Sade-Beck article summary February 29, 2008
Posted by nutheadgreg in gaming.Tags: delicious, Research Methods
1 comment so far
Below I have reviewed and summarised the article on Internet Ethnography by Liav Sade-Beck from the University of Isreal, he posses some interesting issues surrounding the use of this methodology.
Internet Ethnography: Online and Offline by Liav Sade-Beck (2004)
- Describes methodological issue resulting from Internet-based qualitative research.
- Demonstrates the path used to deal with problems of such research, it is based on Integration of online observations, interviews and content analysis.
- He suggests that there is little writing on integration of the Internet into qualitative research.
o Jones (1999) explored both theoretical and practical issues in his book “Doing Internet Research”.
o Hine (2000) shows how important the need to study the Internet, as a cultural product and also in its cultural context through his text “Virtual Ethnography”.
o Mann & Stewart (2000) defined the Internet as a research field, and as a data gathering instrument in qualitative research.
- Jones (1999) highlights several methodological issues in Internet Ethnography due to complex, diffuse and multi-faceted structure; as a result it is difficult to maintain a focus.
o The population for Internet research can not be determined on regular criteria, as it is not limited to a single social space.
o Data analysis is difficult as you cannot obtain a ‘Hard Copy’ of the Internet database.
o The Internet is updated daily, thus needs to be monitored on a daily basis
- Sade-Beck suggests the Interview and Online Observation cause more problems.
o Interaction is done through writing. Adds problems as there is no face to face meeting, which results in loss of many additional layers of meaning including speech tone, body language, facial expression and gestures.
o The time lapse between thought and writing as in speech gives the Interviewee more time to think and organise the answer.
o Following the activities of actual people is difficult, so ‘Participant-observer’ cannot be applied to description of online observation.
o At what point does the researcher define ones status, which is similar to other web users, it shakes the researchers professional authority.
o The Internet enables the researcher to be anonymous, which raises some ethical issues.
o Only focusing upon the online aspect is looking a part of the picture. Offline (RL) is also part of the picture, as it is linked to Online, this just adds to the difficulty. “…the virtual world and the real world merge, creating a broader definition of reality. Instead of relating to the features that distinguish the Virtual world, we must adopt an approach focusing on imagination, associations and reciprocity between the two worlds…” Sade-Beck referring to Wittel (2000)
