Ethnography for design

Ethnography seems to be used fairly often in systems design research (Sayago & Blat, 2010; Andersen, 1994; Blomberg, Burrell & Guest, 2008; Button, 2008; Macaulay, Benyon & Crerar, 2000). I see sensemaking, especially Dervin's approach to interviews, as fitting easily into a sub-set of ethnography.

I've been reading some ethnographic articles (e.g. Sayago & Blat, 2010) and appreciating the narrative or even conversational style that they adopt. They acknowledge the subjectivity of the approach, but do not accept that this means it is not a legitimate method (Sayago & Blat, 2010). I liked the following,  quoted by a fellow student:

'The attempt to produce value-neutral social science is increasingly being abandoned as at best unrealizable, and at worst self-deceptive, and is being replaced by social sciences based on explicit ideologies. Mary Hesse (1980)'

I wouldn't necessarily agree that we are applying ideologies, but if anyone believes that their research is not affected by their beliefs, theories and biases, then they definitely are having themselves on.

This is where the narrative of ethnography comes into its own. In researching how people select articles in information searches, Brenda Dervin, of Sense-Making Methodology fame, found that the best way to find relevant articles were by using ones that explicitly described the background of researchers and their reasons for conducting the research (I can't find the reference now, unfortunately). Context is invaluable. When information on the researchers is missed in an article, it can make the argument and conclusion more opaque and perhaps less legitimate. Author bias can be part of the appeal rather than a detraction from the legitimacy of the results. I think it is important to include some introduction of my formative experiences and motivations in doing this particular study.

Sayago and Blat (2010) have created a well-structured article on an ethnographic study of older people's use of email. They divide their findings into two sections: 'nature of use' and 'interaction barriers' and then further headings in those sections. The 'nature of use' section has the headings 'social circles', 'frequency of use and content', 'geographical distance and its relationship with other means of contact', 'e-mailing and other daily activities' and 'socialisation, emotion and accomplishment'. Their argument is supported throughout the findings by quoting the words of their subjects together with relevant references to literature. My own results could probably be presented and organized similarly.


References:

Andersen, R. (1994). Representations and requirements: the value of ethnography in system design. Human–Computer Interaction 9, 151–182.

Blomberg, J., Burrell, M., Guest, G. (2008). An ethnographic approach to design. In: Jacko, J.A., Sears, A. (Eds.), The Human–Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies and Emerging Applications. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London, pp. .

Button, G., (2008). The ethnographic tradition and design. Design Studies 21, 319–332.

Macaulay, C., Benyon, D., Crerar, A. (2000). Ethnography, theory and systems design: from intuition to insight. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 53, 35–60.

Sayago, S. & Blat, J. (2010). Telling the story of older people e-mailing: An ethnographical study. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies  60, 105-120.