COMM552/Trace ethnography notes
From Driscollwiki
Trace ethnography is a method for studying distributed cognition in sociotechnical networks (Geiger & Ribes, 3). The "traces" it considers are the publicly-accessible artifacts of online social activities. Examples of such traces include the view count and ratings on a YouTube video, the application meta-data attached to a Twitter feed, or the timestamps on eBay bids. These data may be gathered by hand or with the assistance of software tools. The collected traces are analyzed qualitatively according to an "ethnographically-derived understanding" of the peculiar norms and practices of the site under investigation (3).
Contents |
Trace ethnography on Wikipedia
Trace ethnography was introduced in a 2010 paper about anti-vandalism practices on Wikipedia by Geiger & Ribes. Research conducted in 2006 concluded that vandalism was cleaned up primarily through the heroic efforts of a small group of dedicated volunteers but Geiger & Ribes believed that a significant strategic change had taken place during the intervening years. Their preliminary research indicated that fully- and semi-automated vandal-fighting software now accounted for nearly 80% of all anti-vandalism activity. Such "helperbots" simply did not exist when the earlier research was conducted.
To qualitatively understand the process by which a vandal is identified, documented, and banned, Geiger & Ribes needed a way to observe diverse activities occurring simultaneously across Wikipedia. Each malicious edit by the anonymous vandal and each response by a Wikipedia vandal-fighter resulted in the creation of a unique record of the event in the Wikipedia database. By exploiting this feature of the Mediawiki software platform, Geiger & Ribes were able to assemble a coherent timeline of events beginning with an initial malcious edit and concluding with the vandal being temporarily banned from editing the site.
Strengths
Trace ethnography enables researchers to observe events occurring simultaneously in different areas of an online space. It also offers a bridge between the large-scale data collection characteristic of quantitative researches and the attention to quotidian detail found in ethnographic accounts.
Relationship to traditional ethnography
The analysis made by Geiger & Ribes relied on an intimate understanding of the Wikipedia community developed through traditionally ethnographic engagement. They participated in mailing lists, interacted with community members, and learned to use the vandal-fighting tools and helperbots they planned to observe.
Weaknesses
As increasing numbers of scholars grapple with the challenges and opportunities of online research, "trace ethnography" may cease to be a distinct category. Geiger & Ribes make a convincing case for the utility of digital "traces" but, sheer quantity aside, it is not clear that these artifacts are significantly unique from the artifacts conventionally considered by ethnographers: broadcast media, films, periodicals, etc.
Opportunities for future development
Geiger & Ribes manually collected the "traces" left behind by vandals, vandal-fighters, and vandal-fighting software. The success of vandal-fighting software suggests that they might have developed their own research tool for collecting traces of use to their research. Future "trace ethnography" might involve the development of new tools for capturing and displaying online activities in realtime. For example, a tool for understanding online responses to natural disasters might aggregate and visualize Twitter updates, Wikipedia edits, and other digital traces in a way that enables a single researcher to observe in a single location activity occuring simultaneous across the internet.
References
- Geiger, R. S. and Ribes, D. (2010) The Work of Sustaining Order in Wikipedia: The Banning of a Vandal. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), ACM, New York (2010).
