The global research community has identified that, as society becomes ever more mobile and 24/7-oriented, data collection methods that reflect the day-to-day experiences of its participants need to be developed. This article reviews the success and issues of using a solicited email-diary, developed to investigate the impact on commuters of London hosting the 2012 Olympic Games. Research on the effectiveness of diaries as a method of data collection is limited, while there appears to be no analysis using email as a method of soliciting diary responses. The article identifies the research opportunities for an email-diary and the solutions it provides to a number of the problems and limitations experienced with a traditional pen-and-paper diary.
AlaszewskiA (2006) Using Diaries for Social Research. London: Sage.
2.
BarrettLBarrettD (2001) An introduction to computerized experience sampling in psychology. Social Science Computer Review19: 175–185.
3.
BellL (1998) Public and private meanings in diaries: researching family and childcare. In: RibbensJEdwardsR (eds) Feminist Dilemmas in Qualitative Research: Public Knowledge and Private Lives. London: Sage.
4.
BolgerNDavisARafaeliE (2003) Diary methods: capturing life as it is lived. Annual Review of Psychology54: 579–616.
DabbsJStrongRMilunR (1997) Exploring the mind of testosterone: a beeper study. Journal of Research in Personality31: 577–587.
8.
DayMThatcherJ (2009) ‘I’m really embarrassed that you’re going to read this …’: reflections on using diaries in qualitative research. Qualitative Research in Psychology6: 249–259.
9.
DenscombeM (2010) The Good Research Guide: For Small-Scale Social Research Projects (4th ed.). Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill International.
10.
DuckS (1991) Diaries and logs. In: MontgomeryBMDuckS (eds) Studying Interpersonal Interaction. New York: Guilford Press.
Easterby-SmithMThorpeRLoweA (2002) Management Research: An Introduction. London: Sage.
13.
ElliottH (1997) The use of diaries in sociological research on health experience. Sociological Research Online2(2). Available at: http://www.socresonline.org.uk/2/2/7 (accessed 10 November 2014).
14.
EvansAElfordJWigginsD (2008) Using the Internet for qualitative research. In: WilligCStainton-RogersW (eds) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology. London: Sage.
15.
FinkA (1995) How to Sample in Surveys. London: Sage.
GeertzC (1973) The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books.
18.
GuillénMFSuárezSL (2005) Explaining the global digital divide: economic, political and sociological drivers of cross-national Internet use. Social Forces84(2): 681–708.
19.
HagenPRobertsonTKanMSadlerK (2005) Emerging research methods for understanding mobile technology use. Proceedings of OZCHI 2005, Canberra, Australia.
20.
HargittaiE (2010) Digital na (t) ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the ‘net generation’. Sociological Inquiry80(1): 92–113.
21.
HargittaiEShaferS (2006) Differences in actual and perceived online skills: the role of gender. Social Science Quarterly87(2): 432–448.
22.
HannaP (2012) Using Internet technologies (such as Skype) as a research medium: a research note. Qualitative Research12(2): 239–242.
JacelonCSImperioK (2005) Participant diaries as a source of data in research with older adults. Qualitative Health Research15(7): 991–997.
27.
KeleherHMVerrinderGK (2003) Health diaries in a rural Australian study. Journal of Qualitative Health Research13(3): 435–443.
28.
KelleherZHallH (2005) Response to risk experts and end-user perspectives on email security, and the role of the business information professional in policy development. Business Information Review22(1): 46–52.
29.
KenyonS (2006) The ‘accessibility diary’: discussing a new methodological approach to understand the impact of Internet use upon personal travel and activity participation. Journal of Transport Geography14: 123–134.
30.
KrosnickJ (1999) Survey research. Annual Review of Psychology50: 537–567.
31.
La PorteRMontoyeHCaspersenJ (1985) Assessment of physical activity in epidemiologic research problems and prospects. Public Health Reports100(2): 131–146.
32.
LeviAKoçÇK (2001) Inside risks: risks in email security. Communications of the ACM-Association for Computing Machinery-CACM44(8): 112.
33.
LinesG (1998) A case study of adolescent media consumption during the summer of sport 1996. In: MerkelULinesGMcDonaldI (eds) The Production and Consumption of Sport Cultures: Leisure, Culture and Commerce. Brighton: LSA.
34.
LingRS (2012) Taken for Grantedness: The Embedding of Mobile Communication into Society. London: MIT Press.
35.
LittMCooneyNMorseP (1998) Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) with treated alcoholics: methodological problems and potential solutions. Health Psychology17: 48–52.
36.
LynnP (2002) Principles of sampling. In: GreenfieldT (ed) Research Methods for Postgraduates (2nd ed.). London: Arnold.
37.
McLarenRMSolomonDH (2010) Appraisal and distancing responses to hurtful messages II: a diary study of dating partners and friends. Communication Research Reports27(3): 193–206.
38.
MadgeJ (1953) The Tools of Social Science. London: Allen and Unwin.
39.
MilliganCBingleyAGatrellA (2005) Digging deep: using diary techniques to explore the place of health and well-being amongst older people. Social Science and Medicine61(9): 1882–1892.
40.
MurryL (2009) Looking at and looking back: visualization in mobile research. Qualitative Research9(4): 469–488.
41.
MorrisonDLeighBGillmoreM (1999) Daily data collection: a comparison of three methods. Journal of Sex Research36: 76–81.
PattersonA (2005) Processes, relationships, settings, products and consumers: the case for qualitative diary research. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal8(2): 142–156.
44.
PeterJValkenburgPM (2006) Research note: individual differences in perceptions of Internet communication. European Journal of Communication21(2): 213–226.
45.
PrenskyM (2001) Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon9(5): 1–6.
RappaportJStewartE (1997) A critical look at critical psychology: elaborating the questions. In: FoxDPrilleltenskyI (eds) Critical Psychology: An Introduction. London: Sage.
48.
SelwynN (2006) Digital division or digital decision? A study of non-users and low-users of computers. Poetics34(4): 273–292.
StoneAShiffmanSSchwartzJ. (2003) Patient compliance with paper and electronic diaries. Controlled Clinical Trials24(2): 182–199.
51.
TangJCMatthewsTCerrutiJ. (2009) Global differences in attributes of email usage. In: Proceedings of the 2009 International Workshop on Intercultural Collaboration, Palo Alto, CA, 20–21 February. New York: ACM, 185–194.
52.
ThomsonRHollandJ (2005) Thanks for the memory: memory books as a methodological resource in biographical research. Qualitative Research5(2): 201–209.
53.
Van DijkJ (1999) The Network Society: Social Aspects of New Media. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54.
VerbruggeL (1980) Health diaries. Medical Care18: 73–95.
55.
WheelerLReisHT (1991) Self-recording of everyday life events: origins, types, and uses. Journal of Personality59: 339–354.
56.
WhiteGWPearsonSJ (2001) Controlling corporate e-mail, PC use and computer security. Information Management & Computer Security9(2): 88–92.
57.
ZillienNHargittaiE (2009) Digital distinction: status-specific types of Internet usage. Social Science Quarterly90(2): 274–291.
