Pistas para o Desenvolvimento Paradigmático dos Métodos de Pesquisa Qualitativa On-Line



Artigo principal Conteúdo

Newton Claizoni Moreno de Melo
Débora Coutinho Paschoal Dourado

Resumo

Objetivo: neste artigo, problematizamos como os métodos de pesquisa on-line foram reduzidos a adaptações de técnicas anteriores de coleta de dados e discutimos como as propriedades idiossincráticas dos ambientes on-line podem impulsionar o desenvolvimento paradigmático de métodos qualitativos on-line. Proposta: identificamos cinco pistas para o desenvolvimento paradigmático de métodos de pesquisa qualitativa on-line: (1) as novas socialidades que emergem das interações on-line; (2) os processos envolvidos na afirmação de identidades e selves on-line; (3) a crescente dificuldade na distinção entre privado e público no ambiente on-line, e o que a privacidade significa nesse contexto; (4) o aumento da agência dos participantes em pesquisas qualitativas on-line; e (5) a crescente indistinção entre os fenômenos sociais em seus contextos on-line e off-line. Conclusão: ao utilizar ontologias e epistemologias que não consideram as especificidades da experiência on-line, e ao focar excessivamente na adaptação de métodos conhecidos aos novos ambientes, nós pesquisadores ficamos limitados a conceber a experiência on-line e a operar nela através de categorias off-line. Dessa maneira, perdemos a oportunidade de desenvolver métodos nativos e paradigmáticos de pesquisa qualitativa on-line, que poderiam proporcionar um melhor entendimento dos fenômenos que investigamos.



Histórico de Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.


Detalhes do artigo

Como Citar
Melo, N. C. M. de, & Dourado, D. C. P. (2021). Pistas para o Desenvolvimento Paradigmático dos Métodos de Pesquisa Qualitativa On-Line. Revista De Administração Contemporânea, e210015. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2022210015.en
Seção
Artigos Metodológicos

Referências

Anwyl-Irvine, A., Massonnié, J., Flitton, A., Kirkham, N., & Evershed, J. (2020). Gorilla in our midst: An online behavioral experiment builder. Behavior Research Methods, 52, 388-407. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01237-x
Battles, H. T. (2010). Exploring ethical and methodological issues in internet-based research with adolescents. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9(1), 27-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691000900104
Baym, N., & Markham, A. (2009). Making smart choices on shifting ground. In A. Markham, N. Baym (Eds.), Internet inquiry: Conversations about method (pp. 7-19). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Beaulieu, A. (2010). From co-location to co-presence: Shifts in the use of ethnography for the study of knowledge. Social Studies of Science, 40(3), 453-470. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312709359219
Bouchard, K. L. (2016). Anonymity as a double-edge sword: Reflecting on the implications of online qualitative research in studying sensitive topics. The Qualitative Report, 21(1), 59-67. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2016.2455
Broad, K. L., & Joos, K. E. (2004). Online inquiry of public selves: Methodological considerations. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(6), 923-946. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800404265720
CohenMiller, A., Schnackenberg, H., & Demers, D. (2020). Rigid flexibility: Seeing the opportunities in ‘failed’ qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920963782
Coomber, R. (1997). Using the internet for survey research. Sociological Research Online, 2(2), 49-58. https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.73
Corti, L., & Fielding, N. (2016). Opportunities from the digital revolution: Implications for researching, publishing, and consuming qualitative research. SAGE Open, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016678912
Craig, S., Eaton, A., Pascoe, R., Egag, E., McInroy, L., Fang, L., Austin, A., & Dentato, M. (2020). QueerVIEW: Protocol for a technology-mediated qualitative photo elicitation study with sexual and gender minority youth in ontario, Canada. JMIR Research Protocols, 9(11), e20547. https://doi.org/10.2196/20547
Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Featherstone, M., & Burrows, R. (1995). Cultures of technological embodiment: An introduction. Body & Society, 1(3-4), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357034X95001003001
Fischer, M., Lyon, S., & Zeitlyn, D. (2017). Online environments and the future of social science research. In N. Fielding, R. Lee & G. Blank. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of online research methods (2nd ed., pp. 611-627). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957992.n35
Genoe, M. R., Liechty, T., Marston, H. R., & Sutherland, V. (2016). Blogging into retirement: Using qualitative online research methods to understand leisure among baby boomers. Journal of Leisure Research, 48(1), 15-34. https://doi.org/10.18666/jlr-2016-v48-i1-6257
Giaxoglou, K. (2017). Reflections on internet research ethics from language-focused research on web-based mourning: Revisiting the private/public distinction as a language ideology of differentiation. Applied Linguistics Review, 8(2-3), 229-250. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2016-1037
Gregory, K. (2018). Online communication settings and the qualitative research process: Acclimating students and novice researchers. Qualitative Health Research, 28(10), 1610-1620. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732318776625
Griffiths, M. D. (2012). The use of online methodologies in studying paraphilias—A review. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 1(4), 143-150. https://doi.org/10.1556/JBA.1.2012.4.1
Hallett, R. E., & Barber, K. (2014). Ethnographic research in a cyber era. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 43(3), 306-330. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241613497749
Hewson, C., Laurent, D., & Vogel, C. (1996). Proper methodologies for psychological and sociological studies conducted via the internet. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28(2), 186-191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03204763
Hine, C. (2009). Question one: How can qualitative internet researchers define the boundaries of their projects? In A. Markham, N. Baym (Eds.), Internet inquiry: Conversations about method (pp. 1-20). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. https://www.doi.org/10.4135/9781483329086.n1
Holge-Hazelton, B. (2002). The internet: A new field for qualitative inquiry?. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-3.2.854
Howlett, M. (2021). Looking and the ‘field’ through a Zoom lens: Methodological reflections on conducting online research during a global pandemic. Qualitative Research, Online First. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794120985691
Ignacio, E. N. (2012). Online methods and analyzing knowledge-production: A cautionary tale. Qualitative Inquiry, 18(3), 237-246. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800411431558
Jank, W., & Shmueli, G. (2006). Functional data analysis in electronic commerce research. Statistical Science, 21(2), 155-166. https://doi.org/10.1214/088342306000000132
Kaun, A. (2010). Open-ended online diaries: Capturing life as it is narrated. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9(2), 133-148. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691000900202
Kenny, A. J. (2005). Interaction in cyberspace: An online focus group. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 49(4), 414-422. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03305.x
Klein, J., Tyler-Parker, G., & Bastian, B. (2020). Measuring psychological distress among Australians using an online survey. Australian Journal of Psychology, 72(3), 276-282. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajpy.12283
Kokkoris, M., & Kamleitner, B. (2020). Would you sacrifice your privacy to protect public health? Prosocial responsibility in a pandemic paves the way for digital surveillance. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 578618. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.578618
Kozinets, R. (2002). The field behind the screen: Using netnography for marketing research in online communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.39.1.61.18935
Kozinets, R., Scaraboto, D., & Parmentier, M. (2018). Evolving netnography: How brand auto-netnography, a netnographic sensibility, and more-than-human netnography can transform your research. Journal of Marketing Management, 34(3-4), 231-242. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/0267257X.2018.1446488
Krantz, J. H., & Reips, U. D. (2017). The state of web-based research: A survey and call for inclusion in curricula. Behavior Research Methods, 49(5), 1621-1629. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0882-x
Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2 ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lee, R., Fielding, N., & Blank, G. (2017). Online research methods in the social sciences: An editorial introduction. In N. Fielding, R. Lee & G. Blank. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of online research methods (2nd ed., pp. 3-16). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Man, J. D., Campbell, L., Tabana, H., & Wouters, E. (2021). The pandemic of online research in times of COVID-19. BMJ Open, 11(2), e043866. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043866
Marres, N. (2012). The redistribution of methods: On intervention in digital social research, broadly conceived. The Sociological Review, 60(1 Suppl.), 139-165. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2012.02121.x
Mawer, M. (2016). Observational practice in virtual worlds: Revisiting and expanding the methodological discussion. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(2), 161-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2014.936738
Meredith, J., Galpin, A., & Robinson, L. (2020). Examining the management of stake and interest in a participatory design Facebook group. Qualitative Research in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1780354
Michalak, E., & Szabo, A. (1998). Guidelines for internet research: An update. European Psychologist, 3(1), 70-75. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.3.1.70
Miller, C., Guidry, J., Dahman, B., & Thomson, M. (2020). A tale of two diverse qualtrics samples: Information for online survey researchers. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 29(4), 731-735. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-19-0846
Morison, T., Gibson, A. F., Wigginton, B., & Crabb, S. (2015). Online research methods in psychology: Methodological opportunities for critical qualitative research. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(3), 223-232. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2015.1008899
Morrow, O., Hawkins, R., & Kern, L. (2015). Feminist research in online spaces. Gender, Place & Culture, 22(4), 526-543. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2013.879108
Murthy, D. (2008). Digital ethnography: An examination of the use of new technologies for social research. Sociology, 42(5), 837-855. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038508094565
Numerato, D. (2016). Behind the digital curtain: Ethnography, football fan activism and social change. Qualitative Research, 16(5), 575-591. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794115611207
O’Connor, H., & Madge, C. (2001). Cyber-mothers: Online synchronous interviewing using conferencing software. Sociological Research Online, 5(4), 102-117. https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.543
Pozzar, R., Hammer, M., Underhill-Blazey, M., Wright, A., Tulsky, J., Hong, F., Gundersen, D., & Berry, D. (2020). Threats of bots and other bad actors to data quality following research participant recruitment through social media: cross-sectional questionnaire. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(10), e23021. https://doi.org/10.2196/23021
Pronk, T., Wiers, R., Molenkamp, B., & Murre, J. (2020). Mental chronometry in the pocket? Timing accuracy of web applications on touchscreen and keyboard devices. Behavior Research Methods, 52, 1371-1382. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01321-2
Reips, U.-D. (2002). Internet-based psychological experimenting: Five dos and five don’ts. Social Science Computer Review, 20(3), 241-249. https://doi.org/10.1177/089443930202000302
Riley, S., Evans, A., Griffin, C., Morey, Y., & Murphy, H. (2015). Crossing into the digital realm. The Psychologist, 28(8), 652-655. Retrieved from http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/26595
Robbin, A. (1992). Social scientists at work on electronic research networks. Internet Research, 2(2), 6-30. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb047257
Salmons, J. (2016). Doing qualitative research online. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Schiek, D., & Ullrich, C. G. (2017). Using asynchronous written online communications for qualitative inquiries: A research note. Qualitative Research, 17(5), 589-597. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794117690216
Schrum, L. (1995). Framing the debate: Ethical research in the information age. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(3), 311–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780049500100303
Stanton, J. M., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2001). Using internet/intranet web pages to collect organizational research data. Organizational Research Methods 4(3), 200-217. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810143002
Upadhyay, U., & Lipkovich, H. (2020). Using online technologies to improve diversity and inclusion in cognitive interviews with young people. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 20, 159. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01024-9
Voltaire (2007). Philosophical letters or Letters regarding the English nation. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company. (Original work published 1734)
Weissman, R., Klump, K., & Rose, J. (2020). Conducting eating disorders research in the time of COVID-19: A survey of researchers in the field. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 53(7), 1171-1181. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.23303
Welch, T. (2020). Is Facebook a viable recruitment tool? Nurse Researcher, 28(2), 9-13. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.2019.e1682
Williams, S., Clausen, M. G., Robertson, A., Peacock, S., & McPherson, K. (2012). Methodological reflections on the use of asynchronous online focus groups in health research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 11(4), 368-383. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691201100405
Willis, P. (2012). Talking sexuality online–technical, methodological and ethical considerations of online research with sexual minority youth. Qualitative Social Work, 11(2), 141-155. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325011400488
Wood, R. T., Griffiths, M. D., & Eatough, V. (2004). Online data collection from video game players: Methodological issues. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(5), 511-518. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2004.7.511