R3: Ethnography and Contextual Inquiry

The similarities in ethnography, contextual inquiry, and design ethnography are obvious. They all need researchers to be involved in real working context or culture of the users. Researchers can observe and conduct interviews on users and record data and descriptions. With this kind of synchronization with users, researchers can get first-hand information that they cannot acquire when users are not work at that time, since human always forgets something and many things cannot be put into words when we experience them.

But there are also differences in these three methods. Contextual inquiry is more intentional and specific compared to ethnographical methods. Questions for the interviews are well-planed and researchers ask questions to users frequently when they work, trying to reach to a design solution in a short period. Ethnography, however, tends to be more open-ended. Reports often contain many details and are objective. Researchers need to rearrange those data to get direction for the next step. Design Ethnography is improved ethnography that is aimed to solve design problems. Profiles and scenarios of this method are all well-formed and concise. Researchers also make many diagrams and graphs to better understand records.

In my opinion, we can use contextual inquiry for most cases, but for some areas that users need to concentrate on operation, such flight and communication, we can use ethnographic methods since users cannot spare time to answer questions. Also, if we don’t quite familiar with the domain, we can use ethnographic methods to gather as much data as possible, then rearrange them to elicit valuable information for our design. In addition, we can use these three methods only when case study is enough for our sake, since sometimes only a great number of statistical data can tell something.

Ethnography describes an event with respect to a particular setting and circumstances around it. Though HCI draws from or uses principles of ethnography to research towards human centered design or event, it differs in the sense, as it explicitly aims to cover a wide and diverse range of population.

Ethnography is master set of subsets namely contextual inquiry and design ethnography; both the subsets are derivations of ethnography. Contextual Inquiry shares same goals as ethnography, like understanding why and how a user does what he does, however with the intention of acute reasoning behind it and for the purpose of creating a new system to do facilitate the same job. Thus, contextual inquiry is implementation of data gathered through questionnaires and surveys for creating something, whereas ethnography is comparatively open-ended.

Design ethnography is in a way application of ethnomethodology in real world design problem. Designers can take the abstract from ethnographic researches to apply in actual design questions, and with the help of tested design methodologies they can come up with a solution that can solve the design problem for masses.

Here, I would give a hypothetical example of how I would apply these distinct yet conjoint approaches. To solve the water supply problem in rural areas we can undertake an ethnographic study of the region. With help of contextual inquiries we can collect data like sources of water, rainfall cycle, means of storage of water, density of the population affected by it, what localities do to overcome this problem etc. Then, come up with a design ethnographic solution like building artificial man made lakes, dams, reservoirs, and irrigation methods for taking care of food supply.

All these three methodologies studies users in context. These methodologies do not rely on just what users say but extend their approach to observe what users do in practice. They observe users action in their workplace or in their more natural settings. Contextual Inquiry and design ethnography are derived from traditional ethnography.

Contextual inquiry tries to understand and interpret the data gathered during the process rather than having a open-ended view as in case of ethnography. Other difference is that in contextual inquiry the investigator is not a passive observer. He/she is actively involved to gain understanding of how things happen and ask questions about his/her understanding of whole situation. On the other hand, ethnography tends to keep unbiased and open-ended view of situation. Contextual inquiry should be used in a situation where the intention is to design a new system based on collected data.

Design ethnography is a technique where traditional ethnography meets the design. Generally, by the design phase requirements are fixed, as in case of contextual inquiry, but with design ethnography technique designers work with ethnographers to refine requirements to understand users better and focus on user experience. Design ethnography could be used in a situation where an organization has targeted users segment and it wants to understand users better for the future products.

Ethnography, design ethnography and contextual inquiry are all qualitative research methods that use concrete data derived from real experiences observed and recorded in natural environments, which when analyzed, interpreted and re-interpreted fuel in building usable systems for the actual users. The commonalities are many because they are essentially methodological derivatives of the ideology of “knowing the user” by defining ways of connecting with people in their work or living environments. All these methods help in extracting the tacit facts which unfold freely when people are observed in their natural settings or context, escaping the inherit complexity involved in other methods where what people say might be different from what they actually do. Evidently, all three methods consume a considerable amount of time and resources and being qualitative fail to produce quantifiable data like surveys do. But even if they miss on generating huge numbers which at times don’t really speak-up, the outcomes of these methods are consistently resonant and in-sync with the real needs of the people.

The differences between the three methods can be broadly seen in terms of “focus”, “time” and “scope”. Ethnography gives a holistic view of the target group affected by the social, cultural and environmental factors thus focus is not on designing a particular product, which is the case in design ethnography and contextual inquiry. Design ethnographers have objectives that are much clearer and well-defined, rather more design-oriented. Also, ethnography being so complete needs time which can range from months to years, whereas contextual inquiry can be done in few hours or days. The users in contextual inquiry are partners in the methodology they equally participate in the collection as well as interpretation of information that is gathered and analyzed; it involves one-to-one interviews, brainstorming sessions, it is much more directed towards the product. Ethnographers do planned observations, which may involve interviews, but they try not to influence the group under study by any means.

For the same kind of goal I will use Ethnography if the budget and time is sufficient to justify the holistic nature of the method to produce results which can be widely applied not only to particular product but to the field of study. I will use design ethnography if with the above resources I also have an understanding of the actual design-product. I will use contextual inquiry if the target users are easily accessible for, the time and budget is limited and if the product in consideration has a direct effect on only a particular group of people.

Basically, I think the similarities in ethnography, contextual inquiry and design ethnography is the researcher or designer will get close to users’ life to understand the context and to collect information that what users really need. Since most of users can’t express their thoughts (needs) appropriately or even have no ideas. Thereby these methods focus on users (people) that will discovery potential problems in reality; especially, researchers or designers can observe complete interaction in those products or services which need multiple people to work together.

Differently, ethnography is a broader research approach than other two. Ethnography includes many methodologies to understand human behavior or cultures per observation, writing/reading and exploration. Such like researches concentrate in ethnic study, history, biology and so on. So it uncovers potential new thoughts and understanding. Design ethnography is a combination of design and business. This method not only simply records the understanding of a situation, but also recreates insights thoughts from designers. Contextual inquiry is a specific inquiry to explore and investigate users, that how users understand context and collect data, to help interaction design a better organized information.

Thus, contextual inquiry can be well use in observation users’ context and analysis how they work, how they feel, what they want and so on. It offers practical investigations to researchers. Besides, researchers can gather effective data by participating into users’ context. Hopefully, researchers may also discover potential problems based on their professional background; since researchers can investigate first-hand data, they. On the other hand, by using ethnography research approaches, designers could figure out new opportunities and observe new insights which contextual inquiry can’t offer.

As far as I can see, ethnography, contextual inquiry, and design ethnography have a kind of inclusion relation mutually. Design ethnography is using ethnographic techniques to do an industry design, and contextual inquiry is a user-centered design ethnographic research method, concluded by the contextual design. If we see it in this way the similarities and differences are quite obvious.
The similarities are all three need a specific reach in a specific context. No matter for each of them, participation is the most critical prerequisite. Researchers have to join the communities and gather first-hand information from informants, mostly through interviews, observation. Researchers have to make themselves infuse into their targets, and try their best to understand their informants.

The differences are also very outstanding. Ethnography is an open-ended and long term study and a qualitative research design aimed at exploring cultural phenomena. The resulting field study or a case report reflects the knowledge and the system of meanings in the lives of a cultural group. Its goal is to understand the socio-cultural ecosystem as a whole, by living in the community for months, or even years.

However, A contextual inquiry interview is usually structured as an approximately two-hour, one-on-one interaction. A contextual inquiry always focuses on a topic which is relevant to the design scope. As a part of contextual design, contextual inquiry is design process to collect data about users in the field which is for creating and prototyping product and service concepts.

Similarities:
Ethnography, contextual inquiry and design ethnography are all methods to figure out what the stakeholders’ requirements are. These methods need investigation, observation, interaction and conclusion. The outputs of these methods all depend on culture, environment and custom, etc. Which means, the results or requirements could totally different if objects being observed vary.
Differences:
Ethnography seems focus on group and observation or survey from a general perspective, recording data and behavior of human when they interact with environment in detail. However, the intention of ethnography is to take an open-ended view, while contextual inquiry means to understand and to interpret the data gathered. And contextual inquiry aims to design a new product, whose goal is quite clear. Besides, the users are experts in contextual inquiry and are encouraged to lead the investigation. So, the observers here in contextual inquiry are some kind of not passive and need to know their focus and do assumption about the situation. Nevertheless, the observers in ethnography do not have to make sense what possible results or data would be collected before they begin to investigate. When comes to the design ethnography, people pay more attention on design and try to solve the problems during producing and improve the existing product as well.
When to use:
Ethnography is used to collect the requirements of a group of users who have different background such as nationality, education, age, etc. Contextual inquiry is used on people who have experience or knowledge of the new system and can provide valuable advice. Design ethnography is used when the product need a better scenario or runs into a troublesome situat

All the three methods are qualitative research methods to study human behaviour, and can be used to design, invent and implement new products.
Ethnography studies more of the dynamics, relationships and cultural aspects of people. Ethnographic research is generally done in a more natural environment than a formal research setting. Ethnography gives greater insights on how people make sense of their world, and often cultural norms influence design decisions. I think ET makes more compelling products. Contextual Inquiry on the other hand, is generally done in the setting of the participant and is mostly 1×1. It generally involves in asking a set of standard questions and observed and questioned while they work in their own environments. It is a mix of interview and observation. It involves observing people doing their tasks and having them talk about why they are doing while they are doing.

Ethnography is a qualitative description of the human social condition, which is based on observation and fieldwork. Ethnography, contextual inquiry and design ethnography are 3 of the research methods used to generate ethnographic data by using techniques like user observation (which could be passive where the ethnographers become transparent to the users and active, where users actively participate in the interaction and observe the system), interviews etc.

The main similarity between ethnography, contextual inquiry and design ethnography is that they all try to understand the working of the system and the interaction of the user with the system in its natural surroundings and then try to formulate the requirements of the system. This helps in collecting unbiased data about the system and the way in which the users interact with the system. It also makes sure that nuances of product usage are completely understood, which might be inadvertently missed when a user describes a system.

The main difference between the 3 methods is the extent to which the ethnographers are involved or participate in the natural environment of the system when the users interact with it. In contextual inquiry, the ethnographers are involved more actively. They can observe the real functioning of the system and can even participate in the environment. This helps in completely understanding the usage of the system. But design ethnography follows a more passive observation.

I agree with Xinlu’s view that there are some limitations to contextual inquiry and that it cannot be used in all kinds of systems, such as flight and communication. In this case I feel a more passive observation of the system is better.

So what’s the difference between ethnography, contextual inquiry, and design ethnography? It seems to be mostly a matter of scope, and your choice to engage in the study of one or another would be dictated by the type of question you want to answer. From greatest scope to narrowest scope it would go: ethnograpy -> design ethnograpy -> contextual inquiry.

All of these concepts are concerned with the desire to understand a culture that you aren’t familiar with. The word ‘culture’ is used liberally here – it could refer to a population in a different country with a different set of values or socioeconomic class. Or it could refer to a population down the street with a different set of values, or it could just refer to a workplace environment that you’re not familiar with.

So ethnography is a very general term and as I was reading Dourish’s chapter it took me a moment to adjust and realize that this reading it for this class. Ethnography is very broad and simply concerned with understanding another culture, their customs and values. You would use this in any situation where you need to understand a culture.

Design ethnography narrows the scope of ethnography to answer a question related specifically to product development. We’ll be doing this for our quarter-long group design project. If you ask a research question like “how can you design a better baby crib”, then your ethnographic population is mothers of infants and you’ll be asking research questions like “in what ways do mothers interact with their infants children”. You will be studying this ethnography with the intent of understanding their lives with respect to their babies.

And the contextual inquiry takes the scope a few steps narrower. When asking the research question “in what ways do mothers interact with their infant children”, you must be aware of the context in which they interact. How high up does the crib sit? Is the mother sitting or standing? Is the crib in the living room, in the mother’s room or in the baby’s own room? You are now inquiring about the context of the interaction.

All methods involve sampling from users of a relevant community- whether it be the targeted user group of a
newly designed product or a foreign community. Up-close and personal experiences and interaction with the subjects
are crucial to each of these methods. There is a goal of understanding the needs and requirements of
the user group and to define and understand the relationships they hold.

In Ethnography, attention is brought to what the ethnographer or researcher might see, hear or feel. Focus
is directed to the self, which is thought of as an ‘instrument of knowing’. It seems as if an ethnographer
is more immersed in the habitat or surrounding of a user group that they study; they try to place themselves in
the shoes of the user group and to grasp the user experiences firsthand. Contextual inquiry deals more with
acquiring qualitative data from the user group using a structured interview. The idea of observing the user
group in their own habitat or relevant environment is maintained. However, a researcher using contextual inquiry
may not be as immersed as an ethnographer. Observations are made by the interviewer, and relevant questions are asked.
In the end, the interview will interpret the gathered facts from the user’s answers, their observed behaviors
and the surrounding environment.

Design ethnography has a focus of using ethnographic work/applying ethnography to support the design agenda of
creating technology, tools, and products. Connections between ethnography and design must be made, and
one way to provide structure and organization for designers is to use tools such as models, scenarios and
prototypes, etc. This work has expanded in providing insights to inform design innovations and decisions made
for products, experiences, services, processes, business strategies, and ultimately to solve real-world problems.

I would use design ethnography for many of the design questions posed in class. Questions that solve problems
and address practical issues where users need to be understood. I would use ethnography to understand cultural norms
that are different from our own. Contextual inquiry could also be useful in supporting the design of a system
or product that addresses a practical issue and could be used alongside or be a useful alternative to design
ethnography. This may prove more useful when the designer has a focus area in which the interview questions are targeted
and may be more relevant to the design.

All of these techniques are person-focused (they have the goal of understanding the person and his/her goals/needs/wants/behaviors). They all are data-driven and include qualitative components, such as observations and interviews. All are, I believe, helpful in design. However, the 3 differ in the types of questions they ask, the way they ask the questions, and their usefulness in different contexts.

Ethnography is immersive (and design ethnography can be too)–the researcher participates as one of the “subjects” and the line between the observer and the participant is thus blurred. Culture and contexts are of utmost importance in ethnographic research, as the focus of research is on subjective experiences and meaning, as researchers attempt to describe a group of people and understand what they do, how they do it, and why they do it. This technique can be useful in understanding how designs fit in a broader context. I believe that this approach may be the most useful at the very beginning processes of design–that is, brainstorming and coming up with design ideas, since there is no clear cut goal when using this approach, but to carefully see.

Contextual inquiry asks a much more specific question: How does this group of people do work, and what do they want and need when it comes to doing work? The goal of contextual inquiry is to design new software and hardware using this information. Unlike in ethnography, researches using this approach do not take the role of an insider, that is, they do not attempt to “be” their customer. This technique is particularly useful for designing new systems for a very specific purpose and clientele, as it rather focused in scope.

Design ethnography is similar to ethnography, only it “harnesses” the information from ethnographic research into opportunities for design. Ethnography itself lays out the methods for gathering data, but does not address what to do with the information. This method is particularly important in light of the expanding global market–understanding culture and context is crucial when bringing designs from one country to another. I recall some very interesting (but informed!) differences in design when I traveled to Asia last year. Research suggested that Asians like things in a long cylandrical form–so we see Oreos in Asia that are long and straw-like rather than round cookies. The phones there are also long flip-phones. Following this, I believe that design ethnography is useful for revising current designs for use in different contexts, including different cultures.

These three concepts are intertwined to some extent. If we need to distinguish them, I would consider ethnography is a more general approach. Ethnography design is the design process which adopts ethnograph methods. Context inquiry is just part of ethnography. However, I don’t think there is need to arbitarily differentiate them. As they are intertwined with each other rather than separated methods or concepts, people often stand in the middle. For example, in some way, people who do ethnography studies are alsoattempt to provide design ideas. Though Poul also criticized about this trend, I still think that people doing things in this way indicates that there is a need in fact. Why we need to clearly draw a border line between them? Why not digest them all together. If we investigate these concepts from a historical view as Poul did, the concepts are developed from borrowing the ideas across the domains. Although some new ideas are proposed and specified, the underline principles are very similar. When we do interviews, observations, interpretations, the rules that we need to follow are almost the same.
I am glad to read how people summarize their experiences. The ideas are helpful to get starters warm up.

Ethnography, contextual inquiry and design ethnography are all concerned with the researcher/designer going to the user to observe him because what people say is not always what they do. Ethnography is a research method based on observing people in their natural environment rather than in a formal research setting. The aim of design in this case is open ended, thereby leaving the possibilities limitless. Ethnographic inquiry requires the observer to take a more passive role in observing his subjects than he would in contextual inquiry. His goal is to understand a social setting from the point of view of his subjects, so it is important that he writes down what he sees without interjecting his own point of view.

In design ethnography, in contrast, the designer considers the requirements more pointedly, thereby approaching the context with predefined designated goals.

Contexual inquiry is as a user centered ethnography method. The final aim is his case is to design a new system. The objects and environment the user interacts with are just as important. Contextual inquiry allows for a more active role by the observer by allowing the observer to discuss what he sees with his subjects and to ask questions.

I would say that ethnography can be used when there is ample time and the design end is open-ended. Contexual inquiry can be used when we wish to find out the users unmet needs, the potentials problems and solutions, interactions etc. Design ethnography can be used when the designer has in mind a particular objective and has a short time span to achieve it.