

Transect walks were trialled at the Caterthuns and Kinneil House and Estate, with a couple of instances in other studies, where interview participants suggested site walks.

• It was most effective to pre-arranging to meet people for the purposes of completing a transect walk. Depending on the reasons why people were visiting a site (and the associated values) spontaneous requests for participation had a relatively low positive response rate.
• The engaged act of walking, as opposed to a seated interview method, prompted responses from otherwise less talkative respondents.
• Participants were asked to lead the walk according to their normal routes or places of interest. However, there was some evidence that participants chose routes in response to the research context.
• Consider using a voice recorder. Practically speaking, it is difficult to walk, talk and take notes while on a strenuous climb or crossing uneven ground, particularly in the wind and rain. In some cases, an audio recorder was used in addition to physical note taking and/or writing up notes afterwards. This had the added benefit of recording some of the background noises, aiding recall of the multi-sensory experience when transcribing the discussion.

Community heritage walks and tours are normally held for groups and may target community members or visitors/participants from outwith the host’s community. When attending community tours, the locations chosen, the information provided by the group leader, and the reactions of participants, all illustrate how heritage is defined and experienced. Attention needs to be paid to group dynamics and follow-up activities (e.g. a structured interview) may be useful in finding out more about individual responses.