User:Sarahtavares/sandbox

IMPORTANT NOTE: This is a proposal for a new wiki entry of the term "virtual ethnography" since there is no page exclusively dedicated to it yet.

Virtual Ethnography refers to a recent research method that aims to study online practices, more specifically the way participants behave in online environments and the way they experience specific technologies, platforms and software programs in everyday settings. Virtual ethnography uses these very technologies to enter the field and to communicate with subjects.

This method is not one that studies the effect of technologies on society, but one that pays attention to “the understandings which users have of what the Internet is for”. The virtual ethnographic researcher wants to explore the meanings of technology for its users, not considering taken for granted features of Internet during the analysis.

Virtual Ethnography uses ethnographic approaches and applies them to online environments, such as the immersion in a field setting, the observation of the relationships and investigation of the activities and understandings of the people involved in the community.

It might not be misunderstood with other similar methods like cyber-ethnography, online ethnography, digital ethnography and netnography. These methods also have an ethnographical approach to online environments but they present some variations when compared to virtual ethnography.

Online ethnography, for example, refers only to the use of ethnography in an online environment; and digital ethnography refers to the appropriation of digital tools in ethnographic research. Virtual ethnography differs from (and is a combination of) these methods because it addresses the meaning of being present in an online field setting and also the deployment of digital files and tools in order to suit the ethnographic method to a new media environment.

The start
Virtual Ethnography is a result of the changes that occurred in ethnographic research brought by the emergence of the Internet.

It was noticed that the cyberspace was becoming a place for social relationships where culture was being established, transformed and redefined. The development of virtual communities enabled the perception of the computer-mediated communication technologies no longer as a medium to facilitate interaction but also as a medium that brings people together.

Interaction with the subjects
One of the differences between virtual ethnography and traditional ethnography can be seen on the form the researcher interacts with the subjects of the investigation. While traditional types of ethnography rely on physical travels to specific places and face-to-face interactions, virtual ethnography focuses on a displacement that is experiential rather than physical.

The Internet creates the possibility for a researcher to observe and remain invisible at the same time. However, the ethnographer cannot be just a voyeur. The methodology also requires participation of the ethnographer to such an extent that it provides an understanding of how it is like to be a user and which skills are involved.

Written texts x oral interaction
Another difference is that virtual ethnography often involves the analysis of texts instead of oral interaction. In the virtual context, texts should be understood as “ethnographic material which tell us about the understanding which authors have of the reality which they inhabit”. When analyzing the text the ethnographer should point out the authors and cover the contextualization of them in particular consumption and production situations.

Problems
One of the questionings around virtual ethnography involves the validity of information gathered from users of the Internet. In an environment where is possible to play with identities, it becomes a challenge to get accurate data about the gender, age and nationality of users. The ethnographer must acknowledge that she is relying on the user’s truthfulness and her own judgment.

Another possible problem is that the shift from offline to online has changed the perception of the context or location, which can mean a lacking in exposure of complexity and contextualisation. One argument is that “the displacement between ethnographer and her field results in a lack of a common and mutual perception of the physical context”. Because the Internet is used in many and diverse contexts, the ethnographers might think that they understood everything when in fact “they only have a very vague or misleading idea of what the context is”.

Ethical issues
The participant-observation assumed by virtual ethnography raises some ethical questions around the use of the data that is gathered in an online environment.

The invisibility made possible by the internet can lead to practices like “lurking”, the observation without participation on an online community, or “harvesting”, in which the user’s online communication is used for purposes that are not the ones predetermined by the group. Some authors argue for an implementation of “open source ethics” to the research that would offer flexibility to the researcher. One way to do that would be to involve the community in the results of the research, asking for some type of validation from them.

A more participative behavior in the virtual environment that is observed can also build credibility and gain a dual perspective as both a researcher and a participant.

Another ethical consideration is concerned to how the users are addressed on the research report. In some cases nicknames become important identities inside a community, so in order to avoid misunderstandings the researcher should involve the participants in the decision of how is better to address them.