We are still in the early days of assembling the corpus of the TREASURE ethnography via interviews. But it’s useful to have an early check on the data, as already a respectably-sized trove of data has been collected.
So far, we have:
- 31 informants
- 770 contributions (post)
- 26,000 words
- 759 ethnographic annotations
- 113 ethnographic codes
We have induced the network of codes-co-occurrences from this early stage TREASURE corpus. The nodes of this network are the ethnographic codes; two codes are connected by one edge if at least one post has been coded with both codes. We interpret co-occurrence as association. Co-occurrence edges have two properties:
- association depth (abbreviated in d) is the number of co-occurrences underpinning each edge.
- association breadth (abbreviated in b) is the number of informants that have suthored at least one contribution coded with both codes.
In this early stage, the co-occurrence network of the TREASURE corpus has 113 nodes representing codes, and 817 edges. This makes for a network that is large, dense and difficult to interpret visually:
In all figures, node size represents the number of times that particular code occurs in the corpus (it varies from 1 to 57; the code
perception of recycling is the most widely used, with 57 occurrences). Edge color represents association depth d, with bluer edges encoding higher values of d. The deepest edge (d = 15) connects
perception of recycling with
This network has a clear core-periphery structure. In order to interpret it more easily, we find it useful to reduce it by filtering out the more shallow edges. In the figure below, we have selected only the edges with d >= 6:
A chain of connected clusters appears here quite clearly.
To the right, a cluster of codes representing the way drivers try to make sense of the
concept of circular economy, with
perception of recycling at its center. Moving left, we find a cluster surrounding
sustainability: it is clear that our informants see it a technical-political issue, not just a technical one (
political measurements). Further left, we find the very intriguing code
comparison. The ability to compare seems to be a key enabler for drivers to push the industry in the technological direction they want it to take, and this leads to a conversation about older vehicles, products of a different era where repairability (if nopt necessarily recyclability) where more important than they are now. To the left of that, we find a cluster of codes that seem to point to possible ways to a better circularity, hence sustainability, of motor cars:
expertise and service,
self-service ability, but also
dysfunctionality, that seems to point to a critical attitude of informants.