This research suggests three ways in which hybrid ethnography can be used to overcome the shortcomings of single-realm ethnography, in particular, ethnographies that situate solely in the offline or online worlds. I focus on how researchers adapt the ethnographic toolkit to an environment where digital and physical landscapes touch, overlap, and blend. I name these tools multi-access, multi-positionality, and online-offline data assembly. Multi-access refers to researchers using alternative access points to renegotiate blocked access. Multi-positionality refers to researchers leveraging online and offline self-portrayals to reestablish relationships with multiple participants. Online-offline data assembly refers to researchers analyzing multi-faceted data generated by researchers and participants to validate analyses. Taken together, researchers combine, separate, and mix three tools as toolkits to flexibly transition online and offline in the post-pandemic era.
Bagga-GuptaSDahlbergGM (2021) On studying peoples’ participation across contemporary timespaces: Disentangling analytical engagement. Outlines. Critical Practice Studies22: 49–88.
5.
BayreFHarperKAfonsoAI (2016) Participatory Approaches to Visual Ethnography from the Digital to the Handmade. An Introduction. Visual Ethnography5(1): 5–13.
6.
BeaulieuA (2010) Research Note: From co-location to co-presence: Shifts in the use of ethnography for the study of knowledge. Social Studies of Science40(3): 453–470.
7.
Beneito-MontagutR (2011) Ethnography goes online: towards a user-centred methodology to research interpersonal communication on the internet. Qualitative Research11(6): 716–735.
8.
Beneito-MontagutRBegueriaACassianN (2017) Doing digital team ethnography: being there together and digital social data. Qualitative Research17(6): 664–682.
9.
BluteauJM (2019) Legitimising digital anthropology through immersive cohabitation: Becoming an observing participant in a blended digital landscape. Ethnography22: 267–285. DOI: 10.1177/1466138119881165.
10.
BrushABJungJMahajanR, et al. (2013) Digital neighborhood watch: Investigating the sharing of camera data amongst neighbors. In: Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. New York, NY: ACM, pp. 693–700.
11.
CalarcoJM (2018) Negotiating Opportunities: How the Middle Class Secures Advantages in School. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
12.
CaliandroA (2018) Digital Methods for Ethnography: Analytical Concepts for Ethnographers Exploring Social Media Environments. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography47(5): 551–578.
13.
ChristinA (2020) Metrics at Work: Journalism and the Contested Meaning of Algorithms. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1 online resource.
14.
ColomA (2021) Using WhatsApp for Focus Group Discussions: Ecological Validity, Inclusion and Deliberation. Qualitative Research22: 452–467. DOI: 10.1177/1468794120986074.
15.
CrickM (2012) Social media use in the Bronx: New research and innovations in the study of YouTube's digital neighborhood. Journal of Technology in Human Services30(3–4): 262–298.
16.
DongJ (2016) Chinese elite migrants and formation of new communities in a changing society: An online-offline ethnography. Ethnography18(2): 221–239.
17.
FergusonR-H (2017) Offline ‘stranger’ and online lurker: methods for an ethnography of illicit transactions on the darknet. Qualitative Research17(6): 683–698.
18.
FleischhackJ (2019) Changed Conditions of the Social. A Methodological View on Digital Anthropology/Digital Ethnography. Zeitschrift Fur Volkskunde115(2): 196–215.
19.
FlewittR (2011) Bringing ethnography to a multimodal investigation of early literacy in a digital age. Qualitative Research11(3): 293–310.
20.
GabrielsKBauwensJ (2015) Lost in transition?: conducting a hybrid ethnography ‘in’and ‘out’second life. In: Revitalising audience research: innovations in European audience research. New York; London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 13–28.
21.
GarciaACStandleeAIBechkoffJ, et al. (2009) Ethnographic Approaches to the Internet and Computer-Mediated Communication. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography38(1): 52–84.
22.
GoffmanE (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
23.
GyorAF (2017) Digital ethnography: principles and practice, 1st edition. Corvinus Journal of Sociology and Social Policy8(1): 132–138.
24.
HallettREBarberK (2013) Ethnographic Research in a Cyber Era. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography43(3): 306–330.
25.
HammersleyMAtkinsonP (2007) Ethnography : Principles in Practice. New York: Routledge.
26.
HannerzU (2003) Being there. and there. and there! Reflections on multi-site ethnography. Ethnography4(2): 201–216.
JordanB (2009a) Blurring Boundaries: The “Real” and the “Virtual” in Hybrid Spaces. Human Organization68(2): 181–193.
29.
JordanB (2009b) Introduction: Blurring Boundaries: The “Real” and the “Virtual” in Hybrid Spaces. Human Organization68(2): 181–193.
30.
KavanaughPRMarateaRJ (2020) Digital Ethnography in an Age of Information Warfare: Notes from the Field. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography49(1): 3–26.
31.
KhanSR (2011) Privilege: The Making of an Adolescent Elite at St. Paul’s School. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
32.
KudaibergenovaDT (2019) The body global and the body traditional: a digital ethnography of Instagram and nationalism in Kazakhstan and Russia. Central Asian Survey38(3): 363–380.
33.
LaneJ (2019) The Digital Street. New York: Oxford University Press.
34.
LareauA (2011) The Hectic Pace of Concerted Cultivation: Garrett Tallinger. In: Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. 2nd Edition. California: University of California, p. 38.
35.
LeanderKMMcKimKK (2003) Tracing the Everyday 'Sitings' of Adolescents on the Internet: a strategic adaptation of ethnography across online and offline spaces. Education, Communication & Information3(2): 211–240.
36.
LevineFJNasirNSRios-AguilarC, et al. (2021) Voices from the Field: The Impact of COVID-19 on Early Career Scholars and Doctoral Students. Chicago, IL: Spencer Foundation.
37.
LuhtakallioEMeriluotoT (2021) Snap-along ethnography: Studying visual politicization in the social media age. Ethnography: 146613812211158. Online ahead of prind.
38.
MarcusGE (2012) Multi-sited ethnography: Five or six things I know about it now. In: Multi-sited Ethnography. New York: Routledge, pp. 24–40.
39.
MarcusGE (2021) Ethnography through thick and thin. In: Ethnography through Thick and Thin. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
40.
Messina DahlbergGBagga-GuptaS (2013) Communication in the virtual classroom in higher education: Languaging beyond the boundaries of time and space. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction2(3): 127–142.
41.
Messina DahlbergGBagga-GuptaS (2015) Learning on-the-go in institutional telecollaboration: Anthropological perspectives on the boundaries of digital spaces. In: Researching Language Learner Interactions Online: From Social Media to MOOCs. Texas: Texas State University, p. 259.
42.
Messina DahlbergGBagga-GuptaS (2016) Mapping languaging in digital spaces: Literacy practices at borderlands. Language Learning & Technology20(3): 80–106.
43.
MurphyAKJerolmackCSmithD (2021) Ethnography, Data Transparency, and the Information Age. Annual Review of Sociology47(1): 41–61.): null.
44.
MurthyD (2008) Digital Ethnography. Sociology42(5): 837–855.
45.
NumeratoD (2016) Behind the digital curtain: Ethnography, football fan activism and social change. Qualitative Research16(5): 575–591.
46.
OrgadS (2009) How Can Researchers Make Sense of the Issues Involved in Collecting and Interpreting Online And Offline Data?Los Angeles: SAGE.
47.
PascoeCJ (2012) Studying young people’s new media use: methodological shifts and educational innovations. Theory Into Practice51(2): 76–82.
48.
PinkSHorstHAPostillJ, et al. (2016) Digital Ethnography: Principles and Practice. Los Angeles: SAGE.
49.
PrzybylskiL (2021) Hybrid Ethnography: Online, Offline, and in between. Los Angeles: SAGE.
50.
ReyesV (2018) Ethnographic toolkit: Strategic positionality and researchers’ visible and invisible tools in field research. Ethnography21(2): 220–240.
51.
RitterCS (2021) Rethinking digital ethnography: A qualitative approach to understanding interfaces. Qualitative Research: 146879412110005. Online ahead of prind. DOI: 10.1177/14687941211000540.
52.
Sade-BeckL (2004) Internet ethnography: Online and offline. International Journal of Qualitative Methods3(2): 45–51.
53.
SanjekRTratnerSW (2016) eFieldnotes: The Makings of Anthropology in the Digital World. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
54.
SeaverN (2017) Algorithms as culture: Some tactics for the ethnography of algorithmic systems. Big Data & Society4(2): 205395171773810.
55.
SwidlerA (1986) Culture in Action - Symbols and Strategies. American Sociological Review51(2): 273–286.
56.
TaggCLyonsAHuR, et al. (2017) The ethics of digital ethnography in a team project. Applied Linguistics Review8(2–3): 271–292.
57.
TummonsJ (2020) Online, offline, hybrid, or blended? Doing ethnographies of education in a digitally-mediated world. In: Handbook of Qualitative Research in Education. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
58.
UrbanikM-MRoksRA (2020) GangstaLife: Fusing Urban Ethnography with Netnography in Gang Studies. Qualitative Sociology43(2): 213–233.
59.
WohlH (2021) Bound by Creativity: How Contemporary Art Is Created and Judged. Chicago ; London: The University of Chicago Press.
60.
YoungAA (2004) The Minds of Marginalized Black Men : Making Sense of Mobility, Opportunity, and Future Life Chances. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
61.
ZaniB (2021) Shall WeChat? Switching between online and offline ethnography. Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique152(1): 52–75.
62.
ZellerFPonteCO'NeillB (2015) Revitalising Audience Research: Innovations in European Audience Research. New York; London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
