An open educational resource for doing netnography in the digital arts and humanities

Abstract

As a part of the DiMPAH-project, the authors have developed an open educational resource (OER) on netnography. In this paper, the OER is presented and critically discussed as the broader problem identified during course-development is made explicit and explored through two research questions: 1) How can an OER be designed that positions netnography as a viable methodology for the digital humanities? 2) How can an OER be designed that theoretically and methodologically combines both quantitative and qualitative approaches for doing netnography? An up-to-date theoretical overview of netnography as a methodology for studying social experiences online is provided. Methodological considerations are presented, aimed for sensitizing students to nuances of active (participatory) and passive (non-participatory) netnography through two analytical concepts. The OER is presented through three case studies and a learning scenario offering flexible and authentic technology-integrated learning. Netnography is found to contribute to the digital humanities, overall characterized by method-driven and quantitative approaches, with reflexivity and a potential for critical research and pedagogy. The two analytical concepts community-based netnography and consociality-based netnography allow for a nuanced methodological understanding of how and when qualitative and quantitative approaches should be employed, and how they may complement each other.

Full text

Education for Information 39 (2023) 155–172 155
DOI 10.3233/EFI-230024
IOS Press
An open educational resource for doing netnography in
the digital arts and humanities
Fredrik Hanella,∗and Pernilla Jonsson Seversonb
aDepartment of Cultural Sciences, Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden
bDepartment of Media and Journalism, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden
As a part of the DiMPAH-project, the authors have developed an open educational resource (OER) on
netnography. In this paper, the OER is presented and critically discussed as the broader problem identified
during course-development is made explicit and explored through two research questions: 1) How can an
OER be designed that positions netnography as a viable methodology for the digital humanities? 2) How
can an OER be designed that theoretically and methodologically combines both quantitative and qualitative
approaches for doing netnography?
An up-to-date theoretical overview of netnography as a methodology for studying social experiences
online is provided. Methodological considerations are presented, aimed for sensitizing students to nuances
of active (participatory) and passive (non-participatory) netnography through two analytical concepts.
The OER is presented through three case studies and a learning scenario offering flexible and authentic
technology-integrated learning. Netnography is found to contribute to the digital humanities, overall
characterized by method-driven and quantitative approaches, with reflexivity and a potential for critical
research and pedagogy. The two analytical concepts community-based netnography and consociality-
based netnography allow for a nuanced methodological understanding of how and when qualitative and
quantitative approaches should be employed, and how they may complement each other.
Keywords: Netnography, open educational resources, methodology, community, consociality, digital
humanities
1. Introduction1
Today, it is almost a truism to state that digitalization affects all aspects of human
life. Digital technologies and digitally mediated communication are pervasive features
when we socialize, seek, and share information about politics or hobbies, work, go to
school or university etc. Netnography – ethnographic internet research – is a field of
research and a methodology for the qualitative study of digitally mediated interactions
∗
Corresponding author: Fredrik Hanell, Department of Cultural Sciences, Linnaeus University, 351 95
Växjö, Sweden. E-mail: fredrik.hanell@lnu.se.
1
This paper develops the notions of community-based and consociality-based netnography and the two
corresponding examples previously outlined in the short paper “Netnography: Two Methodological Issues
and the Consequences for Teaching and Practice” (Hanell & Severson, 2022) presented at the The 6th
Digital Humanities in the Nordic and Baltic Countries Conference (DHNB 2022).
0167-8329/$35.00 c
2023 – IOS Press. All rights reserved.

156 F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography
using a specific set of methods (Kozinets, 2010, 2015, 2020). The name netnogra-
phy is “a portmanteau combining network, Internet, and ethnography” (Kozinets,
2020, p. 6) and was coined by market researcher Robert V. Kozinets in the 1990s.
Essentially, netnography is based on two premises: first, that nearly all aspects of
our social interactions are to some extent digital nowadays, and second, that digitally
mediated interactions should be studied with methods suitable for researching digital
interactions. Netnography is a methodology for studying social experiences online,
or in other words, “online networks of social interaction and experience” (Kozinets,
2015, p. 100).
Since the 1990s, netnographic approaches have been employed to create new
knowledge about digital culture and digital society. Netnographic research spans
a spectrum of disciplines and empirical settings, but a general aim is knowledge
production that recognizes online social experiences. For example, netnographic
approaches are used to investigate the potential for social media brand communities
to develop a sense of both community and place amongst sports fans (Fenton et al.,
2021), and to study information literacy, affordances, and norms of learning in a
digital community at a pre-school teacher education (Hanell, 2020). Furthermore,
netnography is used to study interactions in a digital community of lesbian mothers
coping with postpartum depression (Alang & Fomotar, 2015). One defining feature
of these example studies is a focus on digital communities, a concept, and a point of
departure for netnographic research, we problematize and discuss in this paper.
For several years, we have taught Netnography and Social Network Analysis on a
Digital Humanities Master’s program method course. While talking about netnogra-
phy as a methodology during the most recent iteration of the course, several students
were intrigued to hear about qualitative approaches in the context of digital human-
ities as the students during the first two courses of the master’s program had only
encountered quantitative procedures. This anecdote illustrates issues that we have
encountered and reflected on as teachers and researchers interested in advancing
netnography as a methodology that combines qualitative and quantitative procedures
and arguing for how the netnographic methodology can interact with, and contribute
to, practices and research within the digital humanities.
As a part of the DiMPAH-project, the authors have developed an open educational
resource (OER) on netnography. The OER introduces the ethnographic perspective
that underpins netnography, key concepts such as digital communities and netno-
graphic fieldwork, approaches for producing and analyzing netnographic material,
and research ethics and legal aspects of importance for doing research in digital
settings. Discussing methodology, methods, and digital tools highlights both potential
and challenges for making netnography a viable methodology for the digital arts
and humanities. Designing the OER, two main issues have been identified as crucial
for the successful development of a pedagogical and useful educational resource as
part of the DiMPAH-project. Both issues are interrelated in a broader problematic
concerning the place of netnography (as a qualitative approach) within the context
of the digital arts and humanities (often concerned with big data and quantitative

F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography 157
procedures) but still fruitful to discuss separately (for a discussion on various method
combinations for digital media focusing big data, see Leckner & Severson, 2019).
The first issue concerns how netnography as a methodology rooted in a social
scientific and humanistic research tradition can be understood as a part of the digital
arts and humanities. Carlsson and Hanell (2020) argue that netnography contributes to
the broader digital humanities research field, often focused on research methods and
inquiries connected to big data, quantitative procedures, and visualizations. In this
context, netnography contributes with a qualitative perspective on the digital, allowing
for inquiries into how culture is mediated and enacted through digital interactions.
Given the theoretical and reflexive stance of netnography, something that we will
discuss in detail below, the methodology can serve as a bridge between theoretically
mature traditional humanistic research and contemporary digital methods. For exam-
ple, netnography can provide valuable insights concerning reflexivity and the situated
nature of human (research) practices that can enrich more method-driven approaches
associated with the digital humanities (cf. Kozinets, 2020).
The second issue concerns how both quantitative and qualitative approaches for
doing netnography can be combined theoretically and methodologically. Previous re-
search (Costello, McDermott & Wallace, 2017) has brought attention to a tendency to
employ “observational” or “non-participatory” approaches in netnographic research.
This reflects a methodological strength of netnography in general but might also lead
to netnographic accounts that lack nuanced understandings of certain phenomena
(Kozinets, 2020).
In this paper, the OER on netnography is presented and critically discussed as the
broader problem identified during the development of the course content is made
explicit and explored through two research questions. The two research questions
guiding this investigation are:
1.
How can an OER be designed that positions netnography as a viable methodol-
ogy for the digital arts and humanities?
2.
How can an OER be designed that theoretically and methodologically combines
both quantitative and qualitative approaches for doing netnography?
2. Theoretical overview
In essence, netnography can be understood as an extension of ethnography. The
point of departure for netnographic research is consequently a cultural focus where
significance is found in social patterns of digital interactions (Kozinets, 2020). Ethno-
graphic research aims to understand and account for the perspectives of the partici-
pants. Rather than a method, ethnography is better understood as a perspective where
the aim is to reach “a theoretical informed encounter with the other” (Shumar &
Madison, 2013, p. 266). With an ethnographic perspective, the complexities, and the
particularities of the social field of study are focused. Methodologically, netnography
is based on the ethnographic notion of participant observation. Classic participant

158 F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography
observation includes forming personal relations with the people being studied during
an extended period. The aim is to achieve a sufficient degree of inclusion in the
participants’ lives so that the researcher may understand a certain social field from
the participants’ perspectives (Davies, 2008). The social field needs to be understood
from the participants’ perspective, but the researcher must also reflect on her impact
on the field studied (Geertz, 1973). Ethnographic research aims to provide detailed
and rich accounts of the social field studied, including accounts of interactions of
participants and how these interactions can be understood.
There are several similar strands of research with roots in ethnography and a focus
on digital interactions, such as social media ethnography (e.g. Postill & Pink, 2012)
and digital ethnography (see Caliandro, 2018). According to Kozinets, the defining
features of netnography today are a systematic and updated toolbox of existing
methods and a methodological umbrella concept for studying digitally mediated
interactions (Kozinets, 2020). Now we turn to some defining features of digital culture
and how digital culture may be studied in digital communities or consocialities.
Miller (2020) describes three typical and defining aspects and features of digitally
mediated communication: lack of context,variability, and rhizomatic organization.
Our sense of context is eroded in most digital settings. For example, databases add to
the lack of context in digital culture: during database searches or other interactions
with database content, individual users generate context (Miller, 2020). Another
challenge to our sense of context is captured with personalization, referring to how
individuals’ search results and news feeds are adapted to our perceived interests
and identities. The notion of variability refers to how digital objects constantly
change (Miller, 2020). Web pages and databases are updated with new or revised
material, software is developed, profiles on social networking services are updated,
and textual and visual content are endlessly copied and altered. The concept rhizomatic
organization captures how principles of connectivity underpin the very existence of the
internet (Miller, 2020). Through hyperlinks, everything can potentially be connected in
a non-hierarchical manner. These defining features of digitally mediated interactions
offer both unique opportunities for the study of digital social life but also certain
challenges. For one thing, as netnographers, we might ask: what should be the focus
of our netnographic inquiry?
As indicated above, digital communities have been a common way to understand
online sociality and a frequently used point of departure for netnographic studies
since the beginning of netnographic research. A digital community can be understood
as a group of people engaged in social interactions, building of relations, and with a
common (digital) place for these interactions (Kozinets, 2010). Digital communities
can be used for information sharing and for emotional support. They can be found
on social network sites and internet forums, or any other digital place allowing
for people to come together around a shared interest to socialize. In recent years,
ethnographically oriented internet researchers have critiqued the use of concepts like
community, identity, and culture (Kozinets, 2015; see also Caliandro, 2018). Given the
instability of digital contexts and the variability and increasingly situational character

F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography 159
of digitally mediated and constructed identities, the connection between certain digital
interactions and membership in a digital community can be questioned.
As an alternative to the community concept, scholars have suggested the concept
of consociality to better reflect the fluid and dispersed social media landscape of
our time. Consociality describes “the physical and/or virtual co-presence of social
actors in a network, providing an opportunity for social interaction between them”
(Perren & Kozinets, 2018, p. 23). Consequently, consociality focuses on contextual
fellowship and what we share rather than the identity boundary of who we are that
communities imply. This conceptualization of consociality echoes how social media
ethnography researchers have argued for a shift from digital communities to digital
socialities (Postill & Pink, 2012). This conceptual re-orientation has consequences
for netnographic research in terms of how we frame what we study and how we go
about studying it. At the same time, online communities still exist and can present
valuable social settings for netnographic inquiry if we avoid unreflected and uncritical
use of the community concept and consider how identity positions and ways of
understanding digital communities may shift. For these reasons, rather than to argue
for a paradigmatic re-orientation for all kinds of netnographic research, we advocate
two possible points of departure for conducting netnographic investigations:
1.
Community-based netnography, using the notion of community, focused on
interactions characterized by (lasting) communal ties and practices.
2.
Consociality-based netnography, using the notion of consociality, focusing on
interactions characterized by (fleeting) connections in contextual fellowships.
These two points of departure imply differences in what we study: digital interac-
tions characterized by communal ties and practices, or interactions shaped by fleeting
and contextual connections. The two points of departure also suggest differences
in how we conduct netnographic inquiries: should we focus on active or passive
approaches to netnography, and how can qualitative and quantitative procedures be
understood and used depending on our methodological point of departure? Costello,
McDermott, and Wallace (2017) question a perceived preference for “observational”
or “non-participatory” approaches in netnographic research. “Non-participatory”
approaches are employed with the intention of lurking, passively and from a certain
(analytical) distance, using unobtrusive observations or quantitative procedures such
as social network analysis (SNA) to study interactions among members of a digi-
tal community or in a specific social setting. Conversely, active or “participatory”
approaches include interactions between researcher and participants (such as inter-
views), and the writing of field notes. Additionally, observations can be a part of an
active approach if the researcher engages actively with the social phenomenon studied,
through sustained contact, emotional involvement, and the writing of reflective field
notes (Kozinets, 2020).
Methodologically, a scepsis towards excessive and uncritical use of passive ap-
proaches in netnography can be connected to ethnographic ambitions providing rich
accounts of digital interactions capturing the participants’ perspective (cf. Kozinets,

160 F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography
2010). In netnography, however, passive approaches are valuable considering the
amounts and variability of digital data and sites of the social (Kozinets, 2020; cf.
Miller, 2020). To connect to our two main points of departure for doing netnography,
we suggest that for community-based netnography, it is suitable to engage mainly
in active approaches to engage with participants of a community over time. For
consociality-based netnography, passive approaches such as selecting and archiving
online traces can be enough to conduct a netnographic study. Still, a measure of active
procedures such as taking field notes should be employed.
In the next section, we present three case studies with practical assignments show-
casing how netnography can be taught and practiced depending on how you choose
to methodologically approach netnography.
3. Presenting the OER through three case studies
The OER includes four units: Introduction to Netnography,Reflexivity and ethics
in Netnography,Collecting and producing material, and Analyzing material. Each
unit includes theoretical content and practical assignments that enable the learner
to gradually develop a nuanced understanding of netnography and a useful skillset
for doing netnographies. In the first unit, the learner is introduced to netnography as
a methodology and a research field. The second unit introduces research ethics for
studies in digital settings, the role of the researcher, and legal perspectives netno-
graphers should be aware of. Unit three focuses on specific netnographic methods
for collecting and producing material. Qualitative and quantitative approaches are
introduced together with the notions community-based netnography and consociality-
based netnography. The fourth unit introduces analytical procedures for qualitative
and quantitative analyses of netnographic material.
The course is self-paced and designed to be delivered asynchronously using text,
videos, interactive elements (quizzes, dialogue cards, and scenarios) and several
directions for further reading. In each unit, the different learning modalities are
combined to gradually further the learning of both theoretical knowledge and practical
skills. Interactive elements, for example quizzes, are offered in connection to critical
concepts or approaches throughout the OER to enable continuous self-evaluation and
self-satisfaction (cf. Alonso-Mencía et al., 2020). Case studies and a learning scenario
in three parts connect theoretical concepts, practical skills and empirical examples
from cultural heritage platforms and previous research. The learning scenario New
Stories for Europe can be altered if the OER is to function as a methods course that
needs to be adapted to a certain educational context, such as a master’s program,
using suitable empirical material connected to the specifics of that educational context
instead. Overall, the OER provides a clear structure and progression but also allows for
non-linear learning since units and assignments can be taken separately. This design
meets the needs of both learners with low self-regulating learning skills who tend to
prefer structured and linear learning, and learners with high self-regulating learning

F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography 161
skills who often choose a more flexible and non-linear learning path (Alonso-Mencía
et al., 2020).
As discussed above, the analytical distinction between community-based netnog-
raphy and consociality-based netnography is a way to draw the attention of OER-
students to several interconnected methodological issues critical for doing netnog-
raphy: the relation between quantitative and qualitative procedures, the value and
limitations of active and passive approaches to netnography, and ultimately: what
is the focus of netnographic inquiry? Since the analytical concepts community and
consociality form the underpinnings of the methodological considerations and discus-
sions throughout the OER, the three case studies focus on how these two concepts
can be understood and researched netnographically. The first case study focuses on
how digital communities can be studied with netnographic approaches. In the sec-
ond case study, the OER-students are invited to learn more about community-based
netnography. The third case study focuses on consociality-based netnography. In the
following, the case studies are briefly presented and discussed.
3.1. Case study 1: To study digital communities
The first case study is a part of Unit 1 and focuses on how digital communities can
be studied with netnographic approaches. Previously in the unit, netnography as a
field of research and as a methodology has been introduced and several examples of
netnographic research has been provided, allowing for OER-students to develop an
understanding of what netnography is and how netnography can be done. Also, the
concept ‘digital community’ is explained and positioned as a key point of departure for
several netnographic studies. In case study 1, two illustrative examples of netnographic
research are presented together with study questions as a way to make OER-students
familiar with research on digital communities and reflect on what such research can
offer insights about. Furthermore, the notions of “active” and “passive” approaches
are exemplified. For the first case study, empirical examples together with valuable
methodological comments are borrowed from Kozinets (2017). The OER-students are
advised to consider the following study questions when reading about the example
studies:
–What can the study tell us about a certain digital community?
–
What might the implications of this study be (e.g., for certain fields of research,
for the community)?
In the first example, we encounter a netnographic study focusing on people playing
Restaurant City, a game hosted on Facebook (García-Álvarez et al., 2015). The study
reports results from netnographic fieldwork conducted over three years. Fieldwork
commenced soon after the launch of Facebook’s Restaurant City game in 2009 and
the researchers started to participate in playing the game and becoming a part of the
gaming community. The researchers participated in the gaming community and spent
18 months learning about the social and technical features of the Facebook game.

162 F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography
They designed their own restaurant as part of the game and then proceeded to produce
netnographic material by writing field notes, taking screenshots, and recording inter-
actions. This brief example is contextualized by Kozinets (2017, p. 375), pointing to
some important aspects the study highlights:
Demonstrating good ethical practice, they revealed their identities as researchers,
explained the purpose of their research, and guaranteed anonymity to those with
whom they interacted. Besides participant observation, their netnography involved
the use of interview style questioning. They were thus able to delve into interesting
individual perspectives and reactions which might not have revealed themselves
without some interactive prompting and elicitation. Yet they were also careful to
continue observing in situ, with minimal disruptions of the dynamics of interactive
participation.
What this first example brings to the fore is how the researchers employ several
active, or participatory, approaches and interact with participants during a lengthy
time-period. Importantly, practices to secure informed consent are also discussed.
Now, in the second example we will instead encounter a study that mainly employs
passive, unobtrusive, approaches but that still provides a nuanced account of digital
interactions among drug users (Orsolini et al., 2015). As Kozinets explains (2017,
p. 376), the researchers:
[. . . ] conducted a ‘nonparticipant netnographic qualitative study of a list of cyber
drug communities (blogs, fora, YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter pages)’. As
they tell, us, inviting us to read critically between the lines, they were able to
complete their netnography in two months, rather than the three years of García-
Álvarez et al. (2015). They scanned 102 pro-drug websites, and screened 13,770
forum threads authored by 2,076 users. They further state: ‘In line with best
practice protocols for online research and in compliance with unobtrusive and
naturalistic features of netnographic research, no posts or other contributions to
private or public forum discussions were made’ (p. 297). The terms unobtrusive
and naturalistic are emphasized.
The example shows how stigmatic subjects can be researched with unobtrusive
approaches, a valuable part of the netnographic methodology, with specific ethical
implications. The qualitative and immersive aspects of the study allowed for the
researchers to offer a rich netnographic account of a stigmatic subject, while also
avoiding potential risks connected to participation or interaction in the context of drug
use culture.
The first case study, that also marks the end of the main part of the first unit/lesson,
is followed by a multiple-choice quiz to validate learning (Fig. 1).
3.2. Case study 2: Community-based netnography
The second case study focuses on community-based netnography with active
approaches. In most cases, active approaches to netnography require more time and

F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography 163
Fig. 1. Multiple choice quiz from case study 1.
commitment than passive approaches. This presents a pedagogical challenge since the
OER-students will in most cases not be able to spend a considerable amount of time
immersing in a new community. Such an endeavor would also require more knowledge
and guidance than you can reasonably expect from an OER where studies are self-
paced and delivered asynchronously without individual teacher supervision. The
solution for allowing the OER-students to experience the dynamics of community-
based netnography with active approaches is in this case study to let the students
select a digital community they already consider themselves a member of. This might
be a Facebook Group, an online forum, or any other digital setting where people
come together around a shared interest. To provide the OER-students with a measure
of guidance in this crucial first step of the case study, the students are instructed to
answer a brief yes or no question before they proceed: “Does the community gather
around a shared interest?”. The students are provided with a summary of how a digital
community can be identified and understood if they click the “Show tip” button (in
the summary central notions, such as a shared interest and lasting communal ties
and practices are highlighted). If the students answer “Yes”, then they receive a
confirmation that they are well underway. If they answer “No”, they are provided
additional guidance (Fig. 2).
Having selected a digital community they consider themselves members of, the
OER-students are instructed to reflect on the following questions:
1.
What is the nature of the shared interest that has brought the participants
together?

164 F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography
Fig. 2. Quiz for case study 2.
2.
How is the community shaped by the nature of this shared interest (e.g., lan-
guage, types of people, humor, and norms)?
3. What would seem strange or hard to understand for an outsider?
4.
How is the community making use of the digital setting(s) (ways of communica-
tion, ways to foster communal ties)?
5. How is the digital platform shaping social interactions?
To practice one of the main approaches for collecting and producing netnographic
material discussed in Unit III, the students are to write down the reflections as
field notes. The OER-students are reminded that field notes are important tools
for reflection and serve as analytical guidance when engaging in the inductive and
explorative processes of netnographic research (Kozinets, 2020). Field notes capture
experiences of what it is like to be a researcher, interactions with participants, and
notes taken while observing and archiving online traces (such as posts to a Facebook
Group) explaining the context of the situation observed. The OER-students are also
advised to include reflections about themselves and their backgrounds, and how these
personal aspects affect their understanding of, and interactions with, participants and
phenomena in the community studied. While it might lie outside the scope of the case
study as such, the students are also sensitized to how these reflections can form the
basis of an auto-netnographic study (see Howard, 2020), focusing on autobiographical
details, emotional connection and introspection, supplying netnographic accounts with
significant reflexive depth increasing the validity of the study. However, netnographic
field notes can be both extensive and detailed. To provide reasonable borders for this
case study, the OER-students are instructed to write brief field notes around 200–400
words.
The next step of the case study offers the OER-students the option to design an
interview guide, based on their own subjective understanding of the digital community
they have selected. The OER-students are advised that the interview questions should
be informed by the reflections they have written down as field notes and continue to
investigate these central issues, but also leave room for the interview person to initially
provide free accounts of their history in the community and their experiences (in this
context, students are provided a link to a previous page outlining the interviewing
method). The students are also advised that the interview, as part of this case study,
might be conducted with a person they know well in the community. The main
findings from the field notes and the optional interview, including procedures for

F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography 165
informed consent, may then be presented to the interview person and then possibly to
the community (in a form suitable for the community in question, and if the interview
person agrees).
3.3. Case study 3: Consociality-based netnography
The third case study focuses on consociality-based netnography through SNA
using and comparing tools and data. Consociality-based netnography focuses on the
co-presence of what social actors in a network share (Perren & Kozinets, 2018).
SNA offers a quantitative understanding of connections between entities, the relations
between actors and the structure of these relations (Fenton & Procter, 2019). Hence,
SNA is a method for students to engage in quantitative studies of digital contextual
fellowships focused on consociality to map networks. Deciding to use SNA through
exploring tools is pedagogically informed by digital humanities pedagogy. Teaching is
done from and through digital skills (Hirsch, 2012), as integrative learning (Nyhan et
al., 2014), and based on the value of authentic technology-integrated learning (Datt et
al., 2020). Of particular importance is scaffolding and play in a balanced way (Tracy
& Elizabeth, 2017), enabling students to explore and assess their work according to
what is important, valuable, and “good” in relation to their own interest of learning.
Teaching consociality-based netnography as social network analysis means fo-
cusing on an interest in exploring the social positioning of individuals in what they
communicate through social media. Hence, it is an interest in networked individ-
ualism as patterns of relationships between social actors in a network (Kozinets,
2020). Adding SNA affords a particular interest in the graphical visualizations of
social networks: maps of social networks. Meanings of interactions can be simple,
like in automated online tools. They can also be deepened and analytically deduced.
An example is Harland (2020) studying consocial relations and SNA in a first effort
to categorize observable behavior and roles in a network of professional teachers.
Furthermore, the SNA approach can be seen as an unobtrusive way to do netnography
when using larger and anonymized datasets for a study.
Developing a case study for consociality-based netnography using tools for so-
cial network analysis, the use of three tools enables a scaffolding learning exer-
cise. The tools offer the students multiple approaches to tools and their poten-
tial for consociality-based netnography. The first one is One million tweet map
(http://onemilliontweetmap.com). Students are to visit the page and type in a word of
particular interest by keyword, user @ or hashtag #. An automated visualized map
information is provided of geolocalized data. To analyze this map as social network
analysis, students are to consider the following:
–Key countries – where are they?
–What are the main clusters in the world, if any?
–How can you understand and describe any relationships between countries?

166 F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography
Fig. 3. Automatically generated analysis of text from Voyant.
Hence, this exercise displays the limitations of connections by mainly visualizing
“where”, not networks. The second tool, Voyant (http://voyant-tools.org), focuses on
text-based analysis of correlations as a fundamental interest. Students must explore
correlations by inserting a URL or cutting and pasting text. The automatically gener-
ated analysis of the text covers frequency and correlation with various visualizations,
like word clouds (“cirrus”), Links and Bubble Lines as seen in Fig. 3.
Students are to consider the following:
–Key terms – what are they, and why do you think it is so?
–
What links and correlations between the words in the text do you find most
interesting and why?
The third tool is SocioViz (http://socioviz.net/) where students are to do SNA of
Twitter data by attaching values to the correlation as nodes and edges in a scaffolding
learning way. This tool requires the students to download, register, and do tutorials.
Since students are to explore SNA in several ways, different venues for doing SNA
complement each other. SocioViz includes social media’s detailed analysis of user
interactions, hashtags, and emoji co-presence. The tool also analyzes semantic net-
works, which connect well to the Voyant tool exercise. Students can in this exercise
for example study social media phenomena like #blacklivesmatter (also #blm) and
what user interactions exist as well as what kind of hashtag and emoji co-presence is
there.
Starting from the tool offers different insights into consociality-based netnography
as SNA than starting from, for example, a research question, a real-life issue, or even

F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography 167
a dataset or database. In our experience, efforts to learn a tool do not always match the
expectations from students on what the tool can do for you – however, tools matter.
The various tools presented in the scaffolding structure of this case study, from simple
and automated, provide a sense of what is possible. Hence, the OER offers insights
on multiple web-based, open, and free tools, their risks and opportunities, and which
social media data is available to use. Netnography means approaching and dealing
with theoretical and methodological issues about what data is used and what tools are
(and were) possible to use for SNA. With the DiMPAH OER:s, one main takeaway for
students is to learn the thinking behind the tools. This assignment is mainly designed
for students to understand what consociality-based netnography as social network
analysis is and can be and strengthen the students to navigate and apply appropriate
use of thinking and tools.
Together, the three case studies offer a nuanced understanding of netnography
and useful skills for netnographic research. Next, a comprehensive and integrative
assignment is outlined where students are invited to combine insights and skills from
the OER to initiate and gradually develop their own netnographic projects as part of a
learning scenario made up of three sections.
4. Learning scenario: New stories for Europe
The learning scenario is called New stories for Europe and includes three distinct
sections where each part corresponds to a unit (Unit I, III and IV). Drawing on insights
from problem-based learning (Jones, 2006), the learning scenario offers students a
way to independently use knowledge and practical insights acquired from a unit and
in a creative but pedagogically designed progression put this knowledge into play to
formulate and then investigate netnographic research questions. Each part of the sce-
nario allows for the students to practice and develop knowledge and skills connected
to the insights gained from the corresponding unit. Although open for reiteration
and non-linear learning, the scenario is meant to be worked with as a continuous
assignment that students return to at the end of Unit I, III and IV. Unit II, focusing on
research ethics and reflexivity, does not include a corresponding part of the learning
scenario since the content of that unit should inform the entire learning scenario. In
Unit II, a branching scenario is offered to allow for OER-students to test both their
knowledge on research ethics in general, as well as specific netnographic project
ideas. Informed by the introduction to netnography as a methodology and a field of
research, and research ethical knowledge vital for aspiring netnographers, the third
and fourth units teach students the basics of how to conduct an actual netnographic
study of their own, from developing a good netnographic research question, collecting
and producing material, to analyzing and presenting a netnographic project.
To allow students a starting point for their own netnographic projects and building
both on the insights from the OER and the research interest and previous experiences
of the students, in the first part of the learning scenario suggested themes for the

168 F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography
Fig. 4. Dialogue cards from part one and part three of the learning scenario.
netnographic projects are presented to the students. The themes are open-ended, which
is recommended for scenario-based learning (Jones, 2006), allowing for individual
creativity as the starting point and the topic is considered. At the same time, the
suggested themes are meant to bring the different netnographic projects sparked by
the OER together and to offer students an opportunity to contribute to the development
of New stories for Europe. The four main themes, connected to important issues of
contemporary Europe as described in the project goals of DiMPAH, are: social equity,
transnational and cultural diversity,gender equality, and good health and well-being.
Using the interactive feature dialog cards, the students can click through four dialog
cards to learn more about how the different themes can be approached and explored.
Figure 4 displays one of the themes, cultural diversity, as suggestions for venues
for research are presented in the first part of the learning scenario as part of Unit 1
(left image), and then how OER-students can work with analyzing the netnographic
material in the third and last part of the scenario (right image).
The students are advised to choose one of these main themes, or any combination of
them. With the practice of writing field notes, a central part of netnographic research
that is introduced in Unit I and developed in Unit III, the students are instructed
to reflect on their interests and what theme(s) would be most interesting for them
to explore. The students are then to write down the selected theme(s) in their field

F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography 169
notes (a physical notebook or a digital document), an artifact that students will use
throughout the learning scenario for reflections and development of their netnographic
research (cf. Kozinets, 2020). In the second part of the scenario, students are invited
to develop their selected research topic, aided by instructions and exercises provided
in Unit III on formulating research questions, how to understand the object of study
and qualitative and quantitative netnographic approaches for collecting and producing
material. Specifically, the students are to revise their netnographic research question
and to create a brief research plan for collecting material. At this point, students are
advised to revisit Unit II and go through the branching scenario to test the research
ethics of their current project before proceeding to conduct fieldwork and collect
netnographic material.
The third part of the scenario builds on insights and skills concerning key ap-
proaches for analyzing netnographic material developed in Unit IV through step-by-
step exercises on coding,thematic analysis,SNA, and interpretation, and how to write
netnographies and provide thick descriptions. To aid the students in the analytical
process and in writing up, some possible approaches to analyze netnographic ma-
terial are showcased through dialogue cards (see Fig. 4, right image) and different
modalities for presenting netnographic accounts are suggested. Lastly, to highlight the
connective nature of netnography, students are encouraged to share their netnographic
projects with the authors of the OER and with the world using the hashtag #dimpah
on Twitter, or any other digital platform.
5. Concluding remarks
Presenting and discussing central features of an OER on netnography, we have been
guided by two research questions that we will now return to in this concluding section.
First, we asked: How can an OER be designed that positions netnography as a viable
methodology for the digital arts and humanities? As indicated in the introduction,
we argue that netnography contributes to the digital arts and humanities, overall
characterized by method-driven and quantitative approaches, with reflexivity and
valuable perspectives for methodological considerations when doing various strands
of digital research. In the OER, we present two possible points of departure for doing
netnographic research: community-based netnography and consociality-based netnog-
raphy. These dyadic analytical concepts together form one tangible example from
the OER that promotes reflexivity and nuanced methodological consideration when
doing research online, essentially by asking: what is the nature of the phenomenon
we seek to study? The way we then go about studying this phenomenon needs to be
informed by an answer to this basic question. As the learning scenario of the OER
illustrates, netnography also opens up for research questions and projects bringing
together insights, material and research from the digital arts and humanities in the
human and genuine effort to understand other humans. This way, netnography offers
potential for critical research and pedagogy within the digital arts and humanities,

170 F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography
ultimately with reflexivity as a way to make visible and to challenge the “political
evil” of our time, through countering injustice, oppression and the dehumanization
framed by Hannah Arendt as thoughtlessness and superfluousness (Hayden, 2008).
We believe this to be a valuable part of what digital scholarship can be.
The second research question, How can an OER be designed that theoretically and
methodologically combines both quantitative and qualitative approaches for doing
netnography?, is answered in part through the dyadic analytical concepts community-
based netnography and consociality-based netnography. The concepts sensitize stu-
dents to differences between online socialities, that may be based mainly on communal
ties or otherwise more fleeting forms of connections in contextual fellowships. Fur-
thermore, the concepts allow for a nuanced methodological understanding of how
and when qualitative and quantitative approaches should be employed, and how they
may complement each other. If we return to Miller’s (2020) view on the defining
features of digitally mediated communication, we find that variability and rhizomatic
organization call for quantitative approaches to navigate vast amounts of content and
contexts, and to use affordances of the connectivity through digital methods such
as SNA, as well as staying up to date with current tools and methods. What Miller
(2020) describes as lack of context pinpoints the need for qualitative approaches to
understand the subjective nature of digital interactions (cf. Kozinets, 2020). How the
digital, networked online world creates both closeness and estrangement is a vivid
issue for netnography, challenging how we understand both ethnographic insights and
digital methods and how we go about doing ethical netnographic research.
Acknowledgments
The work reported here has been conducted within the Digital Methods Platform
for Arts and Humanities (DiMPAH) project financed by Erasmus
+
(Grant Agreement
Number 2020-1-SE01-KA203-077878). The authors would like to thank the DiMPAH
project group for intellectual and practical support in developing the OER. We would
also like to express our gratitude to the editors of this thematic issue for editorial
support during the writing of this paper.
References
Alang, S.M., & Fomotar, M. (2015). Postpartum depression in an online community of lesbian mothers:
Implications for clinical practice. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health,19(1), 21-39. doi:
10.1080/19359705.2014.910853.
Alonso-Mencía, M.E., Alario-Hoyos, C., Maldonado-Mahauad, J., Estévez-Ayres, I., Pérez-Sanagustín,
M., & Delgado Kloos, C. (2020). Self-regulated learning in MOOCs: Lessons learned from a literature
review. Educational Review,72(3), 319-345. doi: 10.1080/00131911.2019.1566208.
Caliandro, A. (2018). Digital methods for ethnography: Analytical concepts for ethnographers exploring
social media environments. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography,47(5), 551-578. doi: 10.1177/
0891241617702960.

F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography 171
Carlsson, H., & Hanell, F. (2020). Netnography in the Digital Humanities. In J. Hansson & J. Svensson
(Eds.), Doing Digital Humanities: Concepts, Approaches, Cases. Växjö: Linnaeus University Press.
pp. 45-64.
Costello, L., McDermott, M.-L., & Wallace, R. (2017). Netnography: Range of practices, mispercep-
tions, and missed opportunities. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,16(1). doi: 10.1177/
1609406917700647.
Datt, A.K., Frost, J., Light, R., & Zizek, J. (2020). Designing Engaging Assessments for Teaching the
Digital Humanities. In E. Alqurashi (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Fostering Student Engagement
With Instructional Technology in Higher Education. IGI Global. pp. 139-153.
Davies, C.A. (2008). Reflexive ethnography: A guide to researching selves and others. London: Routledge.
Fenton, A., Keegan, B.J., & Parry, K.D. (2021). Understanding Sporting Social Media Brand Commu-
nities, Place and Social Capital: A Netnography of Football Fans. Communication & Sport. doi:
10.1177/2167479520986149.
Fenton, A., & Procter, C.T. (2019). Studying social media communities: Blending methods with netnogra-
phy. In: SAGE Research Methods Cases. doi: 10.4135/9781526468901.
García-Álvarez, E., López-Sintas, J., & Samper-Martínez, A. (2015). The social network gamer’s experience
of play: A Netnography of Restaurant City on Facebook, Games and Culture,12(7-8), 650-670. doi:
10.1177/1555412015595924.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York, NY: Basic books.
Hanell, F. (2020). Co-learning in a digital community: Information literacy and views on learning in
preschool teacher education. In: Proceedings of Sustainable Digital Communities: 15th International
Conference, iConference 2020, Borås, Sweden, 2020, Springer Nature Lecture Notes in Computer
Science, Cham, 2020. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-43687-2_26.
Hanell, F., & Severson, P. (2022). Netnography: Two Methodological Issues and the Consequences for
Teaching and Practice. Paper presented at the DHNB 2022, The 6th Digital Humanities in the Nordic
and Baltic Countries Conference 2022, Uppsala, Sweden. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3232/paper19.pdf.
Harland, D. (2020). Digital colleague connectedness: A framework for studying teachers’ profes-
sional network interactions. Journal of Educational Research and Practice,10, 393-403. doi:
10.5590/JERAP.2020.10.1.25.
Howard, L. (2020). Auto-Netnography in Education: Unfettered and Unshackled. In R.V. Kozinets &
R. Gambetti (Eds.), Netnography Unlimited: Understanding Technoculture Using Qualitative Social
Media Research. Routledge. pp. 217-240.
Hayden, P. (2008). Political evil in a global age: Hannah Arendt and international theory. Routledge.
Hirsch, B.D. (Ed.). (2012). Digital humanities pedagogy: Practices, principles and politics (Vol. 3). Open
Book Publishers.
Jones, R.W. (2006). Problem-based learning: Description, advantages, disadvantages, scenarios and facili-
tation. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care,34(4), 485-488.
Kozinets, R.V. (2010). Netnography: Doing ethnographic research online. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Kozinets, R.V. (2015). Netnography: Redefined (2 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Kozinets, R. (2017). Netnography: radical participative understanding for a networked communications
society. In C. Willig, & W. Rogers, The SAGE Handbook of qualitative research in psychology.
pp. 374-380. SAGE Publications, doi: 10.4135/9781526405555.n22.
Kozinets, R.V., Scaraboto, D., & Parmentier, M.-A. (2018). Evolving netnography: How brand auto-
netnography, a netnographic sensibility, and more-than-human netnography can transform your re-
search. Journal of Marketing Management,34, 3-4, 231-242. doi: 10.1080/0267257X.2018.1446488.
Kozinets, R.V. (2020). Netnography: The essential guide to qualitative social media research (3 ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Leckner, S., & Severson, P. (2019). Exploring the meaning problem of big and small data through digital
method triangulation. Nordicom Review,40(s1), 79-94. doi: 10.2478/nor-2019-0015.
Miller, V. (2020). Understanding digital culture. Sage.

172 F. Hanell and P.J. Severson / An open educational resource for doing netnography
Nyhan, J., Terras, M., & Mahony, S. (2014). Digital Humanities and Integrative Learning. In Daniel
Blackshields, James Cronin, Bettie Higgs, Shane Kilcommins, Marian McCarthy, Anthony Ryan
(Eds.), Integrative Learning International research and practice. Routledge.
Orsolini, L., Papanti, G.D., Francesconi, G., & Schifano, F. (2015). Mind navigators of chemicals’
experimenters? A web-based description of e-psychonauts. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking,18(5), 296-300. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2014.0486.
Perren, R., & Kozinets, R.V. (2018). Lateral exchange markets: How social platforms operate in a networked
economy. Journal of Marketing,82(1), 20-36. doi: 10.1509/jm.14.0250.
Postill, J., & Pink, S. (2012). Social media ethnography: The digital researcher in a messy web. Media
International Australia,145(1), 123-134. doi: 10.1177/1329878X1214500114.
Shumar, W., & Madison, N. (2013). Ethnography in a virtual world. Ethnography and Education,8(2),
255-272. doi: 10.1080/17457823.2013.792513.
Tracy, D.G., & Elizabeth, M.H. (2017). Scaffolding and play approaches to digital humanities pedagogy:
Assessment and iteration in topically-driven courses. Digital Humanities Quarterly,11(4).