Participant observation, anthropology methodology and design anthropology research inquiry

Abstract

Within the design studio, and across multiple field sites, the authors compare involvement of research tools and materials during collaborative processes of designing. Their aim is to trace temporal dimensions (shifts/ movements) of where and when learning takes place along different sites of practice. They do so by combining participant observation, anthropology methodology and design anthropology research inquiry, engaging with practice based explorations to understand if methods and methodologies, understood as being central to anthropological inquiry, can be taught to interaction design engineering students studying in an engineering faculty and engineers working in an energy company. They ask: how do you generate anthropological capacities with interaction design engineering students engaged in engineering design processes and employees of an energy company setting out to reframe their relation with the private end user? What kind of opportunities can engaging with collaborative processes of designing offer for both designing and anthropological research inquiry simultaneously?

Between Vision and Reality: A Study of Scientists’ Views on Citizen Science

“…The main methods used for this study were personal interviews and participant observations (Gunn and Logstrup 2014). We chose to conduct qualitative research because of its exceptional data richness and ability to provide deep insight into the practices, motivations, and attitudes of the group of interest.…”

Are retailers “bagging” the carrier bag levy in England? An exploratory enquiry

“…Scholars in different fields including environment and management support the use of observations as a form of research methodology (see for instance: Oliver and Eales, 2008;Tedlock, 2000). Gunn and Løgstrup (2014) assert that observation is a way to produce constructive critic while Oliver and Eales (2008) perceive observation as an approach to provide insights about the organization and to identify the actual problems faced at the specified time and situation. Through observations, a researcher can have a deeper understanding of the phenomena being investigated (Tedlock, 2000).…”

Cross-boundary and cross-discipline creation of scientific knowledge. The case of economic anthropology/ business ethnography

“…This approach was far from the positivist model of creating objective knowledge based on quantified tools. On the contrary, it assumed subjective analysis and intensive observation of the research subject in its natural environment (Barnard 2006; Barth et al 2007;Beach, Gobo, Jeffrey, Smyth & Troman 2004;Gunn & Loegstrup 2014;Hann 2009;Herzfeld 2004;Ulin 1991;Wilk & Cliggett 2011).…”