1. Qualitative Methods in CSCW
Research
Luigina Ciolfi
Professor of Human Centred Computing
Sheffield Hallam University, UK
http://luiginaciolfi.net
https://blogs.shu.ac.uk/c3riimpact/
CSCW Asia Winter School 2019, Kyoto, Dec 2019
2. Whoâs Talking?
Background in Communication Studies and HCIâŠMy work moved to CSCW
during my PhD
Qualitative researcher. Domains: cultural heritage and mobile/nomadic work
Learning from service: I read a lot of CSCW papers!
Also experience in supporting regional CSCW communities (EUSSET â European
Society for Socially Embedded Technologies; SIGCHI Ireland)
Teaching to CS students
3. Some questions I get asked all the time
â Why do we need to know about qualitative research?
â Is qualitative research objective?
â Why should I spend so much time studying people when they could just be
saying one thing and doing another?
â How can qualitative results be generalised?
â How do I know my research findings are valid?
â Is qualitative better than quantitative? Or the other way around?
4. âThe two hardest problems in computer science are: (i) people,
and (ii) convincing computer scientists that the hardest
problem in computer science is people.â
Jeff Bigham, Carnegie Mellon University
5. They change their mind
They are complicated
They are part of complicated organisations and groups
They are busy and might not want to talk to you
They often say one thing but mean, or think, another
They often want what experts know will not work
6. They change their mind
They are complicated
They are part of complicated organisations and groups
They are busy and might not want to talk to you
They often say one thing but mean, or think, another
They often want what experts know will not work
They are smart and adaptable
They can empathise
They make very complicated systems work, using very complex tools
They like to be and work with other humans
They can figure things out
They find ingenious workarounds, solutions, or alternatives
7. What This Tutorial is NOT About
A step-by-step guide to ethnographyâŠ
âŠor interview design in a nutshellâŠ
âŠor a pocket guide to qualitative data analysis
8. What This Tutorial IS About
Some history of qualitative enquiry in CSCW: why do we do it? And why do we do
it in this way?
Some key approaches and milestones shaping qualitative CSCW research
Challenges and opportunities
Some experiences in doing qualitative work in CSCW⊠Letâs share some food for
thought!
9. Qualitative Research in CSCW
Qualitative methods are mainly concerned with the âhowâ and âwhyâ of research on
collaborative computing and computer-supported collaboration
Examples going back to the inception of the discipline, applied to several domains
But, why is so much CSCW work based on qualitative methods?
10. CSCW and Qualitative Methods: A bit of history
From Human Factors to Human Actors
âUnderstanding the user's needs, and the tasks performed by the user is basic to
the system development process. However, it is a mistake to think that simply
having a human factors person on the design team is by itself sufficient to ensure
that the "human factor" has been adequately taken into accountâ (Bannon, 1991)
11. CSCW and Qualitative Methods: A bit of history
CSCW researchers were advocating moving away from lab-centred, one-user
focused studies, which âhave deliberately stripped away the supporting context of
the everyday world, in an effort to study 'pure' internal processes" (G. Olson 1990)
12. CSCW and Qualitative Methods
Systems were certainly providing users with collaborative functionalities, but what
about the âarticulation workâ of coordination and cooperation?
Studies of cooperation in actual work settings were required â âsecond order workâ
âSituatedâ character of cooperative work (Suchman, 1983; Gershon & Star, 1986)
Looking at the complexity of people, artefacts, spaces, contextual and cultural
settings: âassumption that the social and material are âconstitutively entangledâ â
(Orlikowski, 2007)
13. CSCW and Qualitative Methods: A bit of history
âThe indigenous CSCW research program implies an approach to technology
development radically different from that of the previous development of
interactive and collaborative computing, namely, an approach to technology
development in which ethnographic and other forms of in-depth workplace studies
play an essential and proactive role.â (Schmidt & Bannon, 2013)
14. CSCW and Qualitative Methods: A bit of history
Early work on Control Rooms and âcentres of coordinationâ
The âturn to ethnographyâ in human-centred computing
A âpractice-focusedâ approach: âCSCW was the first research community in
applied computer science which stressed the importance of an in-depth
understanding of practices when designing ICT artefactsâ (Wulf et al, 2011)
Schmidt, K (2014), âThe Concept of âPracticeâ: Whatâs the point?â
16. CSCW and Qualitative Methods: A bit of history
âStudies of the social organisation of work will need to proceed in a manner which
recognises this heterogeneity of domains and develops analytic tools which are
capable of exhibiting the relevant scope of this varietyâ (J. Hughes et al 1994)
17. Ethnography in CSCW
Fieldwork in HCI draws heavily from the ethnographic tradition, which âseeks to
present a portrait of life as seen and understood by those who live and work
within the domain concernedâ (D. Randall, R. Harper and M. Rouncefield,
Fieldwork for Design, emphasis added)
Ethnography in CSCW (and HCI) is now widespread, including variations such as
âquick and dirty ethnographyâ and âdesign ethnographyâ (about which we
could debate!)
Recommended reading: âReflections on 25 Years of Ethnography in CSCWâ, by
Jeanette Blomberg and Helena Karasti, JCSCW 22: 4-6 (2013)
18. Ethnography in CSCW
We âborrowedâ ethnography and other qualitative methods from social scienceâŠ
âŠbut we do things quite differently:
- Not so interested in creating theory or expanding existing theory out of
qualitative work
- Not so interested in generalising at the macro scale
- We are quite much more fond of mixed methods than social scientists
- âImplications for designâ
19. Domains of Ethnographic study in CSCW
âCentres of Coordinationâ
Workplace studies
âDiagnostic Workâ
âMobility Workâ
20.
21.
22. âCentres of Coordinationâ
Workplace studies
âDiagnostic Workâ
âMobility Workâ
Disaster response
Health and clinical settings (many aspects of it)
Collaborative software development
Collaborative writing
Museum visiting
Domains of Ethnographic study in CSCW
23. Key outlooks provided to the broader field of HCI/HCC:
- Unanticipated use
- Appropriation practices
- Concerns for social context/social dimension of technology use (well before
social became âparadigmâ)
- Domain-specific knowledge and understanding
- Ethnographic methods now belong in HCI
Domains of Ethnographic study in CSCW
24. Moving away from âworkâ
Leisure domains
Education (CSCL)
âWorkâ as the serious business of getting things done
âWorkâ (intended as paid labour is also changingâŠorganizational and culture
changes, including micro-work)
Domains of Ethnographic study in CSCW
25. Doing qualitative research when you cannot be in the fieldâŠor has the field
moved?
âit has become increasingly problematic in CSCW to conceptualize the field site
as single-sited. The field site has become a multifaceted and intricate
constellation of people, technologies, activities, entities, and relations; and the
boundaries of the field site are less clear, even unbounded, involving
extended spatial and temporal scopeâ (Blomberg and Karasti, 2013)
Other methods for qualitative inquiry
26. Other methods for qualitative inquiry
Not just ethnography, other qualitative methodologies trying to capture the
complexity of âsituated collaborationâ
Well-known examples:
Interviews
Action research
Questionnaires
âŠoften in combination (triangulation)
27. Social media and online collaboration
â Online ethnography (âdigital ethnographyâ)
â Trace ethnography (Geiger and Ribes, 2011; Ăsterlund, Crowston and
Jackson, 2019)
Other methods for qualitative inquiry
28. Design/Creative methodologies in CSCW
â Another important aspect of qualitative research in CSCW
â Not only for designing or for generating design requirements
â E.g. âworkshopsâ as ways to construct field sites (Rosner, Kawas, Li, Tilly and
Sung, âOut of Time, Out of Place: Reflections on Design Workshops as a
Research Methodâ, CSCW 2016)
â Influence by (and often convergence with) Participatory Design (Greenbaum
and Kyng (1991) âDesign at Workâ)
â The âInteraction Designâ turn, early 2000s
â The âFiction Turnâ (late 2010s)
29. CSCW and Qualitative Methods
âThe steps through which CSCW became institutionalized were rather practical
steps in a process of interlinking a range of research activities and communities
that participants began to see as converging or in some other sense related.
CSCW emerged more as a bazaar than as a cathedralâŠthere is a sense in which
CSCW is continually being formedâ (Schmidt & Bannon, 2013)
30. Doing qualitative research in CSCW: Challenges?
â Access to field
â âŠlinked to research design
â Collecting data
â Analysis
â Writing up (it takes a lot of space and time)
37. Beyond ârunning a studyâ: Action Research
PhD projects:
Dr Laura Maye at the
Hunt Museum (Limerick,
Ireland)
Dr Caroline Claisse at
Bishopâs House (Sheffield,
UK)
38. Researching Nomadic Work
â Researching workers who are not usually based at company premises (incl
freelancers)
â Operating from home or from âtemporary workplacesâ (cafes, airports, hotels,
etc.)
â Difficult to follow, difficult to observe how cooperation with colleagues and
clients happens
â Extensive interview studies, complemented by focused shadowing sessions
and other techniques such as diaries
39.
40. Some books I found useful
â âFieldwork for Designâ, by Richard Harper, David Randall and Mark
Rouncefield
â âDigital Ethnographyâ, by Sarah Pink
â âMy Life as a Night Elf Priestâ by Bonnie Nardi
â âWorkplace Studiesâ, âVideo in Qualitative Researchâ, J Hindmarsh, P Luff
and C. Heath
â âConvivial Toolboxâ, by L. Sanders and P. Stappers
â âCritical Fabulationsâ by Daniela Rosner
â âŠmany ârole modelâ papers using qualitative research and data presentation
in CSCW
One of the first students in Italy to pursue a major in HCI. Then research assistant working with some prominent HCI researchers, using mixed methods, including some qual but with a strong cognitive psychology and cognitive science frame: a lot of studies in the lab, focusing on single users, focusing on specific instances of technology use rather than âthe bigger pictureâ
PhD, working with Liam Bannon, one of the pioneers of CSCW, and European CSCW in particular
Associate editor, CSCW journal; papers chair, CSCW 2015 & COOP 2014; general chair, ECSCW 2017, CSCW 2021; Subcommittee chair âBeyond the Individualâ, CHI 2018-2019 One of those people working across Europe and USA communities
Questions that could have been asked to CSCW researchers in the early days
How many of you use qualitative methods in your research? How many of you have attended courses/programmes on qualitative research?
Very frustrating to study! Easier to create controlled conditions to focus on particular aspects of behaviour â and sometimes this is true
Easier to study large scale phenomena on the basis of selected indicators and work around greater trends and patterns â and sometimes that is also true
Enough reasons to want to study qualitatively how technology becomes part of their lives
There isnât enough time and there are plenty of ways to learn that
I will mention examples of CSCW work but these are by no means exhaustive, just highlights, things that I know and find useful
Qualitative research is about smaller samples, yet nuance and depth of analysis, a lot of focus on context of activity
Very foundation of CSCW as a discipline, critique of other approaches, such as HCI and Human Factors
Users are experts who operate in complex contexts, including the social context
Other methods left those things out and they are often crucial
Relationship to HCI
Situated is not just about context and the modelling of context, itâs about how intra-action is constantly producing practices: ârecursive interweaving of the social and materialâ (Orlikowski)
Influence from social science, more so than psychology and social psychology
Unique proposition about in-depth understanding of the complexities of human collaboration and its context
Not only ethnographyâŠEthnomethodological studies in CSCW
Research with Hideaki
Not so concerned with applying the same analytic or theoretical tools, important bit is capturing the complexity of practices in use
Accounts of those who are immersed in those practices
Accounts of those who are immersed in those practices
Ref to Jonathanâs talk yesterday about âcycles of popularityâ of topics
Mention work on turkers
Work to make AI work
Work in field that is difficult to access, Bjorn and Boulus work on Palestinian entrepreneurs
The âfluidâ workplace, or the social media platform âspaceâ, etc.
Documentation practices (Geiger, 2017); online communications such as Whatsapp messages (TenĂłrio and BjĂžrn, 2019); traces of collaborative use in collaborative writing software (Larsen-Ledet and Korsgaard, 2019)
Why? Moving away from work, more creative, inspiration-centred methods
PD brought another qual dimension to research in CSCW: understanding how design is collaboratively done and through which tools
Applies to methodology too
Work in field that is difficult to access, Bjorn and Boulus work on Palestinian entrepreneurs
Even if the technique is the same, different challenges: e.g. fixed camera set up to shadowing in spaces of different size
Fixed cameras, plus
Fixed cameras, plusâŠand systemâs logs â so some quant!
Working with small sample can lead to depth of understanding; presenting rich, complex pictures of how sociotechnical systems are practiced, in a way that formal methods cannot grasp. While this this challenging it is a necessary complement to other methodologies