Beal 1

Landyn Beal

Professor Haynie

Research 210 – D07

28 April 2019

Digital Ethnography

An Examination of the Use of New Technologies for Social Research

Digital Ethnography is a relatively new form of ethnographical research. Prior to recent

breakthroughs, research was conducted purely through physical methods. Those methods

included surveys being mailed out and face to face interviews among others. “Digital

Ethnography: An Examination of the Use of New Technologies for Social Research” by Dhiraj

Murthy is an article discussing the real effects that digital ethnography has on modern-day

research. The purpose of this article is to suggest possible benefits and problems that digital

ethnography is posing to the world of research. Murthy says the purpose is to “critically

examine the possibilities and problems of four new technologies - online questionnaires, digital

video, social networking websites, and blogs - and their potential impacts on the research

relationship” (Murthy, 2). The study analyses the effectiveness and the total impact that each

piece of technology has on social research. Murthy’s thesis is that social researchers can no

longer stay absent from the use of digital methods of research. Weather that be through online

surveys are other various uses of technology. As technology continues to advance, the world of

research likewise needs to advance. Not only to remain relevant but also to perform research at

the highest possible level; planning for success. In order to provide cutting edge information and
 Beal 2

discovery one must also use cutting edge technology. Even with Murthy’s push toward a new

world of social research, he by no means intends to forget tradition. Instead, his goal is to

combine the best of the traditional physical research with the most modern aspects of digital

ethnography. The article states “a balanced combination of physical and digital ethnography not

only gives researchers a larger and more exciting array of methods to tell social stories but also

enables them to demarginalize the voice of respondents in these accounts” (Digital Ethnography,

4)

The data being tested is qualitative and the result is “possibilities, problems and potential

impacts.” Very little of the research is concrete, it is focused around ideas and theories; opposed

to quantitative research which focuses on numbers and hard data. Therefore, the research

method for this study is clearly qualitative. The specific research design used for this study is

digital ethnography. Surprisingly, Murthy is using digital ethnography to study the effect that

technology has on ethnography itself. Research Across the Disciplines: an introduction written

by Kristen Hark, says digital ethnography is “used to investigate communication in digitized

spaces” (Hark, 166)

The primary conclusion of the research is the “high level of invisibility of digital

ethnography in sociological methods handbooks” (Digital Ethnography, 13). This means that a

decade ago digital ethnography was not recognized nor utilized in the same capacity it is today.

The research also concludes that as our society becomes more advanced in technology the

collection of data through means of online sources will also become more advanced. The

research finally concludes that although advancements in technology are helpful, the use of

physical data collection mediums are still relevant and beneficial. For the researchers and for the

best possible conclusion to said research. Two limitations to the argument identified can be
 Beal 3

made from either side. Murthy states that many researchers of ethnography shy away from new

technology because they value tradition. It is also mentioned that some believe that old physical

styles of research are outdated and need not be included in modern research. All the while the

research suggests that a balance will yield the most positive outcomes. Murthy makes clear

conclusions on the result of the research. Through these conclusions, he clearly suggests future

researchers use his findings as a tool to further their research in the area of Ethnography and

beyond.

In the last decade, the use of technology has increased exponentially in the world of

research. While the use of this technology is readily available the field of sociological research

has done little to capitalize on the recourses available. This study was focused on assessing the

various benefits that digital devices may have on ethnography. It analyzes problems and

possibilities that online questioners, digital video, social networking websites and blogs present

to sociological research. While it does not yield quantitative data, the study does show that the

inclusion of these four technologies will improve not only the research method but also the

quality of research. This is due to the fact that the use of such technology will give the

researcher more tools to work with, providing cutting edge findings in all fields of research.

Likewise, it will also greatly improve the speed of research both in the phase of retrieving data

and in the phase of synthesizing the data. The study concludes that while technology is

paramount for success the use of physical research is still important to find results.

The humanities article differs from the scientific article in three distinct ways; research

methods, research topic and the conclusions made through research. First, the two articles had

different research methods. My scientific article used a quantitative approach while my

humanities used a qualitative approach. Therefore the scientific article had numerical data and
 Beal 4

my humanities article focused on ideas and soft data. Second, the two articles had different

research topics. The scientific article focused on one topic with a right or wrong result. Due to

the quantitative approach, the research topic was directly testable. This humanities articles’ topic

was specific but could be applied to a broad range of areas in research. Finally, the two articles

had very different conclusions. My scientific article had a definitive conclusion that could not be

argued with because it was backed by hard data. My humanities article conclusion was not about

a hard data statement but about bringing ideas together to draw a meaningful statement that may

improve all future research. While both articles evaluated a topic through research they were

quite different by nature. Although they were different they both provided necessary data and

conclusive information.
 Beal 5

Works cited:

Hark. Research Across the Disciplines: An Introduction. Kendall Hunt Publishing, Co., 2017.

Murthy, Dhiraj. “Digital Ethnography: An Examination of the Use of New Technologies for

Social Research.” Sociology, vol. 42, no. 5, 2008, pp. 837–855. JSTOR, JSTOR,

www.jstor.org/stable/42857191.