This article is concerned with methodological issues arising from a retrospective partially insider study of a divorce support website. I argue that, while we need to conduct detailed retrospective studies into the development of online communities, such studies bring methodological challenges, due to their retrospective nature, the potential size of the data set, and the problems of dealing with past manifestations of sites that continue to function. After an introduction to online and offline ethnography and insider/outsider researcher positioning, I discuss my hybrid insider/outsider status with respect to the research site. I focus in particular on researcher positioning, field entry and delimitation, public/private boundaries, ethical issues, and questions of time with respect to carrying out retrospective online studies while maintaining an ongoing real-time engagement with a research site.
AckerS (2000) In/out/side: positioning the researcher in feminist research. Resources for Feminist Research28(1–2): 189–210.
2.
BallSJ (1990) Self-doubt and soft data: social and technical trajectories in ethnographic fieldwork. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education3(2): 157–171.
3.
BarakABoniel-NissinMSulerJ (2008) Fostering empowerment in online support groups. Computers in Human Behavior24: 1867–1883.
BeaulieuA (2004) Mediating ethnography: objectivity and the making of ethnographies of the internet. Social Epistemology18(2): 139–163.
6.
BerryDM (2004) Internet research: privacy, ethics and alienation: an open source approach. Internet Research14(4): 323–332.
7.
BreenLJ (2007) The researcher ‘in the middle’: negotiating the insider/outsider dichotomy. Australian Community Psychologist19(1): 163–174.
8.
CouldryN (2008) Mediatization or mediation? Alternative understandings of the emergent space of digital storytelling. New Media and Society10(3): 373–391.
DwyerSCBuckleJL (2009) The space between: on being an insider-outsider in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods8(1): 54–63.
11.
EllisC (2011) Autoethnography: an overview. Forum: Qualitative Social Research12(1): Article 10.
12.
EppleyK (2006) Review Essay: ‘David Weaver-Zercher (ed) (2005) Writing the Amish: the worlds of John A. Hostetler’. Forum: Qualitative Social Research7(3): Article 16.
13.
EssC (2009) Internet research ethics. In: JoinsonAMcKennaKPostnessT. (eds) Oxford Handbook of Internet Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 487–502.
14.
FayardA-LDeSanctisG (2005) Evolution of an online forum for knowledge management professionals: a language game approach. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication10(4): Article 2.
15.
ForseyM (2010) Ethnography and the myth of participant observation. Studies in Qualitative Methodology11: 65–79.
16.
HalsteadFR (1996) The effects on staff morale of a change of leadership and period of industrial dispute in a secondary school. PhD Thesis, School of Education, The Open University, UK.
17.
HammersleyMAtkinsonP (2007) Ethnography: Principles in Practice. London: Routledge.
18.
HineC (2005) Internet research and the sociology of cyber-social-scientific knowledge. The Information Society21: 239–248.
19.
HineC (2008) Virtual ethnography: modes, varieties, affordances. In: FieldingNGLeeRBlankG (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Online Research Methods. London: Sage, 257–270.
20.
HodkinsonP (2005) ‘Insider research’ in the study of youth cultures. Journal of Youth Studies8(2): 131–149.
21.
HowardPN (2002) Network ethnography and the hypermedia organization: new media, new organizations, new methods. New Media and Society4(4): 550–574.
22.
HumphreyC (2007) Insider-outsider: activating the hyphen. Action Research5(1): 11–26.
23.
KevalHC (2009) Negotiating constructions of ‘insider’/‘outsider’ status and explaining the significance of dis/connections. Enquire4: 51–72.
24.
KozinetsRV (2010) Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. London: Sage.
25.
LabareeRV (2002) The risk of ‘going observationalist’: negotiating the hidden dilemmas of being an insider participant observer. Qualitative Research2(1): 97–122.
26.
LangerRBeckmanSC (2005) Sensitive research topics: netnography revisited. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal8(2): 189–203.
27.
MadgeCO’ConnorH (2002) Online with e-mums: exploring the internet as a medium for research. Area34(1): 92–102.
28.
MannCStewartF (2000) Internet Communication and Qualitative Research: A Handbook for Researching Online. London: Sage.
29.
MarkhamA (2004) Representation in online ethnographies: a matter of context sensitivity. In: ChenS-IHallJJohnsM (eds) Online Social Research: Methods, Issues and Ethics. New York: Peter Lang, 131–145.
30.
MarkhamA (2005) The methods, politics and ethics of representation in online ethnography. In: DenzinNKLincolnY (eds) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. 3rd ed.London: Sage, 793–820.
31.
MelroseM (2002) Labour pains: some considerations on the difficulties of researching juvenile prostitution. International Journal of Social Research Methodology5(4): 333–351.
32.
NonneckeBAndrewsDPreeceJ (2006) Non-public and public online community participation: needs, attitudes and behavior. Election Commerce Research6: 7–20.
33.
PerrymanJ (2011) The return of the native: the blurred boundaries of insider/outsider research in an English secondary school. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education24(7): 857–874 (ifirst article).
34.
ShoemakerDW (2009) Self-exposure and the exposure of the self: informational privacy and the presentation of identity. Ethics and Information Technology12: 3–15.
35.
TaylorJ (2011) The intimate insider: negotiating the ethics of friendship when doing insider research. Qualitative Research11(1): 3–22.
36.
ThomsenSRStroubhaarJDBolyardDM (1998) Ethnomethodology and the study of online communities: exploring the cyber streets. Information Research4(1).
37.
WattsJ (2006) ‘The outsider within’: dilemmas of qualitative feminist research within a culture of resistance. Qualitative Research6(3): 385–402.
38.
ZimmerM (2010) ‘But the data is already public’: on the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics and Information Technology12: 313–325.
