Ethical and methodological considerations

Observing social activities in general

Methods with a focus on social aspects of spaces are key to understanding the experience of space and how people use them. A simple count of people performing neutral activities (e.g. sitting, lying down) is less problematic but the more detailed the observation or specific the identified activity the more ethical issues are raised through invasion of privacy. The Perecquian approach involves making very detailed notes of everything observed in the site. Like the Dancewalk, this is thought to raise awareness and allow the observer to notice things that they did not initially notice. This takes time and is quite demanding mentally because spaces can be described in a considerable amount of detail. However, writing notes means it is easy to miss things in busy spaces, and is therefore not a substitute for counting methods. There is also a risk that the observer makes judgements or conclusions in their notes based on their own experience. So this is a less objective method compared to photography. Aside from the privacy issues of observing people’s lives, there are also problems with the participant observer role that the Perec method uses. As discussed previously, people noticed that we were doing something out of the ordinary and repeating these observations could affect the natural behaviour of people. This could also be a product of our choice of observation time, in that considerably more people uses these spaces on the weekend. This larger number would make observations less intrusive, but it would also miss those that may use this space at quiet times in order to relax.

Photography

Since the goal of this project is to study how people experience space, we must observe what they are doing. The most optimal for this is to film what is happening in the space. In order to put up a surveillance camera in Sweden one needs a permit, and it is questionable whether a research project is a valid enough excuse to apply for this. The point is that by watching people we may be invading their privacy.

Taking a photo in a public space is not illegal but taking photos of people doing activities can also raise ethical considerations. Findings in rhythmanalysis are illustrated by showing images of people doing activities (e.g. Wunderlich, 2013) and it is up to the researchers to consider whether this is appropriate to identify. We tried to take photos in a way that would respect the identity of the people (e.g. photo from behind or at a distance). Many researchers working with rhythmanalysis use time-lapse photography as a more ethical form of surveillance of a public space. This depends on the interval. We used 10s as an interval which could mean that the same individual appears in several consecutive frames if they are moving slowly. But in a public space that is not used frequently, a longer interval would likely miss any activity taking place.

Proprioception

Proprioception in the form of a Dancewalk is useful to elevate awareness of a space and allow us to make more observations. In this respect it is similar to the Perecquian approach. Dancewalks are not available for every space so this method has limitations. But the idea can be applied to new spaces. For example, the Nyhamnen walk starts from visual aspects of the space and directs the listener to explore these through body positions. This allowed us to recognize the wavy pavements lines in Henry Dunkers Plats, the shape of the path in Kungsparken and the flow of water and people in Gröningen.

We are not professional dancers so one can question the credibility of our proprioception in this project. But there is more to this issue than dance skill. We asked professionals to improvise their experience of two spaces in Stockholm. Asplind is sceptical to this approach as many dancers simply use a site as a stage rather than actually interacting with it. Mörk and Mäkinen did interact with materialities like trees and benches but repetition of certain movements (e.g. running around the perimeter) illustrates a ‘choreography’ that one would see in a dance performance. Modern dance in general can be difficult to understand so one can question its use altogether. We argue that it did add to our understanding and identified two interesting issues regarding the use of public space. First, the dancers both chose to dance in the parts of the spaces where most people engaged in optional activities, suggesting that the presence of or potential for social interaction was a part of their experience. Second, in Stockholm the people in the surroundings did not seem to pay attention to the dance despite the fact that this is not a ‘normal’ activity. In Helsingborg, everything we did attracted attention. For example, simply stopping to read an information sign led to an interesting conversation with a local resident about the park and the apartment buildings. By using proprioception, one could easily uncover the ‘norms’ of the place and use this to better understand the observed or lack of social activities. At the same time, it could perhaps be considered unethical for us to interfere with the normal activities and rhythms in these spaces.

Sound

Recording sound is a simple method and sound files can be compressed to easily share online. There are again ethical issues related to privacy in that one can hear the conversations of people near the microphone. Without a visual context these dialogues lack any context even if the stereo recording allows the listener to follow their path from one side to the other. The main strength of this method is to remove the effect of visual senses from a scene and provide a new perspective on the space. This works less well for the researcher making the recording that has a visual memory of the space but still it gives additional information to pair with the observations. Disruptive sounds, like car noise and wind, seem to relate to the use of spaces while more subtle noises, like voices and birds, contribute to the soundscape.

Next...