Sarah Rüller
Konstantin Aal
Norah Abokhodair
Alan Borning
Abstract
This SIG delves into the multifaceted dynamics of conducting ethnographic research in volatile environments marked by political unrest, conflict, economic or natural disasters. Our aim is to start nuanced discussions to critically examine the ethical, methodological, and psychological challenges of conducting research in these environments. We discuss the adaptation of ethnographic methods to prioritize safety for participants and researchers, emphasizing ethical and moral considerations in unstable environments. We will explore the impact of researchers’ presence in sensitive environments, focusing on establishing relationships, understanding, and respecting local customs, and minimizing disturbance to the community. Moreover, we address the emotional burden borne by both researchers and participants, sharing strategies for building resilience and managing secondary trauma. Using real-life case studies, this SIG aims to provide an in-depth exploration of the practical challenges and ethical dilemmas, sharing insightful lessons and valuable perspectives to ethnographers, enhancing their approach to research in such demanding contexts.
1 MOTIVATION AND BACKGROUND
The "Ethnography at the Edge: Exploring Research Dynamics in Crisis and Conflict Areas" SIG inaugurates an important and timely discussion within the Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) community. As ethnographic approaches become integral to HCI and technology design, especially in an era where technology increasingly intersects with global sociopolitical environments, the need to understand and address the unique challenges of conducting research in crisis and conflict zones has never been more pressing. This SIG aims to provide a platform for researchers, practitioners, and academics to explore the intricacies of ethnographic work in these complex environments, focusing on understanding the ethical, methodological and psychological aspects that are often overlooked and/or under explored in traditional settings.
Our aim is to explore the multifaceted nature of ethnographic research in areas of instability and conflict. We seek to unpack the ’messiness’ inherent in such fieldwork, including navigating ethical dilemmas, adapting research methods to fluid and often dangerous contexts, and addressing the emotional toll on both researchers and participants. This SIG is more than a platform for sharing experiences and best practices; it represents an opportunity for collaborative innovation in developing new methodologies and approaches that can enhance the effectiveness and integrity of ethnographic research in these challenging settings.
By bringing together a diverse group of participants, each bringing unique experiences and perspectives, we aim to foster a dialogue that will enrich the broader discourse on ethnography in HCI. Through constructive discussions, we will address issues related to the physical and mental safety of both researchers and participants, ethical practices in data collection, and navigating the complex dynamics of power and authority in conflict zones. The insights and strategies shared and co-developed in this SIG aim to equip researchers with the essential tools and knowledge necessary to conduct nuanced and influential research in some of the world’s most demanding environments.
The history of ethnography is complex. While an invaluable research approach for understanding people and cultures, it has also been misused as a tool of colonialism and exploitation, relying on problematic claims of detached objectivity and neutrality [4].
In recent decades, ethnography has become increasingly important in computer science and human-computer interaction research [1, 2, 6, 7, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17]. With the increasing complexity and pervasiveness of technology since the 1990s, quantitative methods proved insufficient to fully understand socio-technical contexts. Ethnography offered a qualitative, holistic alternative attuned to the complexity of the real world. By the 2000s, ethnographic approaches were well established in HCI and interaction design [5].
Recently, more and more researchers share reflections on ethnography and lessons learned from their research [3, 15]. With this SIG, we aim at contributing to this trend.
2 PREVIOUS WORKSHOPS
This SIG represents a significant progression in the ongoing dialogue on the inherent ’messiness’ of ethnographic research. Building on the foundation established by previous events, which have explored various aspects of conducting ethnographic fieldwork, this SIG introduces a novel and contemporary perspective by focusing specifically on the distinct challenges and complexities of conducting research within the volatile environments of crisis and conflict zones. By doing so, it enriches the discourse with new insights and experiences, shedding light on the dynamic and often unpredictable nature of ethnography in such demanding and sensitive environments. The aim is to broaden the understanding of ethnographic practices and methodologies when applied to these critical and often overlooked settings, and to make valuable contributions to the field. In contrast to previous workshop [9, 13, 14] and session formats ( https://messy-ethnography.org), we want to try a shorter and more focused format for two main reasons. First, our experience is that it can be easy to get lost in conversations that are certainly valuable and much needed when there is plenty of time, but it can be harder to end with concrete outcomes. Second, and more importantly: We want to keep the threshold low. In both workshops we had last minute expressions of interest and did our best to accommodate them. Given the thematic nature of this SIG, we want to invite anyone who wants to join these conversations without having to submit a position paper before the conference - and this is especially important these days as the world faces ongoing war, injustice, and natural disasters.
2.1 ECSCW 2020
The workshop at the ECSCW conference in 2020 focused on the topic of “Coping with Messiness in Ethnography” and focused on methods, ethics, and participation. Ethnography, described as a ’messy’ methodology by Nimmo ([10]), relies on the interpretative skills of researchers immersed in complex social environments. It favored an inductive approach, focusing on the phenomenological experiences of subjects rather than predefined analytic categories. This approach has been integrated into HCI and CSCW research for over 30 years [8], utilizing a range of field techniques like note-taking, audio/video recordings, interviews, and participant observation. This method aims to produce a detailed and rich portrayal of life within the research domain, building on trust and interaction between researchers and participants.
Recent fieldwork by the workshop authors in diverse global locations, including Morocco, Botswana, Palestine, and Iran, underscores the challenges of ethnographic research. While activities are pre-planned and ethically approved, they often require on-the-ground adaptations due to changing situations. The process of collecting ’thick’ data is demanding, involving a wide range of potential methods and needing flexibility to suit specific circumstances. Additionally, ensuring the reliability, accuracy, and verifiability of the collected data is a crucial part of this scientific endeavor.
2.2 CHI 2021
The second workshop at CHI 2021 addressed the issue of “Authority, Bias and Immersion in Ethnographic Fieldwork in the Non-Western World”. The integration of ethnography into human-computer interaction (HCI) and technology design is increasingly recognized for its ability to provide a rich, grounded understanding of diverse local contexts. This workshop focused on the challenges and complexities of conducting ethnographic fieldwork in non-Western settings, an area of growing interest as HCI extends its reach to more diverse populations and environments. Key to ethnography is the researcher’s immersion in the cultural context and practices of their study, a process that requires a careful balance between maintaining a critical, reflective stance and avoiding potential biases. This immersion raises questions about the role of the researcher, the influence of their presence and the nature of the data collected.
The workshop aimed to address methodological and design biases in translating user needs and experiences, particularly in the context of the authority that researchers and participants hold within organizations and policy systems. Challenges arise in maintaining and re-establishing ethnographic authority, especially in non-Western and politically unstable contexts where researchers often use their identity strategically. This initiative seeks to shed light on the ’messy’ aspects of ethnography that have not yet been fully explored in the CHI community.
2.3 4S 2023
In November 2023, an open panel titled "Acknowledging and Embracing the Complexities of Conducting Ethnography: Navigating the Notions of Messiness in the Field" was held as part of the annual meeting of the Society for Social Studies of Science (4S). Participants gave presentations and shared insights into their struggles to identify and gain access to research sites, and to establish trust and accountability after long-term presence in research fields.
3 SIG AIMS & STRUCTURE
This SIG is dedicated to situate HCI research conducted in crisis and conflict zones within the broader field of ethnography. We aim to connect ethnography, HCI, and technology design, emphasizing the growing importance of ethnographic methods in these overlapping fields. In an era where technology intertwines with global sociopolitical issues, understanding and skillfully navigating the unique challenges of research in crisis and conflict zones is essential.
Our approach includes a comprehensive discussion of several issues that have implications for conducting research in highly challenging research settings. Key themes include navigating ethical complexities in crisis environments, adapting methodologies under duress, and managing the psychological well-being of both researchers and participants.
We will tackle the heightened ethical dilemmas, focusing on the nuances of informed consent and participant safety. We will also examine methodological adaptations, such as remote data collection and non-intrusive observation techniques, assessing their efficacy in unstable or dangerous environments. Another significant aspect of this discussion will be the emotional and psychological impact of conducting research in conflict zones. We will share strategies for managing and coping with stress, trauma, and the intense emotional demands of these settings. Emphasizing the importance of cultural sensitivity and the establishment of local partnerships and collaborations, we will explore how to foster trust and rapport in these environments.
The SIG will also delve into real-world case studies, cultural competence, and the broader ethical responsibilities of researchers. We will explore strategies for the dissemination of research findings in a sensitive manner and discuss how this research can contribute to policy development and positive change.
By bringing together a diverse group of researchers and practitioners, this SIG seeks to foster rich dialogue, exchange best practices, and cultivate a deeper understanding of the unique challenges of conducting HCI research in crisis and conflict settings. Our goal is to not only discuss these challenges but also to contribute to the development of innovative solutions and methodologies that enhance the effectiveness and integrity of ethnographic research in these critical areas.
3.1 Themes
The following themes are starting points for further discussion. Each of them has a different angle when working with stakeholders in crisis and conflict zones. After a brief introduction, participants will reflect on their own work and present best practices or ideas in smaller groups. At the end, each group will present their discussion and takeaways.
Ethical Complexities and Participant Safety: This theme centers on the critical exploration of heightened ethical challenges in crisis settings. Emphasis is placed on how ethnographers can conduct research in an ethical and secure manner within crisis or conflict zones. This includes dissecting the intricacies of obtaining informed consent in volatile situations, ensuring the safety of both participants and researchers, and the moral implications inherent in undertaking research in such volatile settings.
Methodological Adaptations: Explore how traditional ethnographic methods need to be adapted in crisis settings. This may include remote data collection techniques, the use of digital communication tools, or finding non-intrusive ways to observe and interact with participants under stress or in danger.
Invisible Emotional Work/labor: Reflect on working as a group in challenging settings, where the group frequently serves a dual role - as a collaborative unit and as a support network. Here emotional work is crucial to better cope with the experiences, but often unseen by others.
Psychological Impact on Researchers and Participants: Addressing the profound emotional and psychological repercussions experienced by those engaged in research within conflict zones is a key theme. It underscores the necessity of developing and implementing effective strategies for coping with stress and fostering emotional resilience. Including dealing with and mitigating secondary trauma, and providing robust support for research participants. The aim is to cultivate a supportive and empathetic research environment that acknowledges and actively responds to the psychological demands of working in such intense and emotionally charged settings.
Impact of Researcher Presence: Consider the impact that a researcher’s presence in a conflict zone may have. This includes understanding how a researcher might influence the environment, the ethical implications of such influence, and how to minimize disruption while maximizing understanding.
Building Trust in Sensitive Environments: Discuss strategies for building trust with participants in conflict zones. This could include understanding local customs and norms, working with local mediators, and the long-term process of building trust in crisis-affected communities.
4 SIG NEXT STEPS
As we look to the future of this SIG, our next steps are focused on maintaining and expanding the dialogue initiated during our meetings. The starting point for ongoing discussions will be the establishment of a dedicated online community using tools such as a mailing list and SharePoint. These platforms will serve as a hub for ongoing interaction, allowing members to share insights, resources and updates, fostering a collaborative and supportive environment. In addition to these online tools, we plan to organize events at various conferences in the future. These events will not only provide opportunities to engage with new researchers and expand our network but will also ensure that our discussions remain dynamic and evolving. To reach a wider audience and cement the importance of our work, we are also considering the publication of a special issue in a relevant academic journal. This special issue will encapsulate the key findings and discussions of our SIG, extend the conversation to a wider academic community, and invite contributions that reflect the diverse and multifaceted nature of conducting research in crisis and conflict zones. Through these initiatives, we aim to maintain the momentum of our SIG and make a lasting impact in the field.
- Konstantin Aal, Sarah Rüller, Peter Tolmie, and Volker Wulf. 2023. The orchestration of activist events: Making protests heard (and seen). Global Media Coverage of the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: Reporting the Sheikh Jarrah Evictions (2023), 139.Google Scholar
- Miglė Bareikytė and Yarden Skop. 2022. Archiving the Present. Critical Data Practices During Russia’s War in Ukraine. Sociologica 16, 2 (2022), 199–215.Google Scholar
- Nina Boulus-Rødje. 2018. Stuck with my body at Qalandiya checkpoint: Reflections upon conducting fieldwork in an uncertain field site. In SAGE Research Methods Cases: Part 2. SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
- J. Clifford. 1986. Introduction: Partial truths. In Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography, J. Clifford and G. E. Marcus (Eds.). 1–26.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andy Crabtree. 2003. Designing collaborative systems: A practical guide to ethnography. Vol. 200. Springer.Google Scholar
- Andy Crabtree and Tom Rodden. 2002. Ethnography and design. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on “Interpretive” Approaches to Information Systems and Computing Research. Citeseer, 70–74.Google Scholar
- Houda Elmimouni, Yarden Skop, Norah Abokhodair, Sarah Rüller, Konstantin Aal, Anne Weibert, Adel Al-Dawood, Volker Wulf, and Peter Tolmie. 2024. Shielding or Silencing?: An Investigation into Content Moderation during the Sheikh Jarrah Crisis. In Proceedings of the 2025 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP). ACM New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mark-Anthony Falzon. 2016. Multi-sited ethnography: Theory, praxis and locality in contemporary research. Routledge.Google Scholar
- Marios Mouratidis, Sarah Rüller, Konstantin Aal, Shaimaa Lazem, Anicia Peters, Nina Boulus-Rødje, Simon Holdermann, Vasilis Vlachokyriakos, Ann Light, Dave Randall, 2021. Coping with Messiness in Ethnography: Authority, Bias and Immersion in ethnographic Fieldwork in the non-Western World. In Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–5.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Richie Nimmo. 2011. Actor-network theory and methodology: Social research in a more-than-human world. Methodological Innovations Online 6, 3 (2011), 108–119.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David Randall, Richard Harper, and Mark Rouncefield. 2007. Fieldwork for design: theory and practice. Springer.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Markus Rohde, Konstantin Aal, Kaoru Misaki, Dave Randall, Anne Weibert, and Volker Wulf. 2016. Out of Syria: Mobile media in use at the time of civil war. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 32, 7 (2016), 515–531.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sarah Rueller, Konstantin Aal, Marios Mouratidis, Dave Randall, Volker Wulf, Nina Boulus-Rødje, and Bryan Semaan. 2020. (Coping with) Messiness in Ethnography–Methods, Ethics and Participation in ethnographic Field Work in the non-Western World. (2020).Google Scholar
- Sarah Rüller, Konstantin Aal, Marios Mouratidis, and Volker Wulf. 2020. Messy Fieldwork: A Natural Necessity or a Result of Western Origins and Perspectives?. In Companion Publication of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 185–190.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jenny Waycott, Greg Wadley, Stefan Schutt, Arthur Stabolidis, and Reeva Lederman. 2015. The Challenge of Technology Research in Sensitive Settings: Case Studies in ’Sensitive HCI’. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Australian Special Interest Group for Computer Human Interaction. 240–249.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Volker Wulf, Konstantin Aal, Ibrahim Abu Kteish, Meryem Atam, Kai Schubert, Markus Rohde, George P Yerousis, and David Randall. 2013. Fighting against the wall: Social media use by political activists in a Palestinian village. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1979–1988.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Volker Wulf, Dave Randall, Konstantin Aal, and Markus Rohde. 2022. The Personal is the Political: Internet filtering and Counter Appropriation in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 31, 2 (2022), 373–409.Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Ethnography at the Edge: Exploring Research Dynamics in Crisis and Conflict Areas
Recommendations
Who is “I”?: Subjectivity and Ethnography in HCI
CHI '24: Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsHCI research applies ethnographic methods to understand and represent practices that involve the use of interactive systems. A subdomain of this work is interpretivist ethnography, which positions the researcher's perspectival view [37] as central to ...
Ethnography, CSCW and Ethnomethodology
AbstractThis paper documents some details and some examples of the influence of ethnomethodological work in the fieldwork tradition associated with European CSCW; in particular what has been termed ‘ethnomethodologically informed ethnography’. In so doing,...
Design ethnography in information systems
Until recently, most ethnographic research in information systems has been based on the traditional anthropological model of ethnography. In this traditional model of ethnography, one of the most important data-gathering techniques is participant ...
Comments