Using Social Media as a Source for Understanding Public Perceptions of Archaeology: Research Challenges and Methodological Pitfalls

Q1 Social Sciences
L. Richardson
{"title":"Using Social Media as a Source for Understanding Public Perceptions of Archaeology: Research Challenges and Methodological Pitfalls","authors":"L. Richardson","doi":"10.5334/jcaa.39","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Digital social science research has had an important impact on the types of methodological approaches to the internet and digital social phenomena, practices and communities. Whilst this paper does not seek to include empirical data, it aims to elaborate further on these debates in digital social research, that is, research on ‘life in digital society’ (Lindgren 2017: 230), using insights from my own research methods. This paper will firstly consider some methodological pitfalls that could sabotage our digital social archaeology research. It will then discuss the importance of understanding the framework and sources of our data. It will outline the two main methodological approaches I have used in my own empirical research to date – ‘thick’ social media data collection and analysis, and digital ethnography. It will discuss some of the many ethical considerations that must be assessed and implemented when undertaking this type of work. I will argue for a methodological pragmatism when undertaking social research in the fields of archaeology and heritage, although this pragmatism can be applied to any field of social study in the digital world.","PeriodicalId":32632,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/jcaa.39","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Digital social science research has had an important impact on the types of methodological approaches to the internet and digital social phenomena, practices and communities. Whilst this paper does not seek to include empirical data, it aims to elaborate further on these debates in digital social research, that is, research on ‘life in digital society’ (Lindgren 2017: 230), using insights from my own research methods. This paper will firstly consider some methodological pitfalls that could sabotage our digital social archaeology research. It will then discuss the importance of understanding the framework and sources of our data. It will outline the two main methodological approaches I have used in my own empirical research to date – ‘thick’ social media data collection and analysis, and digital ethnography. It will discuss some of the many ethical considerations that must be assessed and implemented when undertaking this type of work. I will argue for a methodological pragmatism when undertaking social research in the fields of archaeology and heritage, although this pragmatism can be applied to any field of social study in the digital world.
利用社交媒体作为了解公众对考古学看法的来源:研究挑战和方法缺陷
数字社会科学研究对互联网的方法论方法类型以及数字社会现象、实践和社区产生了重要影响。虽然本文不寻求包括实证数据,但它旨在利用我自己的研究方法中的见解,进一步阐述数字社会研究中的这些争论,即“数字社会中的生活”研究(Lindgren 2017:230)。本文将首先考虑一些可能破坏我们数字社会考古研究的方法论陷阱。然后,它将讨论理解我们的数据框架和来源的重要性。它将概述我迄今为止在自己的实证研究中使用的两种主要方法论方法——“厚”社交媒体数据收集和分析,以及数字民族志。它将讨论在从事这类工作时必须评估和实施的许多道德考虑因素中的一些。在考古和遗产领域进行社会研究时,我将主张方法论实用主义,尽管这种实用主义可以应用于数字世界中的任何社会研究领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
19 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信