This article makes a systematic review of the use of participant-generated image methods in social science research. Such methods have a long history of application across the social sciences. Their development has, however, been uneven and fragmented, resulting in a lack of gestalt (wholeness or unity). This has led to the methods being underappreciated and sometimes mistrusted. The article compares and contrasts the design, implementation, and analytical methods of nearly 300 studies. Six main groups or traditions are identified. However, the study finds no strong evidence that any is distinctive enough to warrant being awarded its own name. Meanwhile, no convincing evidence is found to suggest that best practice has either been identified or adopted.