Of the 23 articles finally selected, access was obtained only to 19 articles because 2 were not available and 2 were not in English/Dutch. All the full text articles fulfilled Criterion 1, but 8 were excluded on Criterion 2, and 4 were excluded on Criterion 3. In the articles finally selected11, it is apparent that many different methods are used to study local constructions of child marriage. In four studies, surveys are used to collect information about the study population (Chowdhury. 2004; Ertem & Kocturk. 2008; Gangoli et al. 2009; Rahman. 2009). Only in one study was it made clear what was asked in these surveys (Ertem & Kocturk. 2008). In these surveys the situation of child marriage in the study population was explored with questions about age at marriage, level of education, type of marriage etc. In one study, participant observations are used during the survey (Chowdhury. 2004). Interviews are a frequent method to study local understandings of child marriage (Chowdhury. 2004; Gangoli et al. 2009; Human Rights Watch. 2011; Rahman & Kabir. 2005; Rahman. 2009; Sabbe et al. 2013; Schlecht et al. 2013; World Vision. 2013). All different kinds of interviews are described in these studies. In-depth interviews were used in two studies (Chowdhury. 2004; Rahman. 2009). Telephone interviews are used in one study Gangoli et al. 2009), but it is not made clear which questions were asked. The interviews used in one study were semi-structured and looked at the phenomena child marriage from a stakeholder perspective (Sabbe et al. 2013). Key informant interviews were used in one study because participants were chosen who had a key role in the community as the community leaders, head teachers, health workers, legal officers, religious leaders, etc. (Schlecht et al. 2013). One method which is frequently used is focus group discussions (FGD’s). They are used as a method in several studies (Ertem & Kocturk. 2008; Gangoli et al. 2009; Ouis. 2005; Ouis. 2009; Rahman & Kabir. 2005; Schlecht et al. 2013; World Vision. 2013). In some articles like in article 2 and 11 the method used is not clearly described (Ertem & Kocturk. 2008; World Vision. 2013), but in at least one study the methods are described with some detail (Ouis. 2005), and here the researcher discussed four different themes without a fixed set of questions. Storytelling is only mentioned in one study in order to get an insider’s perspective into the experiences, opinions and views of children (Ouis. 2009). However this method was considered potentially useful in choosing the methods for RAU because it gives an deep insight in a personal perspective of the situation and in which contextual factors are incorporated. 11 See section on references (below). 42