Video interaction guidance

1. Introduction

Version followed: the UK model of Video Interaction Guidance (VIG) as set out by the Association for Video Interaction Guidance UK (AVIGuk) and in Kennedy, Landor & Todd (eds., 2011), Video Interaction Guidance: A Relationship-Based Intervention to Promote Attunement, Empathy and Wellbeing (Jessica Kingsley). The book itself is not drawn on directly: book content comes from theses that quote it, mainly Hawtin's thesis citing Kennedy 2011 and Biemans 1990 [uncertain where noted]. AVIGuk's "Theoretical background" and "Trauma and VIG" pages confirm the theory base, but they contain no procedural detail. James (2017, NCT Perspective) confirms the typical length, number of films, gap between film and review, and clip count, and describes a final session. The IRISS VERP podcast transcript (Sen) describes one VERP course. AVIGuk's training and VERP pages are not drawn on, so the training detail comes from MMHA and James.

VIG is a brief, strengths-based intervention using video. A trained "guider" films a client briefly with someone they want a better relationship with, usually parent and child but possibly any pairing or age. The guider micro-analyses the film and edits it into short clips of moments that are going well. Then guider and client watch and discuss these clips in a "shared review". AVIGuk sums up its aim as enhancing or rekindling communication in important relationships, building attunement, sensitivity and mentalization [source: AVIGuk, What is VIG]. Change comes from the client seeing themselves succeed, and from being helped to name what they did to make it work. Kennedy (2011, p. 29) calls the clips "a mirror of the successful self" [source: Hawtin thesis, quoting Kennedy 2011]. The guider's central reflective question is "What is it that you are doing that is making a difference?" [source: AVIGuk, What is VIG]. Seeing and naming these moments helps clients build new, more positive stories about themselves as parents, about the child and about the relationship [source: AVIGuk; MMHA nutshell].

Theoretical roots. AVIGuk puts Trevarthen's micro-analysis of successful parent–infant interaction and his theory of intersubjectivity (1980) "at the core of VIG". Its two focal areas are attunement (Beebe 2010) and mentalization, meaning the parent's reflective functioning (Fonagy et al. 2002). It names mind-minded interaction (Meins 2012) as a way of supporting clients: parents are helped to treat the child "as an intentional being". AVIGuk also describes the clips as a "witness" to good moments the client may have missed (Jarvis 2011). They create a shared space in which practitioner and client micro-analyse the clips together. AVIGuk says this theory base frees VIG from prescriptive manuals [source: AVIGuk, Theoretical background]. James likewise says there is no rigidly defined protocol: guiders apply the method in their own way [source: James 2017]. Hawtin adds maternal sensitivity (Ainsworth), mediated learning and scaffolding (Bruner, Feuerstein & Klein), the zone of proximal development (Vygotsky) and self-modelling (Bandura) [source: Hawtin thesis].

History. The pioneers AVIGuk names are Trevarthen (1970s), Harrie Biemans (1980s, Netherlands), Hilary Kennedy, Raymond Simpson and Claske Houwing [source: AVIGuk, Theoretical background]. VIG began in the Netherlands from studies of the "moments of vitality" in natural parent–baby communication. It came to the UK in the mid-1990s, and related Dutch video methods from the 1980s are practised in other countries [source: AVIGuk, What is VIG]. AVIGuk was set up in 2012 to give the UK method structure, training and accreditation [source: AVIGuk, About]. In practice, VIG means AVIGuk-accredited training and practice; the name is attached to that accreditation pathway (see 2.5).

2. Framework

2.1 Overall shape

VIG runs as cycles. Each cycle is one short film followed by one shared review. AVIGuk lists six elements: (1) agreeing a helping question; (2) filming a few minutes of interaction; (3) micro-analysis and editing into clips of attuned moments; (4) shared review; (5) receiving the client's own ideas; (6) co-creating next steps that build on strengths [source: AVIGuk, What is VIG]. Hawtin describes three cycles as typical, varying with need [source: Hawtin thesis, citing Kennedy 2011]. The MMHA summary says filming and shared review are repeated three or four times [source: MMHA nutshell]. James gives a usual shape: about three months of work with a family, three or four recordings in the natural setting, a first goal-setting session and a final session [source: James 2017]. A local authority leaflet says only that cycles may be repeated as needed [source: Oxfordshire ATTACH leaflet].

2.2 Phases, goals and movement criteria

Phase A – Engagement and helping question. Goal: understand the client's concerns, worries and hopes for change, explain VIG and invite them to take part [source: Hawtin thesis]. James also places goal construction with the parent in the first session [source: James 2017]. Then agree a helping question tied to the client's goal, e.g. what they are doing to build a closer relationship with their child [source: AVIGuk]. Move on when there is a helping question in the client's own words and informed consent to filming [synthesis: consent sequencing; the leaflet requires permission before filming, source: Oxfordshire ATTACH leaflet].
Phase B – Filming. Goal: capture a few minutes of the pair doing something mutually enjoyable, usually at home or in the usual setting [source: AVIGuk; Hawtin thesis; James 2017]. The film can be coached and is often "better than usual" [source: MMHA nutshell]. Move on when the film contains enough moments to edit; if it does not, re-film [synthesis].
Phase C – Micro-analysis and editing (guider alone, between sessions). Goal: find moments of attuned interaction linked to the helping question, judged against the principles of attuned interaction and guidance. These are often exceptions to the usual pattern [source: Hawtin thesis, citing Kennedy 2011; Collins & James 2011]. James defines the target moments as the parent leaving space for the infant's initiative, with a visible positive effect on the infant [source: James 2017]. Move on when a small set of short clips is ready that answers part of the helping question. Kennedy, Ball & Barlow describe "a few short clips" [source: Kennedy, Ball & Barlow 2017 via Research in Practice summary]. James's case review used three clips, one only a few seconds long [source: James 2017]. No fixed number is laid down [uncertain].
Phase D – Shared review. Goal: guider and client watch the clips together. The guider activates the client's own noticing and naming, receives the client's ideas, and co-creates what to build on [source: AVIGuk; Hawtin thesis]. In James's case, the review took place about a week after filming [source: James 2017; one case, not a rule]. At the end, both agree what the client wants to develop before the next film [source: Hawtin thesis]. The shared review is itself filmed so the guider can reflect on it with a supervisor [source: MMHA nutshell; Kennedy, Ball & Barlow 2017]. Then start the next cycle.
Phase E – Ending. James describes a final session at the end of the video work, in which the parent attributes the change to themselves [source: James 2017]. No more detailed ending protocol was found [uncertain]. [synthesis] End when the helping question has been answered to the client's satisfaction, usually after about three cycles. Do a final review across the clips so far, and agree with the client what happens to the films (see 4.14).

2.3 Session count and format

VIG is brief: typically three cycles over about three months, with three or four recordings [source: Hawtin thesis; MMHA; James 2017]. That gives roughly an initial meeting, three or four film-plus-review cycles and a final session [source: James 2017; contact count is synthesis]. Studies cited in Gibson's thesis used 4–7 sessions [source: Gibson thesis]. Films last "a few minutes" [source: AVIGuk]. One reported case used a 60-minute outing film, which is atypical [source: Collins & James 2011]. In one published case the review came about a week after filming [source: James 2017]. No source gives session lengths or a standard gap between film and review [uncertain]. [synthesis] Plan shared reviews of about 45–60 minutes, and hold the review within about a week of filming, while the interaction is still fresh for both of you.

2.4 Settings and clients

VIG is used with parents and carers of children of any age, including during pregnancy, and with children, young people and adults. Settings include health (perinatal, parent–infant, CAMHS, adult mental health, learning disability, dementia), social care (edge of care, Child in Need and Child Protection plans, foster and adoptive families), schools, courts, and drug and alcohol and domestic violence services [source: AVIGuk, What is VIG]. AVIGuk also reports growing interest in VIG with adults and children who have experienced trauma, including perinatal work after a traumatic birth [source: AVIGuk, Trauma and VIG]. VERP (Video Enhanced Reflective Practice) is the related approach for professionals' own practice; see 4.15 [source: IRISS VERP transcript].

2.5 Training, accreditation and fidelity

AVIGuk sets UK standards for VIG training and practice, and those of affiliated countries [source: MMHA nutshell; Hawtin thesis]. The pathway [source: MMHA nutshell]:

an AVIGuk-accredited initial 2-day course;
supervised practice, often over 18–24 months;
accreditation at each of three stages;
continued peer supervision after accreditation.

Trainees film their shared reviews and review them with an AVIGuk supervisor [source: MMHA]. Their conversational skills are assessed at three assessments before accreditation [source: Collins & James 2011]. James gives supervised training and assessment over at least 18 months before accreditation [source: James 2017]. AVIGuk's directory listing means accreditation and current registration, not a recommendation [source: AVIGuk]. AVIGuk's own training and costs page is not drawn on, so current course lengths, fees and re-registration rules are unconfirmed [uncertain]. [synthesis] A clinician who has not trained should not present their work as VIG. They can use the strengths-based video-feedback principles below, but should call it something else until they are enrolled and supervised.

3. Guiding principles

Values and beliefs [source: AVIGuk, What is VIG; MMHA nutshell; Hawtin thesis]:

People in difficult situations want to change. Start from the assumption of motivation, not resistance.
Affirming strengths is central to change. Every session's material is what is going well, not what is going wrong.
"Everyone is doing the best they can at the time" [source: MMHA]. Judge nothing; look for what made the good moment possible.
Change is possible even in adverse situations. Look for exceptions even in high-risk families.
Every conversation involves two equally important people. Treat the client as an expert on their own relationship, and the child as an active partner.
Trust grows through recognition of, and empathy for, what people are managing. Name the difficulty the client is coping with before moving to clips.
People must be actively involved in their own change. The client, not the guider, names what they see and decides what to build.
Client-centred pace and goals. The helping question is the client's; the guider follows their pace [source: AVIGuk; MMHA].
Collaborative, not prescriptive [source: Hawtin, citing Simpson, Forsyth & Kennedy 1994]. Co-inquiry and a coaching style, not advice-giving [source: Collins & James 2011].

Principles of method:

Work from attuned moments. MMHA defines attunement as a parent who "left space for and then received the child's initiative" [source: MMHA]. Select and discuss these moments only.
Use the principles of attuned interaction and guidance as the lens. These are Biemans' (1990) contact principles as adapted by Kennedy [source: Hawtin; Gibson; Collins & James]. They are the framework for micro-analysis, for the review conversation and for the guider's own behaviour (4.5).
Activate before compensating. First invite the client to see and say. Give information or explanation only when needed [source: Hawtin, citing Silhanova 2008].
The guider practises attunement with the client. Doria et al. describe guiders bringing about change by practising the VIG principles themselves in the review [source: Hawtin, citing Doria et al.; detail thin, uncertain]. Wait, receive and build on the client's initiatives, just as the parent does with the child.
Self-modelling. Seeing oneself succeed is more persuasive than being told how [source: Hawtin, citing Bandura; Kennedy 2011].
The client owns the film. Film only with permission, and never show it to anyone without their permission [source: Oxfordshire ATTACH leaflet].
The guider is supervised on film. Supervision works on the guider's own filmed shared reviews, so the same method shapes the guider's development [source: MMHA].

Stance points from James (2017) [source: James 2017]:

The parent is the expert on the relationship; the guider is the expert on the video and its editing. Do not take over interpretation of the family.
Speak from a first-person position, not as an instructor. Say "I noticed…" or "I chose this because…" rather than telling the parent what they should see.
Stay non-threatening and non-judgemental, and don't close down the parent's reflections on the limits of their situation. Hear the constraints before returning to the clip.
Support the parent's own "true words". James draws on Freire: aim for the parent's own reflected, intended action, not borrowed phrases.

4. Intervention inventory

VIG is one integrated method, not a menu of techniques. The items below are its component procedures, in cycle order. The step order follows AVIGuk's six elements and Hawtin's account of Kennedy (2011). The detailed micro-steps and all example language are mine [synthesis] unless cited. Kennedy (2011) is reported to include a figure of "seven steps to attuned interaction and guidance". It is not on AVIGuk's theory page and the book is not drawn on, so it is not reconstructed [uncertain].

4.1 Initial meeting: exploring concerns and hopes

Purpose / when: first contact, before any filming. Build trust and recognition, and learn what the client hopes will change [source: Hawtin thesis; AVIGuk values].
Steps: (1) Meet where the client lives or usually is with the child, where possible [source: Hawtin, home-based]. (2) Invite concerns, worries and hopes; let the client tell it their way. (3) Acknowledge what they are managing before moving on [source: AVIGuk value on recognition]. (4) Explain VIG simply: short film, guider picks moments that work, then you watch them together. (5) Invite participation; do not pressure [synthesis on wording].
Example language (illustrative): "Before we talk about filming, tell me what's been hardest lately, and what you'd love to be different between you and Sam." / "I'll film just a few minutes and pick out the bits that are going well. Then we look at them together and work out what you're doing that helps."
Watch for: initial goals often centre on the child's behaviour (instructions, eating) [source: Hawtin]. That is fine as a starting point; the helping question reframes it (4.2). Note shame, fear of judgement or of the film being used against them, especially under child protection [synthesis].

4.2 Formulating the helping question

Purpose / when: end of the first meeting. It turns the client's goal into a question the films can answer, and steers clip selection and review [source: AVIGuk].
Steps: (1) Take the client's hope ("less shouting at bedtime"). (2) Reframe it toward the relationship and the client's own actions; AVIGuk's example is what the parent is doing to build a closer relationship with the child [source: AVIGuk]. (3) Phrase it positively, in the client's words, answerable from a film. (4) Write it down and read it back. (5) Revisit it at every review [synthesis on steps 3–5].
Example language (illustrative): "So the question we're trying to answer is: 'How can I help Mia listen to me without us both getting cross?' Does that capture it?" / "What would you see on the film if things were a bit better?"
Watch for: questions about changing only the child ("How do I make him behave?"). Gently add the client's part. Avoid professional jargon. The question should be one the client wants answered, not one the referrer wants [synthesis].

4.3 Consent and agreements about the film

Purpose / when: before the first film, and again whenever the use of film changes (e.g. supervision, training).
Steps: (1) Get permission before filming [source: Oxfordshire ATTACH]. (2) State that the recording belongs to the people filmed, and will not be shown to anyone without their permission [source: Oxfordshire ATTACH]. (3) Explain that your shared reviews may be filmed for your supervision, if so, and get separate consent [source: MMHA, on filming reviews; consent wording is synthesis]. (4) Agree storage, deletion and whether the client keeps copies, following your service's data protection policy [synthesis; no AVIGuk policy cited, uncertain]. (5) For children, get age-appropriate assent [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "The film is yours. I won't show it to anyone without asking you first, and you can ask me to stop or delete it at any time."
Watch for: in child protection or court-involved work, clarify in writing whether films could be requested by courts, and what your service's position is [synthesis; AVIGuk notes court settings, source: AVIGuk].

4.4 Filming the interaction

Purpose / when: start of each cycle. Gather raw material that contains attuned moments.
Steps: (1) Agree an activity the pair enjoy together, such as play or being together [source: Hawtin; Oxfordshire]. (2) Film a few minutes [source: AVIGuk]. (3) The film can be coached, for example by suggesting a calm, enjoyable activity. Aim for a film that is "better than usual" [source: MMHA]. (4) Keep the camera unobtrusive and stay friendly and non-evaluative; don't comment on performance [synthesis]. (5) Film enough to have several chances of success; if it goes badly, stop kindly and re-film another time [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "Just do something you both like – the bricks, a book, whatever's easy. I'll only film a few minutes." / "That's plenty – thank you, that was lovely to watch."
Watch for: self-consciousness at first (usually eases after a minute or two) [synthesis]. Choose later cycle activities that link to the helping question, e.g. a mealtime if eating is the concern [synthesis, consistent with Hawtin's examples].

4.5 Micro-analysis with the principles of attuned interaction and guidance

Purpose / when: between filming and review, done by the guider alone. Find and understand moments where the interaction works [source: Hawtin; Collins & James].
The framework (paraphrased from Biemans 1990, as adapted by Kennedy 2011 and reported by Hawtin; extended by the AVIGuk-derived Education Scotland profile). The categories build on each other:
- Being attentive: friendly, interested posture; giving time and space; wondering what the other is doing, thinking or feeling; enjoying watching them.
- Encouraging initiatives: waiting; actively listening; warm, friendly or playful tone; positively naming what you see, think or feel; saying what you are doing; looking for initiatives.
- Receiving initiatives: showing you noticed; receiving with body language; returning eye contact, smiles and nods; receiving in words; repeating or using the other's words.
- Developing attuned interactions: receiving then responding; checking understanding; waiting for your turn; second and further turns on the same topic; short turns given and taken; contributing equally; cooperating; having fun.
- Guiding: scaffolding by judging and adjusting support; extending and building on the other's response; offering help when needed; giving understandable choices and realistic suggestions; saying no positively when needed [source: Education Scotland profile adapted from AVIGuk].
- Deepening discussion: supporting goal-setting; sharing viewpoints; collaborative discussion and problem-solving; naming differences and possible contradictions; reaching new shared understandings; managing conflict [source: Education Scotland profile].
Steps (procedure is synthesis): (1) Watch the whole film once, without stopping. (2) Re-watch, noting each initiative by the child or other person and what happens next. (3) Mark moments where the initiative was received and responded to. (4) Code each moment against the categories above. Note which level it reaches. (5) Keep the moments most relevant to the helping question, especially exceptions to the usual pattern [source: Hawtin].
Watch for: start at the lower categories. Attentiveness and receiving initiatives come before guiding and deepening discussion, and are the commonest place to find early success. The sources present the framework as building blocks, though not as a strict hierarchy [source: Gibson, "building blocks"; hierarchy reading uncertain].

4.6 Editing the clips

Purpose / when: after micro-analysis. Prepare a short, strengths-only selection for the shared review.
Steps: (1) Cut a few short clips of the chosen attuned moments [source: AVIGuk; MMHA; Kennedy, Ball & Barlow 2017]. A published case used three clips, one of only a few seconds [source: James 2017]. (2) Include only positive moments in the edited review set; Gibson notes that some VIG studies removed misattuned moments entirely [source: Gibson thesis]. (3) Order the clips so they build toward the helping question [synthesis]. (4) Optionally pause on a key frame, e.g. a shared gaze. Still frames are not described in any source, including AVIGuk's theory page and James 2017, so treat this as [synthesis] [uncertain]. (5) Be ready to say briefly why you chose each clip, and prepare one or two activating questions for it [source: James 2017 on explaining the choice; questions are synthesis].
Watch for: too many clips overwhelms reflection. Keep the set small; about three clips is a reasonable default [source: James 2017 case; not a published rule]. If you find no attuned moment at all, see 5.3.

4.7 Opening the shared review

Purpose / when: the start of each review session. Re-connect, recall the helping question, set a strengths-based frame.
Steps: (1) Ask how things have been since the film; receive and acknowledge [synthesis]. (2) Read back the helping question [synthesis, consistent with AVIGuk]. (3) Explain that you will watch some short clips of moments that went well and think together about what made them work [source: AVIGuk; MMHA]. (4) Sit side by side, facing the screen, so the client controls the pace where possible [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "Our question was how you help Leo settle at bedtime. I've picked a few moments I think show part of the answer. Let's see what you notice."
Watch for: anxiety about seeing themselves. Name it lightly and start with the strongest, least ambiguous clip [synthesis].

4.8 Activating questions: helping the client see and name success

Purpose / when: the core of every shared review. The client, not the guider, discovers and names what works; this links with deeper understanding [source: Hawtin, citing Gromski 2011].
Steps: (1) Play a clip, then pause. (2) Ask an open, activating question. The anchor is "What is it that you are doing that is making a difference?" [source: AVIGuk; Kennedy 2011 via Hawtin]. (3) Wait; give space as you would want the parent to give the child. (4) Receive and build on whatever the client offers, and repeat their words [source: principles, 4.5]. (5) Move through activating moves listed in the Silhanova model: asking for their opinion; linking to past experience; checking you understood them; naming contradictions; extending their idea; generalising the learning to future situations [source: Hawtin, Figure 5]. (6) Replay or slow the moment if they can't see it yet [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "What do you notice about Ella's face just there?" / "What were you doing that helped her to carry on?" / "What do you think she was feeling when you waited?" / "When else do you do that?" / "How might you do that at teatime?"
Watch for: working when the client starts naming their own behaviours ("I waited", "I copied her") and the child's responses unprompted, and speaks of themselves more positively [source: AVIGuk on new narratives; indicators are synthesis]. Not working: the client turns to the child's faults or criticises themselves (see 5.2).

4.9 Naming positively and mediating meaning

Purpose / when: when the client cannot yet see the moment, or to deepen what they have named. The guider mediates in the Bruner sense, helping the client see positives in their own skills [source: Hawtin].
Steps: (1) Describe concretely what is on screen: the behaviour, the child's response, then the meaning. (2) Link it to a principle in plain words, e.g. waiting or following the child's lead. (3) Hand it back with a question so the client owns it [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "Watch – she looks at the brick, you look at it too, and you say 'blue'. Then she smiles and gives it to you. What do you make of that?"
Watch for: sliding into praise without content. Name the specific behaviour, not "good mum" [synthesis].

4.10 Compensating: giving information when activation is not enough

Purpose / when: when the client cannot generate an answer, or would benefit from knowledge about the child, development or the method. In the Silhanova model compensation is the more controlling end, where the guider supplies thoughts, advice and explanations [source: Hawtin].
Steps: (1) Try at least one activating question first. (2) Offer information briefly, tied to the clip in front of you. (3) Return to activating at once by asking what the client makes of it [synthesis on sequence; principle from Hawtin].
Example language (illustrative): "Babies her age often look away when they need a little break – then look back when ready. Look, you waited, and she came back to you. What do you think of that?"
Watch for: reviews dominated by guider talk. Aim for the client to speak more than you [synthesis].

4.11 Receiving the client's ideas and co-creating next steps

Purpose / when: latter part of each review. Elements 5–6 of the AVIGuk process: the guider receives the client's initiatives, and together they identify strengths and develop new ideas [source: AVIGuk].
Steps: (1) Ask what the client has taken from the clips. (2) Ask what they would like to do more of or try. (3) Jointly agree what they want to develop before the next film [source: Hawtin]. (4) Agree an activity and time for the next film, linked to that focus [synthesis]. (5) Summarise in their words [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "What would you like us to look for next time?" / "So: more waiting for him to start, at teatime. Shall I film then?"
Watch for: goals the client cannot yet do. Keep the next step within reach, in the zone of proximal development [source: Hawtin on Vygotsky; application is synthesis].

4.12 Attuned guiding: the guider applying the principles to the client

Purpose / when: throughout every contact. The guider models and enacts with the client the same attuned interaction they hope the client will show the child [source: Hawtin, citing Doria et al. 2011, 2013; detail not given there, uncertain].
Steps (synthesis using the 4.5 framework): (1) Be attentive: friendly posture, enough time. (2) Encourage the client's initiatives: pause, ask, wait. (3) Receive them: nod, use their words. (4) Develop turns: build on one idea over several turns. (5) Guide only as much as needed. (6) Deepen discussion: explore differences and contradictions together.
Example language (illustrative): "You said 'I just followed her'. Tell me more about following."
Watch for: your own interruptions, rushing or lecturing. These are visible when you review your filmed shared review (4.13).

4.13 Filming the shared review and supervision

Purpose / when: for trainees and accredited guiders. The shared review is filmed, and guider and supervisor reflect on its attuned moments [source: MMHA]. Supervision uses VIG's own method on the guider [source: MMHA; AVIGuk].
Steps: (1) Get client consent to film the review (4.3). (2) After the review, select moments where your guiding was attuned. (3) Review them with your AVIGuk supervisor using the principles and the activating/compensating balance. (4) Bring learning points to the next review [synthesis on steps 2–4].
Watch for: supervisors also apply a strengths-first approach to the guider; expect to be asked what you did that made a difference [synthesis, consistent with MMHA].

4.14 Ending the intervention [synthesis]

Purpose / when: when the helping question is answered, usually after about 3 cycles or 3–4 recordings over about three months [source: Hawtin; James 2017]. James describes a final session in which the parent attributes the change to themselves [source: James 2017]. No more detailed ending procedure was found [uncertain].
Steps: (1) Show a short sequence of clips from across the cycles so change over time is visible [synthesis]. (2) Ask the client to say what they have learnt and how they now see themselves and the child, i.e. the new narrative. Help them credit the change to their own actions [source: AVIGuk outcome; James 2017]. (3) Agree how they will keep it going [synthesis]. (4) Settle what happens to the films: copies, deletion, consent for any later use [source: Oxfordshire on ownership].
Example language (illustrative): "Looking back at the first clip and this one, what do you see that's changed – and what did you do to make that happen?"

4.15 Other applications described by AVIGuk

VIG with school staff and their attunement to pupils, with staff teams, with foster and adoptive carers, and with professionals such as GPs and health visitors in their communication with clients [source: AVIGuk]. Collins & James (2011) describe its use with a family of a child with communication difficulties [source: Collins & James]. The procedure is the same: helping question, film, micro-analysis, shared review.
VERP (Video Enhanced Reflective Practice). VERP is developed from VIG but turns the camera on the practitioner: it reviews what the practitioner did, not what the service user did. It covers communication between professionals as well as with service users. The attunement principles carry over to attuned conversation: active listening, waiting, shorter turns, checking understanding, showing you have heard (e.g. paraphrasing) and naming differences. The aim is for both sides to feel heard, without needing to agree. In one reported course for newly qualified social workers (Sen, Rotherham), participants filmed their own supervision sessions and work with parents. They met for five days in total: a full first and last day with four half-days in between, bringing films to small groups for peer review. The topics included difficult conversations and deepening discussion [source: IRISS VERP transcript]. That is one local course design, not a standard. AVIGuk's VERP page and VERP accreditation rules are not drawn on [uncertain].
An Education Scotland Attunement Profile adapts the principles as a self-review tool for schools and early learning settings [source: Education Scotland]; this is a derivative, not VIG itself.

5. Handling problems

The sources say little about troubleshooting. Except where cited, everything in this section is my own synthesis built on VIG's published values and methods [synthesis].

5.1 Client refuses or fears filming. Respect the refusal; the values put the client's pace first [source: AVIGuk]. Explore the fear: being judged, the film being used by social care or courts, or how they look. Restate film ownership and consent [source: Oxfordshire]. Offer small steps: a 1–2 minute film, filming the child only at first, or watching a short demonstration clip of another family with consent. If they still decline, offer non-video support; do not pressure.

5.2 Client focuses on the negative ("look how he ignores me", "I look awful", "I can't see how this helps"). Receive the feeling first. James's published case models a sequence: name the parent's emotion; explain from your own first-person position why you chose the clip; replay it; listen to the parent's response without telling them how to see it; and build shared meaning from what they say [source: James 2017]. Then, if needed, ask a narrow activating question ("What did you do just before he smiled?") [synthesis]. If self-criticism persists, name the gap between how they feel and what the film shows. Naming contradictions is one of the listed activating moves [source: Hawtin, Figure 5]. Do not close down their account of real constraints [source: James 2017]. Keep compensation brief (4.10).

5.3 No attuned moments in the film. Search more finely; one second of shared gaze or a received initiative is enough to start. If there is truly nothing, re-film with more coaching toward a "better than usual" interaction [source: MMHA]: an easier, more enjoyable activity, a calmer time of day, or shorter filming. Do not show misattuned clips instead.

5.4 Overwhelm or strong emotion while watching. AVIGuk notes reviews can be emotionally moving [source: AVIGuk]. Its "Trauma and VIG" page reports growing interest in VIG's healing potential after trauma. It points to perinatal and intergenerational-trauma resources, including a Kent perinatal case after a traumatic birth and an NHS training film for parents of babies aged 0–24 months. It gives no adaptations, cautions or safety procedures [source: AVIGuk, Trauma and VIG]. The guidance that follows is therefore [synthesis]. Tears on seeing their child's delight are common and usually not a problem; pause, receive, give time. If the emotion is distress (trauma memories, perinatal depression, own childhood), stop the video and attend to the person. Assess safety in line with standard practice, and consider referral to a parallel mental-health or trauma service. Re-start VIG only when the client chooses.

5.5 Stuck: the client names nothing new across cycles. Check that the helping question still matters to them, and rewrite it if not. Choose clips from a lower level of the framework, such as attentiveness. Move along the activating/compensating range: offer one concrete observation, then hand back. Look at your filmed review: are you waiting and receiving, or talking? (4.12, 4.13). Take it to supervision.

5.6 Non-adherence: missed appointments, no time to film. Treat it as information about load, not motivation, since VIG assumes clients want change [source: AVIGuk]. Film at times and places that suit, keep films very short, link filming to daily routines, and send a friendly reminder of the next step agreed together.

5.7 Rupture with the guider. Signs: the client feels watched or judged, or feels clips were "set up". Name it openly, apologise for your part, and ask what would make the process feel safer. Give back control over which activity is filmed and which clips are discussed. Use the attunement principles on the repair itself: wait, receive, build on their view.

5.8 Statutory, court or child-protection contexts. AVIGuk lists edge-of-care, Child in Need and Child Protection plans, and courts as settings [source: AVIGuk]. Power imbalance is high. Agree in writing, before filming, what any report will say and who may see films. Keep VIG strengths-based even if other professionals hold the risk assessment. Safeguarding concerns that come up in film or review must be acted on through your local safeguarding procedures. Tell the client at the start that this applies [synthesis].

5.9 Co-parents, family conflict or multiple carers. Film each carer with the child separately at first. Review separately or jointly, as the carers prefer. In joint reviews, receive each person's view and avoid comparing carers.

5.10 Child or young person as a participant. With older children, agree their own hopes, seek assent to filming, and consider letting them watch and name moments as well. AVIGuk lists children and young people as clients [source: AVIGuk].

5.11 Technical and data problems. Use service-approved, encrypted devices, follow data protection policy, and delete as agreed. Lost or poor-quality footage: apologise and re-film. Never use personal phones without service policy cover.

5.12 Guider drift toward advice-giving or deficit focus. This is the main fidelity risk the sources point to. VIG is collaborative not prescriptive [source: Hawtin], and activating links with deeper understanding [source: Hawtin, Gromski 2011]. Audit your filmed reviews for the ratio of client to guider talk and for activating moves, and bring this to AVIGuk supervision.

Sources

Sources:

Further reading (not drawn on directly); content via the secondary sources above:

Kennedy, H., Landor, M. & Todd, L. (eds.) (2011). Video Interaction Guidance: A Relationship-Based Intervention to Promote Attunement, Empathy and Wellbeing. London: Jessica Kingsley.
Kennedy, H. (2011). What is Video Interaction Guidance (VIG)? In Kennedy, Landor & Todd (eds.), above.
Biemans, H. (1990). Source of the contact principles, cited via Hawtin and Gibson [uncertain: full reference unconfirmed].
Silhanova, K. (2008); Gromski (2011); Doria et al. (2011, 2013), cited via Hawtin.

Further reading (not drawn on): AVIGuk's "All about training" and VERP pages, and an AVIGuk PDF on its site. The ESCAP 2017 "interactive guidance background" PDF is not drawn on. Content from these is not reflected here [uncertain].

← Previous · V-054Child-parent psychotherapy Next · V-056 →Marte Meo