FIELD WORK: ETNOGRAFI DAN ETNOGRAFI DIGITAL
Abstract
The presence of digital platforms increasingly permeates contemporary everyday culture, necessitating a re-evaluation of observational studies on social and cultural phenomena. Traditional qualitative research methods that rely on physical locations face challenges in the era of digital platforms. This article aims to explain the use of ethnography and digital ethnography in fieldwork, combining classic ethnographic methods with participant observations in locations where digital platforms are utilized. Technical exploration can uncover social and cultural assumptions embedded in interactions and interviews, as well as how their accessibility can create symbolic meanings. Meanwhile, participant observation focuses on the perspectives of digital platform users within a community. Referring to pioneering works in the field of "digital ethnography," this article critically explores the potential and challenges posed by new technologies that warrant attention. It can be concluded that a balanced combination of physical and digital ethnography not only provides researchers with diverse and intriguing methods but also allows for a better appreciation of respondents' voices. The development of digital ethnography as a research methodology, along with the challenges encountered in addressing classical concepts of fieldwork, participation, and representation, creates opportunities for digital ethnographers to gain professional recognition in conducting research related to society and culture.
Downloads
References
Beaulieu, A. (2004). Mediating ethnography: Objectivity and the making of ethnographies of the internet. Social Epistemology, 18(2–3), 139–163.
Amit, V. (2000). Introduction: Constructing the field IN AMIT. V. (Ed.) Constructing.
Baym, N. K. (2000). Tune in, log on: Soaps, fandom, and online community (Vol. 3). Sage.
Beaulieu, A. (2010). From co-location to co-presence: Shifts in the use of ethnography for the study of knowledge. Social Studies of Science, 40(3), 453– 470.
Boellstorff, T. (ed.) (2012), Ethnography and Virtual Worlds: A Handbook of Method (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).
Bruckman, A. (2002). Studying the amateur artist: A perspective on disguising data collected in human subjects’ research on the Internet. Ethics and Information Technology, 4(3), 217–231.
Caliandro, A. (2018). Digital methods for ethnography: Analytical concepts for ethnographers exploring social media environments. Journal of contemporary ethnography, 47(5), 551-578.
Castells, M., & Blackwell, C. (1996). The information age: economy, society and culture. Volume 1. The rise of the network society. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 25, 631-636.
Clifford, J., & Marcus, G. E. (Eds.). (1986). Writing culture: the poetics and politics of ethnography: a School of American Research advanced seminar. Univ of California Press.
De Seta, G. (2020). Three lies of digital ethnography. Journal of Digital Social Research, 2(1), 77-97.
Dicks, B., Soyinka, B., & Coffey, A. (2006). Multimodal ethnography. Qualitative research, 6(1), 77-96.
Fine, G. A. (1993). Ten lies of ethnography: Moral dilemmas of field research. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 22(3), 267–294.
Garcia, A. C., Standlee, A. I., Bechkoff, J., & Cui, Y. (2009). Ethnographic approaches to the internet and computer-mediated communication. Journal of contemporary ethnography, 38(1), 52-84.
Gatson, S. N., & Zweerink, A. (2004). Ethnography online:‘Natives’ practising and inscribing community. Qualitative research, 4(2), 179-200.
Hannerz, U. (2003). Being there... and there... and there! Reflections on multi-site ethnography. Ethnography, 4(2), 201-216.
Hine, C. (2007). Connective ethnography for the exploration of e-science. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), 618–634.
Horst, H. A. and D. Miller (2013), Digital Anthropology (London: A & C Black).
Ito, M. (1996). Theory, method, and design in anthropologies of the Internet. Social Science Computer Review, 14(1), 24-26.
Jerolmack, C., & Khan, S. (2014). Talk is cheap: Ethnography and the attitudinal fallacy. Sociological methods & research, 43(2), 178-209.
Jones, G. (1995). Computer-Mediated communication and community. Cybersociety.
Kaur‐Gill, S., & Dutta, M. J. (2017). Digital ethnography. The international encyclopedia of communication research methods, 1-10.
Kavanaugh, A. L., & Patterson, S. J. (2001). The impact of community computer networks on social capital and community involvement. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 496-509.
Kent, T. (1993). Paralogic rhetoric: A theory of communicative interaction. Bucknell University Press.
Komito, L. (1998). The net as a foraging society: Flexible communities. The information society, 14(2), 97-106.
Marcus, G. E. (1995). Ethnography in/of the world system: The emergence of multi-sited ethnography. Annual review of anthropology, 24(1), 95-117.
Markham, A. N. (1998). Life online: Researching real experience in virtual space (Vol. 6). Rowman Altamira.
Marres, N. (2012). The redistribution of methods: on intervention in digital social research, broadly conceived. The sociological review, 60(1_suppl), 139-165.
Michael, N. I. H. Amit, Vered 2000. Introduction: Constructing the field. In V. Amit (ed.), Constructing the Field: Ethnographic Fieldwork in the Contemporary World, 1–18. New York: Routledge. Anderson, James H. 1998. The Size, Origins, and Character of Mongo-lia’s Informal Sector During the Transition. World Bank, Ulaanbaatar.
Miller, D., and D. Slater (2001), The Internet: An Ethnographic Approach (London: Berg Publishers)
Murthy, D. (2008). Digital ethnography: An examination of the use of new technologies for social research. Sociology, 42(5), 837-855.
Nardi, B. A. (1996), Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human–Computer Interaction (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press)
O’Dell, T., & Willim, R. (2011). Composing ethnography. Ethnologia Europaea: Journal of European Ethnology, 41(1), 27–39.
Orgad, S. (2005). From online to offline and back: Moving from online to offline relationships with research informants. In C. Hine (Ed.), Virtual methods: Issues in social research on the Internet (pp. 51–65).
Paccagnella, L. (1997). Getting the seats of your pants dirty: Strategies for ethnographic research on virtual communities. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(1), JCMC314.
Pink, S., H. Horst, J. Postill, L. Hjorth, T. Lewis and J. Tacchi (2015), Digital Ethnography: Principles and Practice (Los Angeles: Sage Publications).
Pink, S., Sinanan, J., Hjorth, L., & Horst, H. (2016). Tactile digital ethnography: Researching mobile media through the hand. Mobile Media & Communication, 4(2), 237-251.
Postill, J. (2017). Remote ethnography: Studying culture from afar. In L. Hjorth, H. Horst, A. Galloway, & G. Bell (Eds.), The Routledge companion to digital ethnography (pp. 61–69). Routledge.
Ritter, C. S. (2022). Rethinking digital ethnography: A qualitative approach to understanding interfaces. Qualitative Research, 22(6), 916-932.
Rosaliza, M., Syamsidar, R., & Asriwandari, H. (2022). “Tag” Teman Dan# Hastag Rekonsepsi Interaksi Sosial Di Platform Instagram. Jurnal Ilmu Budaya, 19(1), 35-53.
Robinson, L., & Schulz, J. (2009). New avenues for sociological inquiry: Evolving forms of ethnographic practice. Sociology, 43(4), 685-698.
Steyaert, J. Steve Woolgar, Virtual Society? Technology, Cyberbole, Reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. 368 pp. ISBN 0 1992 4876 1, US $29.95 (pbk).
Wellman, B., & Gulia, M. (2018). Net-surfers don’t ride alone: Virtual communities as communities. In Networks in the global village (pp. 331-366). Routledge.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
