Practice-Based Research: Teaching Resource

Using auto-ethnomethodology

The key element that separates auto-ethnomethodology from retrospective (and thus highly problematic) reflection is in situ self-observation, particularly in the form of documentation. The practitioner-researcher undergoing the creative act for the purpose of research takes care to develop a system of documentary records of their creative activities: a research log noting activities, approaches, and thoughts as the creative act is undertaken; notes on the creative artifact itself, in the form of revision notes, code commentary, etc.; various drafts and versions of the creative piece (saved separately, rather than overwritten with each revision). This documentation then serves as a record of observation, which the practitioner-researcher can later analyse for patterns, sources of inspiration, cognitive activity, and changes in the creative artifact as mapped to the creator’s activities.

Harold Garfinkel outlines this documentation approach, drawn from Karl Mannheim's "documentary method of interpretation" (Garfinkel 1967, 78), which bears significant parallels to the concept of semiotics: this method treats the actual appearance of an activity (arguably the signifier) as evidence "documenting" that activity's underlying pattern (that which is signified). For instance, a writer marking a draft-in-progress with the note "Hmm, now where does this go from here?" is an observable, recordable signifier documenting the underlying cognitive pattern of composition (signified), which can be examined and interpreted by the observer.

This page has paths: