Brown, B. & Laurier, E. 2017. The trouble with autopilots: Assisted and autonomous driving on the social road. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 416–429. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025462
Laurier, E. (2016). YouTube: fragments of a video‐tropic atlas. Area, 48: 488-495. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12157
Machines, E. (2020). Visual network analysis with Gephi. Medium. https://medium.com/@EthnographicMachines/visual-network-analysis-with-gephi-d6241127a336
Machines, E. (2020). Mapping controversies with digital methods: Scrapers, crawlers, APIs. Medium. https://medium.com/@EthnographicMachines/mapping-controversies-with-digital-methods-scrapers-crawlers-apis-17e0c96c340a
Zhang, S., Zhao, B. & Ventrella, J. (2018). Towards an ethnographic-archaeological approach to big data: rethinking data veracity. Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference Proceedings, 2018 (1), 62-85. https://doi.org/10.1111/1559-8918.2018.01197
Marres, N. (2015). Why map issues? On controversy analysis as a digital method. Science, Technology, & Human Values 40(5), 655–686. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915574602
Marres, N. (2017). Digital sociology: The reinvention of social research. Polity. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Digital+Sociology:+The+Reinvention+of+Social+Research-p-9780745684789
Rogers, R. (2019). Doing digital methods (1st edition). SAGE Publications. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/doing-digital-methods/book261134
Moats, D. (2019). Following the Fukushima Disaster on (and against) Wikipedia: A methodological note about STS research and online platforms. Science, Technology, & Human Values 44(6), 938–964. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243918815234
Latour, B., Jensen, P., Venturini, T., Grauwin, S. & Boullier, D. (2012). The whole is always smaller than its parts. The British Journal of Sociology 63, 590-615. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2012.01428.x
Burgess, J. & Matamoros-Fernández, A. (2016). Mapping sociocultural controversies across digital media platforms: one week of #gamergate on Twitter, YouTube, and Tumblr. Communication Research and Practice, 2(1), 79-96, https://doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2016.1155338
Elgaard Jensen, T., Kleberg Hansen, A. K., Ulijaszek, S., Munk, A. K., Madsen, A. K., Hillersdal, L., & Jespersen, A. P. (2019). Identifying notions of environment in obesity research using a mixed-methods approach. Obesity Reviews 20(4), 621–630. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.12807
Blok, A. & Pedersen, M. A. (2014). Complementary social science? Quali-quantitative experiments in a Big Data world. Big Data & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951714543908
Hjorth, L., Horst, H. A., Galloway, A., & Bell, G. (Eds.). (2017). The Routledge companion to digital ethnography. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. https://www.routledge.com/The-Routledge-Companion-to-Digital-Ethnography/Hjorth-Horst-Galloway-Bell/p/book/9780367873585
Kozinets, R. V. (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
Martin, B. & Hanington, B. (2018). The pocket universal methods of design: 100 ways to research complex problems, develop innovative ideas and design effective solutions. http://lib.myilibrary.com?id=1050618
Kara, H. (2015). Creative research methods in the social sciences: A practical guide. Bristol: Bristol University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1t88xn4
Pink, S. (2009). Doing sensory ethnography. Sage Publications. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/doing-sensory-ethnography/book242776
MacLeod, H., Jelen, B., Prabhakar, A., Oehlberg, L., Siek K., & Connelly, K. (2016). Asynchronous remote communities (ARC) for researching distributed populations. In Proceedings of the 10th EAI International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare (PervasiveHealth ’16). ICST (Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering), Brussels, BEL, 1–8. Read more…
Sugie, N. F. (2018). Utilizing smartphones to study disadvantaged and hard-to-reach groups. Sociological Methods & Research, 47(3), 458–491. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124115626176
Kaye, L., Monk, R., & Hamlin, I. (2018). “Feeling appy?”: Using app-based methodology to explore contextual effects on real-time cognitions, affect and behaviours. In C. Costa, & J. Condie (Eds.), Doing research in and on the digital: Research methods across fields of inquiry, 11-29. https://www.routledge.com/Doing-Research-In-and-On-the-Digital-Research-Methods-across-Fields-of/Costa-Condie/p/book/9781138673915
Kaufmann, K., & Peil, C. (2020). The mobile instant messaging interview (MIMI): Using WhatsApp to enhance self-reporting and explore media usage in situ. Mobile Media & Communication, 8(2), 229–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157919852392
Boase, J., & Humphreys, L. (2018). Mobile methods: Explorations, innovations, and reflections. Mobile Media & Communication, 6(2), 153–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157918764215
Roller, M. R. (2020). Focus groups: Moving to the online face-to-face mode. Research Design Review. https://researchdesignreview.com/2020/03/16/focus-groups-moving-online-face-to-face-mode/
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2015). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (5th edition). SAGE. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/focus-groups/book243860