Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The article focuses on the digital transposition of ethnography (e.g., digital ethnography or netnography) which is not a homogeneous approach. In the last few years, various attempts have been made of considering digital fields in ethnographic research producing an internally diverse array of approaches. Differences emerge with reference to objects (digital cultures), research field (contextual fields: blogs, forums, and communities VS decontextualized narratives aggregated through tags or a hashtags), access to the field (covert or overt), observational strategies and data analysis (text analysis VS hermeneutics). The article investigates such an array of approaches through a scoping review of the existing digital ethnographic research (selected in Web of Science and Scopus) to map methodological differences. The main goal is to systematize an extensive set of research design and analysis differences in order to discuss how the nature of participant observation is changing in digital spaces and how to resist the tendency to decontextualize culture and humanities.

Keywords

netnography digital ethnography ethnography scoping review

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Addeo

Delli Paoli

Esposito

Bolcato

M. Y.

2020. “Doing Social Research on Online Communities: The Benefits of Netnography.” Athens Journal of Social Sciences 7(1): 9–38. https://doi.org/10.30958/ajss.7-1-1.

Airoldi

2018. “Ethnography and the Digital Fields of Social Media.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 21 (6): 661–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2018.1465622.

Altheide

D. L.

1987. “Ethnographic Content Analysis.” Qualitative Sociology 10 (1): 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988269.

Banfield

E. C.

1958. The Moral Basis of a Backward Society. The Free Press.

Barratt

M. J.

Maddox

2016. “Active Engagement With Stigmatised Communities Through Digital Ethnography.” Qualitative Research 16 (6): 701–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794116648766.

Bartl

Kannan

K. V.

Stockinger

2016. “A Review and Analysis of Literature on Netnography Research.” International Journal of Technology Marketing 2: 165–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJTMKT.2016.075687.

Beaulieu

2004. “Mediating Ethnography: Objectivity and the Making of Ethnographies of the Internet.” Social Epistemology 18 (2–3): 139–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/0269172042000249264.

Bell

2001. An Introduction to Cyberculture. Routledge. New York.

Beneito-Montagut

2011. “Ethnography Goes Online: Towards A User-Centred Methodology To Research Interpersonal Communication On The Internet.” Qualitative Research 11 (6): 716–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111413368.

10.

Bengry-Howell

Griffin

2012. “Negotiating Access in Ethnographic Research With ‘Hard to Reach’ Young People: Establishing Common Ground or a Process of Methodological Grooming?.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 15 (5): 403–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2011.600115.

11.

Boellstoorff

Nardi

Taylor

T. L.

2012. Ethnography and Virtual Worlds: A Handbook of Method. Princeton University Press.

12.

Boyd

D. M.

2008. Taken Out of Context: American Teen Sociality in Networked Publics. SSRN Electronic Journal.

13.

Burrel

2009. “The Field Site as a Network: A Strategy for Locating Ethnographic Research.” Field Methods 21 (2): 181–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X08329699.

14.

Caliandro

2018. “Digital Methods for Ethnography: Analytical Concepts for Ethnographers Exploring Social Media Environments.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 47 (5): 551–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241617702960.

15.

Campana

Van den Bossche

Miller

2020. #dadtribe: Performing Sharenting Labour to Commercialise Involved Fatherhood. Journal of Macromarketing 40 (4): 475–91.

16.

Costello

McDermott

M-L.

Wallace

2017. “Netnography: Range of Practices, Misperceptions, and Missed Opportunities.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 16: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917700647.

17.

Cova

1997. “Community and Consumption: Towards a Definition of the ‘Linking Value’ of Product or Services.” European Journal of Marketing 31 (3/4): 300–1. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569710162380.

18.

Davis

1973. “The Martian and the Covert: Ontological Polarities in Social Research.” Urban Life 3: 333–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124167300200305.

19.

De Martino

. 1977. La fine del mondo. Contributo all’analisi delle apocalissi culturali. Einaudi.

20.

Delli Paoli

. 2022. “The Potential of Digital Ethnography for Sensitive Topics and Hidden Population.” Italian Sociological Review 12: 729–47. https://doi.org/10.13136/isr.v12i7S.579.

21.

Delli Paoli

D’Auria

2021. “Digital Ethnography: A Systematic Literature Review.” Italian Sociological Review 11 (4S): 243–67. https://doi.org/10.13136/isr.v11i4S.434.

22.

Durkheim

. 2008. The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. Mineola (Ny): Dover publication (ed. or 1912).

23.

Eriksen

T. H.

1995. Small Places, Large issues. An introduction to Social and Cultural Anthropology. Pluto Press. London.

24.

Escobar

1994. “Welcome to Cyberia: Notes on the Anthropology of Cyberculture.” Current Anthropology 35 (3): 211–31. https://doi.org/10.1086/204266.

25.

Fetterman

1998. Ethnography. Sage. Thousand Oaks.

26.

Garcia

A. C.

Standlee

A. I.

Bechkoff

Cui

2009. “Ethnographic Approaches to the Internet and Computer-Mediated Communication.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 38 (1): 52–84. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0891241607310839.

27.

Geertz

1973. The Interpretation of Cultures. Basic Books. New York.

28.

Glaser

B. S.

Strauss

1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Aldine Pub. New York.

29.

Gretzel

Hardy

2019. #VanLife: Materiality, Makeovers and Mobility amoingst Digital Nomads. e-Review of Tourism Research 16 (2/3) : 1–9.

30.

Hall

2005. “Notes on Deconstructing the Popular.” In Popular Culture: A Reader, edited by Guins

Cruz

O. Z.

Sage (ed. or. 1981).

31.

Hammersley

Atkinson

2007. Ethnography: Principles in Practice. Routledge. London and New York.

32.

Hewer

Brownlie

2007. “Cultures of Consumption of Car Aficionados: Aesthetics and Consumption Communities.” International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 27 (3/4): 106–19. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443330710741057.

33.

Hine

2005. Virtual Methods. Berg Publishers. Oxford.

34.

Hine

2008. “Virtual Ethnography: Modes, Varieties, Affordances.” In The SAGE Handbook of Online Research Methods, edited by Fielding

Lee

R. M.

Blank

, 257–70. Sage.

35.

Hockin-Boyers

Pope

Jamie

2021. “#gainingweightiscool: The Use of Transformation Photos on Instagram Among Female Weightlifters in Recovery From Eating Disorders.” Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 13 (1): 94–112.

36.

Kavanaugh

P. R.

Maratea

R. J.

2020. “Digital Ethnography in an Age of Information Warface: Notes From the Field.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 49 (1): 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241619854123.

37.

Kozinets

R. V.

1998. “On Netnography: Initial Reflections on Consumer Research Investigations of Cyberculture.” Advances in Consumer Research 25 (1): 366–71.

38.

Kozinets

R. V.

2010. Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. Sage Publications. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi | Singapore | Washington.

39.

Lane

Lingel

2022. “Digital Ethnography for Sociology: Craft, Rigor, and Creativity.” Qualitative Sociology 45: 319–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-022-09509-3.

40.

Langer

Beckman

S. C.

2005. “Sensitive Research Topics: Netnography Revisited.” Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 8 (2): 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750510592454.

41.

Lynd

R. S

Lynd

H. M.

1929. Middletown. Harcourt, Brace & World. New York.

42.

Malinowski

1922. Argonauts of the Western Pacific. Routledge and Kegan. London.

43.

Marcus

E. G.

1995. “Ethnography In/of the World System: Emergence of Multi-sited Ethnography.” Annual Review of Anthropology 24: 95–117. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.000523.

44.

Marradi

1996. “Metodo come arte.” Quaderni di sociologia, XL 10: 71–92.

45.

Morton

2001. “Computer-Mediated Communication in Australian Anthropology and Sociology.” Social Analysis 45: 3–11. https://doi.org/10.2307/23169987.

46.

Munn

Peters

M. D. J.

Stern

Tufanaru

McArthur

Aromataris

2018. “Systematic Review Or Scoping Review? Guidance For Authors When Choosing Between A Systematic Or Scoping Review Approach.” BMC Medical Research Methodology 18 (143): 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x.

47.

Murthy

2008. “Digital Ethnography: An Examination of the Use of New Technologies for Social Research.” Sociology 42 (5): 837–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038508094565.

48.

Nind

Wiles

Bengry-Howell

Crow

2013. “Methodological Innovation and Research Ethics – Forces in Tension or Forces in Harmony?” Qualitative Research Journal 13 (6): 650–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112455042.

49.

Park

R. E.

1928. “Human Migration and the Marginal Man.” American Journal of Sociology 33 (6): 881–93. https://doi.org/10.1086/214592.

50.

Postill

Pink

2012. “Social Media Ethnography: The Digital Researcher In A Messy Web.” Media International Australia 145 (1): 123–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X1214500114.

51.

Puri

2007. “The Web of Insight. The Art and Practice of Webnography.” International Journal of Market Research 49 (3): 387–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/147078530704900308.

52.

Rapport

Overing

2000. Social and Cultural Anthropology: The Key Concepts. Routledge. London and New York.

53.

Rheingold

1993. The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. Cambridge, MA. MIT Press.

54.

Ricolfi

1997. La ricerca qualitativa. Carocci.

55.

Rogers

2010. “Internet Research: The Question of Method: A Keynote Address From the Youtube and the 2008 Election Cycle In The United States Conference.” Journal of Information Technology & Politics 7: 241–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681003753438.

56.

Tricco

A. C.

Lillie

Zarin

O’Brien

K. K.

Colquhoun

Levac

Moher

Peters

Horsley

Weeks

Hempel

Akl

E. A.

Chang

McGowan

Stewart

Hartling

Aldcroft

Wilson

M. G.

Garritty

Straus

S. E.

2018. “PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation.” Annals of Internal Medicine 169 (7): 467–73. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850.

57.

Tunçalp

Lê

2014. “(Re)Locating Boundaries: A Systematic Review of Online Ethnography.” Journal of Organizational Ethnography 3 (1): 59–79. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOE-11-2012-0048.

58.

Varis

. 2014. “Digital Ethnography.” Tilburg Papers in Culture Studies 104: 1–21.

59.

Weber

1949. On the Methodology of the Social Sciences. Free Press.

60.

Wiles

Bengry-Howell

Crow

Nind

2013. “But Is It Innovation? The Development of Novel Methodological Approaches in Qualitative Research.” Methodological Innovations Online 8: 18–33. https://doi.org/10.4256/mio.2013.002.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.08 MB