An integrative review on online ethnography methods: differentiating theoretical bases, potentialities and limitations

Abstract

Purpose As a result of the advancement of the online environment, several methodological proposals emerged to establish procedures for digital qualitative research. While the various online ethnography methods overlap, they are not equivalent in terms of their theoretical bases, procedures and goals. The purpose of this article is to add clarity to their main differences, depicting specificities, potentialities and limitations of each method. Design/methodology/approach This conceptual article results from an integrative literature review that brought together studies that proposed, debated or used qualitative research methods in the digital environment. The research focused on the primary indexed journals publishing cultural studies in the past 20 years. Findings The literature review highlights four methods – virtual ethnography, digital ethnography, netnography and the post-application programming interface ethnography. The integrative literature review adds clarity depicting the main premises and procedures of each method. The present analysis positions the different methods considering two dimensions: the focus on the boundaries of the group/culture investigated, and the focus on the platform agency, affordances and specific dynamics. Originality/value The article proposes a comparative framework outlining points of convergence and divergence to create a reference for researchers on topics of significance while designing and conducting a research study in a digital environment. This conceptual organization highlights and supports qualitative researchers on their methodological challenges.

Being on the inside: a research methodology for data collection within the inner circle of the domain of video game translation/localization in Thailand

“…Given that the research involves data collection from the internet, maintaining the anonymity of sources is practically unavoidable, especially in the unofficial domain where most informants prefer to remain anonymous. The netnography method emphasizes empathic engagement with participants and respects the confidentiality of their information, whether sensitive or not (Nascimento et al, 2022). Anonymity and data protection are critical issues discussed in various research studies related to data collection in TS (e.g.…”

“…Although interviews are not required in netnography-based studies (Nascimento et al, 2022), interviews have been conducted in some TS research using netnography (e.g. Afzali and Zahiri, 2021;Lu and Lu, 2021;Huang et al, 2023).…”

“…This method not only describes a technique for data collection, but also introduces a set of guidelines and tools to achieve the research objectives and questions related to identities, actions, attitudes and other elements affected or generated by technology consumption (Kozinets, 2019). Based on technogenesis ontology, the netnography method provides researchers with opportunities to observe the role of technology interacting with human subjectsmeaning the technology and human being harmoniously and cooperatively coexist and simultaneously affect each other (Nascimento et al, 2022). It is noteworthy to point out that this method resonates with a concept known as actor-network theory (ANT).…”

“…The technological and cultural domains present much complexity and many challenges for researchers undertaking qualitative research (Caliandro, 2018). The complexity necessitates careful management and maneuvering of collected data (Nascimento et al, 2022). The challenges are especially pronounced in the digital and online domains of video game translation/localization.…”

Ethnography and the digital scenario: a typological scheme of differences and evolutionary trajectories

“…(1) the transformations of observable communities in terms of boundless scenarios (Kozinets, 2020 ; Nasciemnto et al, 2022 );…”