Abstract
This chapter presents the methodological rationale for the empirical investigation presented in Part II. The core claim is that the analytical approach developed in the book requires a methodological focus on specific aspects of group dynamics, such as the inter-evaluative practices (methods) used by the members of a community to override heterogeneity and constitute consensus and social reality. Particular attention is given to three areas of social interactions within online bereavement communities of women after perinatal loss: how individual subjective accounts of the experience of perinatal loss are evaluated by other community members; how, because of this inter-evaluation dynamics, individuals modify their own accounts and align to the emerging group normative standards; which new linguistic categories emerge from the interactions and allow for the ontological grounding of—and thus legitimizing—the women’s feelings of loss and grief. It also details the methods of data sourcing, and the approach adopted to data analysis based on a digital ethnography guided by the methodological focus developed as an intrinsic structuralist position.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For the development of these particular areas of focus we have taken inspiration from Barnes’ understanding of the key elements underpinning the formation of groups as status groups (Barnes passim in the bibliography).
- 2.
For ethical reasons we do not provide links to the data sources. Although being able to access the original data would probably enable readers to make their own observations, we are convinced that in the case of a scientific investigation into sensitive experiences, the priority is to protect the identities of the individuals whose experiences are considered.
- 3.
We do not provide the users’ real names or nicknames. The names given in the text that follows are pseudonyms that we invented for each individual we quote.
- 4.
F1 was composed of 479 individual entries, F2 of 492 entries, F3 of 374 entries.
- 5.
We assume that there is an important difference between individual users of the forums and individuals who agree to become moderators. The latter are also informal representatives and ‘spokespersons’ of their group. This assumption was confirmed by the interviewees themselves; in the interviews they stated that it was important for them to participate in both research about miscarriage and media campaigns on this topic, because their organization aims at broadening public consciousness of the emotional experiences of parents who have suffered perinatal loss.
Bibliography
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Heritage, J. (2008 [1984]). Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rafanell, I., Sawicka, M. (2020). Methodology and Methods of Data Collection. In: Emotions in Digital Interactions. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21998-7_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21998-7_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-21997-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-21998-7
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)