Iteration, iteration, iteration: Digital public archaeology and the presentation of online research

Having recently completed her PhD on participatory digital technologies and widening participation in the discipline of archaeology, Lorna Richardson considers the interplay between her research and her own academic practice. The impact of the many discussions she had through various online platforms on the subject of social media, archaeology and Internet technologies had an iterative effect on her work and on her methods of data collection. Her research suggests there is still a great need for the archaeology community to explore further public consumption and creation of engaging and useful projects

Using Social Media as a Source for Understanding Public Perceptions of Archaeology: Research Challenges and Methodological Pitfalls

Digital social science research has had an important impact on the types of methodological approaches to the internet and digital social phenomena, practices and communities. Whilst this paper does not seek to include empirical data, it aims to elaborate further on these debates in digital social research, that is, research on ‘life in digital society’ (Lindgren 2017: 230), using insights from my own research methods. This paper will firstly consider some methodological pitfalls that could sabotage our digital social archaeology research. It will then discuss the importance of understanding the framework and sources of our data. It will outline the two main methodological approaches I have used in my own empirical research to date – ‘thick’ social media data collection and analysis, and digital ethnography. It will discuss some of the many ethical considerations that must be assessed and implemented when undertaking this type of work. I will argue for a methodological pragmatism when undertaking social research in the fields of archaeology and heritage, although this pragmatism can be applied to any field of social study in the digital world

Ethical Challenges in Digital Public Archaeology

This paper focuses specifically on the ethical challenges to the field of digital archaeology and the concerns of the digital public archaeologist. It considers the notions of digital research and ethical data collection, the social and political tensions implicit in digital communications on archaeological topics, and the possible effects on ethical concerns through post-processual approaches to participatory forms of digital media. Through an unpicking of these framings of professional and public interaction with archaeology and archaeologists in digital spaces, this paper proposes several future directions for ethical research, codes of conduct, and practice in digital archaeology

Online Tribes and Digital Authority:What Can Social Theory Bring to Digital Archaeology?

From early discussions of the disruptive potential of computer technologies for archaeological applications, to the present era of digital archaeology as the technical underpinning of modern archaeological practice, we have continued to debate the potential impacts of digital communication and digital capture and storage on our knowledge, profession and communications. The increased use of digital tools and methods for archaeological research and dissemination, as well as what Roosevelt (2015) has referred to as the shift to the digital paradigm within archaeological practice, leads us to suggest that the impact of this paradigm shift requires careful and critical examination. This article will examine the edges of the disciplines of archaeology and sociology, where we aim to advance our understanding of the relationship between digital technologies and archaeological knowledge from a uniquely social perspective, using the theoretical approaches of both classic and modern sociologists. The application of this lens of sociology to digital archaeology equips us to understand how archaeology and archaeological practice is situated in a social world, which is especially relevant in the Global West, where digital technology is ubiquitous. Through a critical consideration of the complexity of use of digital technologies within digital archaeology, we can begin to shift our focus away from the character and method of tools and workflow, to the background of intellectual power and influence