skip to main content
10.1145/1978942.1978961acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Reflexivity in digital anthropology

Published:07 May 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

There are a variety of forms of ethnography inside and outside HCI each with valid complementary contributions. This paper looks at the practices of digital anthropology and how it contributes to reflexive design in HCI. The paper overviews key aspects its use in HCI, as well as in the anthropological approach. In doing so it relates these practices to participatory design and the socio-technical gap, and the ways ethnography can address them.

References

  1. Ackerman, M. 2000. The Intellectual Challenge of CSCW: The Gap Between Social Requirements and Technical Feasibility. Human-Computer Interaction, 15, p179--203. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Anderson, R. 1994. Representation and Requirements: The Value of Ethnography in System Design. Human-Comp. Interact., 9(2),151--82. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Bell, G. No More SMS from Jesus: Ubicomp, Religion and Techno-spiritual Practices. Proc. of Ubicomp 05, p141--158. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Bell, G., Blythe, M., and Sengers, P. 2005. Making by making strange: Defamiliarization and the design of domestic technologies. ACM Trans. on CHI 12(2), 149--173. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Bödker, S.. 2006. When second wave HCI meets third wave challenges. In Proc Nordchi 06, p1--8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Boelstorff, T. 2008. Coming of Age in Second Life: an Anthropologist Explores the Virtual Human. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Bhaskar, R.A., 1975. A Realist Theory of Science, London: Verso.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Blomberg, J., Giacomi, J., Mosher, A., & Swenton-Wall, P. 1993. Ethnographic field methods and their relation to design. In D. Schuler & A. Namioka (Eds.), Participatory design: Perspectives on systems design. 123--54. NJ: LAE P.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Burawoy, M. 1998. The Extended Case Method. Sociological Theory. 16:1, p4--33.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Button, G. 2000. The Ethnographic Tradition and Design. Design Studies, 21, p319--332.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. 1Clifford, C. 1983. On Ethnographic Authority. Representations, 2, p118--146.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Clifford, J. 1981. On Ethnographic Surrealism. Comparative Studies in Society and History. 23, p539--64.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Clifford, J. and Marcus, G. 1986. Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley, CA: U. of California P.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Crabtree, A., T, Hemmings, and T. Rodden. 2003. The Social Construction of Displays; Cordinate Displays and Ecologically Distributed Networks In K. O'Hara, et al (Eds.) In Public and situated displays: social and interactional aspects of shared. Netherlands: Kluwer. p170--190.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Dourish, P. 2007. Responsibilities and implications: further thoughts on ethnography and design. In Proc. DUX '07, p2--16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Dourish, P. 2006. Implications for design. In Proc. ACM Conf. Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI' 06, p541--550. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Easthope, A., and Kate McGowan, eds. 2004. A Critical and Cultural Theory Reader. 2nd Edition. London: U of Toronto.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Frankenberg, R. 2004. Living Spirit, Living Practice. Durham: Duke.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Forsythe, D. E. 1999. It's Just a Matter of Common Sense: Ethnography as Invisible Work. Computer Supported Coop. Work, 8(1--2), 1p 27--145. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Geertz, C. 1988. Works and Lives: The Anthropologist as Author. Stanford, CA: Stanford UP.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. 2Geertz, C. 1973. The Interpretation Of Cultures. New York: Basic.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. 2Greenberg, S. and Buxton, B. (2008) Usability evaluation considered harmful. Proc. CHI' 08, p111--20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Ito, M, Baumer, S. & et al. (forthcoming). Hanging Out, Messing Around, Geeking Out: Living and Learning with New Media. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Kelty, C. 2008. Two Bits: The Cultural Significance of Free Software. Durham NC: Duke UP. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Makkreel, R. A. 1993. Dilthey: Philosopher of the Human Studies. Princeton: Princeton University P.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Malaby. T 2009 Making Virtual Worlds: Linden Lab and Second Life. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. March, W. and Fleuriot, C. 2006. Girls, technology and privacy: "is my mother listening?". Proc. CHI' 06, p107--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Marcus, G. and Fischer, M. 1986. Anthropology as Cultural Critique: An Experimental Moment in the Social Sciences. Chicago UP.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Masayuki Hamabata, Matthews. 1991. Crested Kimono: Power and Love in the Japanese Business Family. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Miller, D. In preparation The Digital and the Human; A Prospectus for Digital Anthropology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. 3Miller, D. and Slater, D. 2000. The Internet: An Ethnographic Approach. Oxford: Berg.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. 3Newman, W. 2009. The Status of Ethnography in Systems Design. Panel CHI'09, (Boston, MA). New York: ACM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. 3Park, J., Blythe, M., Monk, A., and Grayson, D. 2006. Sharable digital TV: relating ethnography to design through un-useless product suggestions. Proc. CHI' 06, p1199--1204. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Rode, J.. 2008. An Ethnographic Examination of the Relationship of Gender & End-User Programming. PhD Dissertation. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Rode, J., M. Stringer, E. Toye, A. Simpson, and A. Blackwell. 2003. Curriculum-Focused Design. Interaction Design and Children 2003, (Preston, UK), 119--26. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Salvador, T., Bell G. & Anderson K. 1999. Design ethnography. Design Management Journal 10(4).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. 3Sengers, P., K. Boehner, S. David, and J.J. Kaye. 2005. Reflective design. In Proceedings of the 4th decennial conference on Critical computing: between sense and sensibility (CC '05), O. Bertelsen, N. Bouvin, P.. Krogh, and M. Kyng (Eds.). ACM, NY NY, USA, 49--58. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. 3Taylor, A. S. and Swan, L. 2005. Artful systems in the home. Proc. ACM Conf. Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI' 05, (Portland, OR), 641--650. New York: ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. 3Tong, R. P. (1998). Feminist Thought: A More Comprehensive Introduction. Boulder, Westview P.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.Van Maanen, J. 1998. Tales of the Field; On Writing Ethnography. Chicago: Chicago UP.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. 4Wajcman, J. From women and technology to gendered technoscience. Information, Communication, and Society 10, 3 (2007), 287--298.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. 4Williams, A., Anderson, K., and Dourish, P. 2008. Anchored mobilities: mobile technology and transnational migration. In Proc. DIS '08, p323--332. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. 4Williams, A. M. and Irani, L. 2010. There's methodology in the madness: toward critical HCI ethnography. Proc. CHI '10 Extended Abstracts, p2725--2734. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. 4Woodward, S. 2007. Why Women Wear What they Wear. Oxford: Berg.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. 4Wyche, S. P., Medynskiy, Y., and Grinter, R. E. 2007. Exploring the use of large displays in American megachurches. Proc. CHI' 07, p2771--2776.. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Reflexivity in digital anthropology

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        CHI '11: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        May 2011
        3530 pages
        ISBN:9781450302289
        DOI:10.1145/1978942

        Copyright © 2011 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 7 May 2011

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        CHI '11 Paper Acceptance Rate410of1,532submissions,27%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader