Qualitative/2nd/06/p 18/11/03 11:34 am Page 95 1 2 3 4 Internet communication as a 5 6 6 tool for qualitative research 7 8 Annette N. Markham 9 10 11 12 13 14 Qualitative studies of the Internet are quite diverse. In the early 1990s, Julian 15 Dibbell published an ethnographically informed account and analysis of 16 a rape in cyberspace (1993). In a popular chatroom space of an online com- 17 munity, one member utilized a program that controlled the text-based actions 18 of two females present in the room. He then proceeded to write acts of violation 19 involving these women, while they were powerless to do anything except 20 turn off their computers, but their online characters continued to be violated 21 online in front of many other people. The event had serious repercussions 22 for the women violated and the community in general. 23 In the mid-1990s, Witmer and Katzman (1998) studied computer-mediated 24 communication (CMC) users and the ways they compensated effectively for 25 the absence of non-verbal and para-linguistic elements of conversation. Using 26 emoticons, users convey humor, irony, and other emotions, supplementing 27 the content of the message to enhance interpersonal connectedness. 28 In the late 1990s, Norwegian scholar Anne Ryen utilized the capacity of 29 the Internet to conduct a long-term and long-distance case study of an Asian 30 businessman in Tanzania. While she began by simply using the Internet as 31 a tool for extending her reach, Ryen ended up also examining how the Internet 32 influenced her personal and professional relationship with the participant 33 (2002). 34 In 2003, Camille Johnson archived and analyzed nearly 600 web pages 35 promoting anorexia as a lifestyle rather than a disease. She contends that this 36 network of pro-anorexia relies on Internet technologies to build and reproduce 37 their ideologies. Through cutting and pasting images and common texts, 38 such as the “Thin Commandments,” these women are actively constructing 39 a global yet anonymous community, which appears to provide solidarity and 40 helps to justify their choice to be anorexic. 41 These are four brief examples of distinctive Internet studies conducted by 42 qualitative researchers. As a communication medium, a global network of 43 connection, and as a scene of social construction, the Internet provides new 44 tools for conducting research, new venues for social research, and new means 45 for understanding the way social realities get constructed and reproduced 46 through discursive behaviors. This chapter seeks to illuminate some of the Qualitative/2nd/06/p 18/11/03 11:34 am Page 96 ANNETTE N. MARKHAM • TEXTS 1 possibilities as well as limitations of studying the Internet and/or using 2 Internet technologies to augment qualitative inquiry. 3 4 5 DEFINING THE INTERNET 6 7 As an umbrella term that includes the associated terms cyberspace and the Web 8 (World Wide Web), the Internet can refer to the actual network and the 9 exchange of data between computers. Many people use the Internet in a 10 seemingly straightforward way: sending and receiving personal email, 11 accessing public information, downloading maps, viewing merchandise and 12 making purchases online, and generally using the technologies for informa- 13 tion gathering and transmission. Internet can also refer to social spaces where 14 relationships, communities, and cultures emerge through the exchange of 15 text and images, either in real time or in delayed time sequences. There is 16 a long tradition of social interaction and community development based on 17 the capabilities of the Internet. In short, the Internet can be perceived as a 18 set of technological tools, a complex network of social relations, a language 19 system, a cultural milieu, and so forth. The way one defines and frames the 20 Internet influences how one interacts with Internet-based technologies, as 21 well as how one studies the Internet. 22 Which of these metaphoric frameworks is most useful for qualitative 23 researchers? What does the Internet contribute to the endeavors of qualita- 24 tive researchers? The answers depend on the specific phenomena under study, 25 the research questions asked, and the methodological approaches favored. 26 The following three frameworks can help illustrate how the Internet is 27 typically conceptualized and therefore how the qualitative researcher might 28 use or study it as a context in itself or use it as a tool in a traditional study. 29 30 1 As a medium for communication, the Internet provides new channels for 31 people to communicate with each other, new channels for researchers to 32 communicate with participants, and new venues for conducting research. 33 Still primarily text based but increasingly augmented with moving and 34 still images and sound, these tools both parallel and depart from traditional 35 media for interaction. Thus, researchers can tap into emerging discursive 36 forms and practices, either studying the way people use CMC in cultural 37 contexts or utilizing CMC to interact with participants. 38 2 As a network of computers, the Internet collapses physical distances between 39 people, thus creating the potential for collectives and collaborations 40 not heretofore available. This network extends the potential reach of the 41 researcher to a more global scale. The speed of transmission in these world- 42 wide networks, along with the archiving capacity of computers, transforms 43 time into a malleable construct. As individuals gain control over how 44 time structures their interactions with others, researchers gain consider- 45 able flexibility in designing and conducting research. Understanding and 46 utilizing time and notions of space in creative ways can significantly 96 Qualitative/2nd/06/p 18/11/03 11:34 am Page 97 INTERNET COMMUNICATION AS A TOOL FOR QUALITATIVE RESEARCH 1 augment research practice, particularly in terms of collecting information 2 for study. 3 3 As a context of social construction, the Internet is a unique discursive milieu 4 that facilitates the researcher’s ability to witness and analyze the structure 5 of talk, the negotiation of meaning and identity, the development of 6 relationships and communities, and the construction of social structures 7 as these occur discursively. Whether the researcher participates or simply 8 observes, the linguistic and social structures emerging through CMC 9 provide the opportunity for researchers to track and analyze how language 10 builds and sustains social reality. 11 12 Whether conceptualized as a communication medium, a global network 13 of connection, or a scene of social construction, the Internet offers the qualita- 14 tive researcher many means of observing and/or interacting with participants 15 in order to study the complex interrelation of language, technology, and 16 culture. Regardless of the general framework used, one can utilize the Internet 17 as a tool for research topics unrelated to the Internet specifically (e.g., using 18 the Internet as a convenient and anonymous means of gathering information 19 on racial attitudes) and/or study the Internet as a specific social phenomenon (e.g., 20 studying the way a special interest group develops and sustains community 21 through the copying and pasting of group-specific images in a network of 22 websites). Put simply, the Internet is both a tool of research and a context 23 worthy of research. 24 As with any metaphoric framework, these three frameworks guide and 25 naturally restrict the qualitative researcher’s general approach and specific 26 practices in using and understanding the Internet, allowing the researcher 27 to focus on certain features or experiences at the expense of other possible 28 views. Understanding the general features of these frameworks can help 29 researchers make wise choices as they investigate potentially unfamiliar 30 research environments or use design studies in which Internet technologies 31 augment the collection or analysis of information. 32 33 34 THE INTERNET AS A MEDIUM FOR COMMUNICATION 35 36 I begin with the assumption that qualitative researchers analyze discursive 37 practices in naturalistic settings to help build knowledge related to the con- 38 struction, negotiation, and maintenance of human social practices and 39 structures. Whether exploring culture writ large or a single conversation, 40 we can say that most qualitative inquiry is grounded in information collected 41 from observation, text, talk, and interviews (Silverman, 1997, 2001). At a very 42 basic level, then, qualitative researchers engage in the process of studying 43 communicative practices in context. 44 Inserting the Internet as a medium for interaction between researcher and 45 participant or studying the Internet as it mediates interactions among subjects 46 in the field changes the research scenario in that the Internet influences 97 Qualitative/2nd/06/p 18/11/03 11:34 am Page 98 ANNETTE N. MARKHAM • TEXTS 1 communication practices in ways that are simultaneously mundane and 2 profound.1 Even as one will note similarities between many features of the 3 Internet and earlier media for communication, such as letter writing, tele- 4 phone, telegraph, post-it notes, and so forth, certain capacities and uses of 5 Internet communication uniquely shape a user’s perceptions and interactions. 6 These influences extend beyond the interpersonal to the social and cultural; 7 outcomes of these communication processes have the potential to shift 8 sensemaking practices at the cultural level. Essentially, the Internet mediates 9 – and in some ways moderates – interactions and the possible outcomes 10 of these interactions at the dyadic, group, and cultural level. Equally, Internet 11 technologies have the potential to shift the ways in which qualitative 12 researchers collect, make sense of, and represent data. 13 14 From “information transmission” to “meaning-making” 15 16 The Internet is a medium that transmits information virtually instantaneously 17 between computers, individuals, and groups of people.