Resonance across the researcher/research participant divide:
Rethinking Ethnographic Methodology in a Global Pandemic
Keywords:
Collective ethnography, Digital methods, COVID-19, Resonance, Being thereAbstract
This article explores the methodological implications of conducting ethnography under shared conditions of uncertainty and constraint, using a collective online ethnographic study of family life in Denmark during the Covid pandemic as its focal point. By rethinking anthropology’s classic imperative of “being there,” we examine how digital methods and shared existential circumstances between researchers and participants offer opportunities to develop innovative forms of relationality and engagement. Drawing on Hartmut Rosa’s concepts of resonance and world appropriation, we propose a methodological approach centering on “being with” as an alternative to physical presence, emphasizing the affective, reflexive, and emergent qualities of research practice. We situate these reflections within broader discussions on the socio-historical context of knowledge production and the transformative potential of collective, relational methodologies. In doing so, we contribute to critical debates on ethnographic practice, highlighting how moments of rupture can challenge established epistemologies and inspire inventive modes of inquiry.
References
Brinkworth, J., Maldonado K., Moddie E., & Rosas, G. (2020). Visceral non-presence. Ethnography in the age of COVID. Journal of Legal Anthropology 4(1), 92-100.
Clemensen, N., Dannesboe, K. I., Winther, I. W., Jørgensen, N. J. & Kousholt, D. (2021). Skemaer for en nedlukket hverdag. Dansk Pædagogisk Tidsskrift (2), 2-22.
Dannesboe, K. I., Jørgensen, N. J., Clemensen, N., Kousholt, D. & Winther, I. W. (2023). ‘We also need to exist somehow’ – families negotiating everyday ethics during Covid-19 in Denmark. Journal of Family Studies, 29(5), 2294–2313.
Davies, J., & Spencer, D. (2010). Emotions in the field. The psychology and anthropology of fieldwork experience. Standford University Press.
Davis, TW., & Obertino-Norwood, H. (2024). Pandemic ethnography. Fieldwork in transformed social space. Qualitative Research 24(5), 1272-1290.
Frykman, J., & Gilje, N. (2003). Being there – new perspectives on Phenomenology and the Analysis of Culture. Nordic Academic Press.
Goffman, E. (1956). Embarrassment and social organization. American Journal of Sociology 62, 264-271.
Hastrup, K. (1992). Det antropologiske projekt. Om forbløffelse. Copenhagen: Gyldendal.
Hastrup, K. (1995). A Passage to anthropology. Between experience and theory. London: Routledge.
Hastrup, K. (2003). Ind i verden. En grundbog i antropologisk metode. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Heidegger, M. (1927). Sein und Zeit. Berlin: De Gruyter Verlag.
Hine, C. (2000). Virtual ethnography. London: Sage
Hine, C. (2017). From virtual ethnography to the embedded, embodied, everyday internet. In Hjorth, L., Horst, H., Galloway, A., & Bell, G. (Eds.). The Routledge companion to digital ethnography. New York and London: Routledge, pp. 21–29.
Horton, S. B. (2021). On pandemic privilege. Reflections on a ‘home-bound pandemic ethnography’. Journal for the Anthropology of North America 24(2), 98-107.
Howlett, M. (2022). Looking at the ‘field’ through a zoom lens. Methodological reflections on conducting online research during a global pandemic. Qualitative Research 22(3), 387–402.
Jørgensen, N. J., Dannesboe, K. I., Kousholt, D., Clemensen, N., & Winther, I. W. (2024). Familieliv i krise og forandring. Betydningen af pandemi og klimaforandringer for forældreskabsidealer i Danmark. Barn. Forskning om barn og barndom i Norden 42(1), 6-21.
Khawaja, I., & Kousholt, D. (2021). Editorial. transmethodology. Creating spaces for transgressive and transformative inquiry. Outlines. Critical Practice Studies 22(1), 1-21.
Kousholt, D. (2005). Fund i forskning. Hvad jeg lærte om forskning i min sovepose. Kvinder, Køn & Forskning 3, 59-67.
Lorimer, F. (2010). Using emotions as a form of knowledge in a psychiatric fieldwork setting. In Davies, J., & Spencer, D. (Eds). Emotions in the field. The psychology and anthropology of fieldwork experience. Standford University Press, pp. 98-127.
Luhmann, N. (1993). Deconstruction as second-order observing. New Literary History 24(4), 763-782.
Miller, D. (2001). Home possessions. Material culture behind closed doors. Routledge
Kousholt, D, Jørgensen, N.J, Dannesboe, K.I, Jørgensen, N.J., Clemensen, N., & Winther, I.W. (in prep). Family care in times of crisis.
Pink, S., Horst, H., Postil, J., Hjorth, L., Lewis, T., & Tacchi, J. (2015). Digital ethnography. Principles and practice. Sage.
Podjed, D. (2021). Renewal of ethnography in the time of the COVID-19 crisis. Sociologija I Prostor 59, 267–284.
Rosa, H. (2015). Social acceleration. A new theory of modernity. Columbia University Press.
Rosa, H. (2019 [2016]). Resonance. A sociology of the relationship to the world. Cambridge: Polity.
Watson, A., & Lupton, D. (2022). Remote fieldwork in homes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Video-call ethnography and pap drawing methods. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 21, 1–12.
Winther, I. W. (2005). Hjemlighed. Kulturfænomenologiske studier. Danmarks Pædagogiske Universitetsforlag.
Winther, I. W. (2009). Homing oneself. Home as a practice. Haecceity Papers 4(2), 49-83.
Winther, I. W. (2015). To practice mobility – on a small scale. Culture Unbound. Journal of Current Cultural Research. 7 (2), 215-231.
Winther, I. W., Kousholt, D., Jørgensen, N. J., Clemensen, N. & Dannesboe, K. I. (2023). ’Det er som at vente på et tog, der bliver ved med at være forsinket’. Coronatid i et ungeperspektiv. Nordiske Udkast, 51(1), 31–54.
Wynn, L. L., & Trnka, S. (2022). ‘Being there’ during lockdown. A phenomenological perspective on ethnography of the pandemic present and research methods for the future. In Matthewman, S. (Ed.). A Research Agenda for COVID-19. United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, pp. 175-194.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
From issue no. 1 2022 and onward, the journal uses the CC Attribution-NonCommercial- Share Alike 4.0 license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) The authors retain the copyright to their articles.
The articles published in the previous 37 issues (From Vol. 1, no. 1, 1999 to Vol. 22, No. 1, 2021, are published according to Danish Copyright legislation. This implies that readers can download, read, and link to the articles, but they cannot republish these articles. The journal retain the copyright of these articles. Authors can upload them in their institutional repositories as a part of a green open access policy.
