Interface Methods: Renegotiating Relations between Digital Social Research, STS and Sociology

Abstract

This paper introduces a distinctive approach to methods development in digital social research called 'interface methods'. We begin by discussing various methodological confluences between digital media, social studies of science and technology (STS) and sociology. Some authors have posited significant overlap between, on the one hand, sociological and STS concepts, and on the other hand, the ontologies of digital media. Others have emphasized the significant differences between prominent methods built into digital media and those of STS and sociology. This paper advocates a third approach, one that (a) highlights the dynamism and relative under-determinacy of digital methods, and (b) affirms that multiple methodological traditions intersect in digital devices and research. We argue that these two circumstances enable a distinctive approach to methodology in digital social research -thinking methods as 'interface methods' -and the paper contextualizes this approach in two different ways. First, we show how the proliferation of online data tools or 'digital analytics' opens up distinctive opportunities for critical and creative engagement with methods development at the intersection of sociology, STS and digital research. Second, we discuss a digital research project in which we investigated a specific 'interface method', namely co-occurrence analysis. In this digital pilot study we implemented this method in a critical and creative way to analyse and visualize 'issue dynamics' in the area of climate change on Twitter. We evaluate this project in the light of our principal objective, which was to test the possibilities for the modification of methods through experimental implementation and interfacing of various methodological traditions. To conclude, we discuss a major obstacle to the development of 'interface methods': digital media are marked by particular quantitative dynamics that seem adverse to some of the methodological commitments of sociology and STS. To address this, we argue in favour of a methodological approach in digital social research that affirms its maladjustment to the research methods that are prevalent in the medium.

"People seem to really enjoy the mix of humour and intelligence": science humour in online settings

“…As noted by Marres and Gerlitz [2016] there are important questions around how current scholarship imports offline methods into online studies, and to what extent we must develop research tools specific to digital settings. The rise of 'big data' and the growing prevalence of black-boxed research tools requires some computing expertise in order to understand and critique processes of data collection [Boyd and Crawford, 2012]; and as new forms and uses of digital media continue to diversify, scholars will need to engage with an increasing plethora of such technical considerations.…”

Experiments with a data-public: Moving digital methods into critical proximity with political practice

“…Such questions have more prominence in recent calls to think of digital methods as ''web-visions'' (Madsen, 2012(Madsen, , 2015a or ''interface methods'' (Marres and Gerlitz, 2016) that inevitably involve some redistribution of research design to, for instance, commercial platforms like Facebook. This means that overlaps between the logics of such platforms and the analysts normative assumptions about the public must be scrutinized anew in every project.…”

Doing digital team ethnography: being there together and digital social data

“…This was considered the best way of dealing not only with the complex and interrelated definition of 'team' and 'collaboration' in ethnographic research, but also with the meaning of 'digital' with respect to ethnography and the recent debates around such a topic (Marres and Gerlitz, 2016).…”