Further, the sixth moment marked the date when the phrase Web 2.0 was first coined on April 1, 1999, by Darci DiNucci (1999, p. 32); the seventh moment marked the date when Web 1.0 officially was switched to Web 2.0 (i.e., November 20, 2001) and marked the period during which social media websites were developed and used, including the launching of MySpace (January 1, 2003) and Facebook (February 4, 2004), as well as the hosting of the first Web 2.0 conference on October 1, 2004, by O’Reilly Media Live, which popularized the term Web 2.0; and the eighth and ninth moments marked the creation of resources such as Wiki Spaces (January 1, 2005) and YouTube (August 20, 2005).
Since the introduction of Web 2.0, the number of users of Web 2.0 platforms has increased exponentially—leading my coauthors and me to call for a 10th moment in qualitative research, which we labeled as “the period of Methodological Innovation, in which qualitative researchers go beyond the traditional ways of collecting primary and reflexive data” (Onwuegbuzie, Leech, & Collins, 2010, p. 697). In so doing, we argued that qualitative researchers would “transcend this methodological contestation and methodological divide by taking advantage of the innovative approaches to reflexivity... and the latest technology and computer-mediated communication” (p. 697).
The use of Web 2.0 platforms has permeated many communities and nations—for example, with more than two billion people using the Internet worldwide. According to the Pew Research Center (2015), in the United States, the proportion of adults who use the Internet increased from 14 percent by the end of the sixth moment (i.e., post-experimental inquiry) to 66 percent by the end of the seventh moment (i.e., methodologically contested present) to 87 percent within the eighth (i.e., unnamed) and ninth (i.e., fractured future) moments—specifically, as of January 2014. Of these Internet users, the proportion of adults who use social networking sites (i.e., social media) increased from 8 percent by the end of the seventh moment to 74 percent in January 2014. Further, by April 2015, 68 percent of U.S. adults owned a smartphone, 45 percent owned a tablet computer, 19 percent owned an ebook reader, 40 percent owned a game console, and 14 percent owned a portable gaming device (Pew Research Center, 2015).
Globally, Internet use has grown by 566 percent from the beginning of the seventh moment in 2000 to deep into the eighth and ninth moments in 2012. And even though every region has reported proportionally fewer Internet users than does the United States, Internet usage worldwide still is significant—with 34 percent, on average, of the world’s population using the Internet: comprising 68 percent in Oceania/Australia, 63 percent in Europe (63 percent), 43 percent in Latin America/Caribbean, 40 percent in the Middle East, 28 percent in Asia, and 16 percent in Africa (Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2013). In the parlance of quantitative researchers (cf. Peters & Van Voorhis, 1940) and some qualitative researchers (cf. Onwuegbuzie, 2003), all of these proportions represent large effect sizes in the context of their sociocultural and geopolitical milieu. In fact, as someone who has been extremely fortunate to have travelled to numerous countries and states that represent six continents, I have witnessed first-hand the widespread and diverse use of Web 2.0 platforms—from Bedouin Arabs in Israel and Palestine (Bremaud, 2013) to members of the Masai Tribe in Kenya (Dimbleby, 2010)—to provide just a couple examples.
However, the use of Web 2.0 tools by researchers has not kept pace with the use by people in their daily lives. For example, in an article that I published as co–guest editor of a special issue in the International Journal of Qualitative Methods, Snelson (in press) used a systematic literature review process to examine trends in qualitative and mixed methods social media research literature published from 2007 through 2013 by searching the three major databases: Academic Search Premier, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Of the thousands of articles published during this time period, Snelson (in press) identified only 174 peer-reviewed qualitative research journal articles wherein social media played a central role. Although this represents an increase in the qualitative media research literature in recent years, this low proportion of published articles involving the study of online environments relative to the study of offline environments does not reflect the popularity of Web 2.0 platforms as a means of communication. Thus, it is not surprising that Greenhow, Robelia, and Hughes (2009) declared, “A stronger research focus on students’ everyday use of Web 2.0 technologies and their learning with Web 2.0 both in and outside of classrooms is needed” (p. 246). Interestingly, Windschitl’s (1998) call, made between the sixth and seventh moments, for researchers to utilize qualitative research methods in order to explore, to discover, and to describe complex changes that occur in the context of Web-based teaching and learning, as well as to understand technological, ethical, educational, professional, and/or social practices pertaining to technology use not only across people’s life span, but also across a whole day (e.g., home, institutions of learning, work place, social spaces) is still very much applicable today in the ninth moment, justifying the need for the tenth moment, as stated previously.
Despite the importance of studying online spaces (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, blogs, wikis, forums, and listservs), the major research methodology textbooks focus primarily—if not exclusively—on methodologies pertaining to the study of offline spaces, with not even a chapter allocated to methodologies that are applicable to the study of online spaces. Unfortunately, the methodological tools presented in standard research methodology books for studying offline spaces are insufficient, per se, for examining many Web 2.0–related research questions. Further, of the few textbooks devoted specifically to online research methodologies, most of them were published during the early years of the eighth and ninth moments, and although they contain some useful information, they need updating, such as Fielding and Lee’s (2008) excellent edited book—which represents the year that the earliest forms of file hosting services (e.g., Dropbox) and Internet-based social bookmarking services (e.g., academia.edu) came to the fore. Further, very few graduate school programs provide students with the option to take formal courses on online research methods.
This lack of (current) published works in the area of online research methods coupled with the lack of formal and systematic instruction on conducting online research likely explain the relative lack of attention to the study of online spaces. And such lack of attention has dire consequences for the advancement of research methodologies in general. As an example, as noted by Leach, Kalinowski, Onwuegbuzie, and Leamons (in press), with very few exceptions (e.g., medical research), researchers representing many fields and disciplines still rely on printed consent forms to document participants’ informed consent, instead of using online, or electronic, informed consent systems that “have the potential to help with logistical problems and possibly increase the consent rates among research studies because they are often more convenient to administer, to complete, and to submit” (p. xx).
Therefore, when I was asked to write the foreword for this book, I became very excited because it meant that I would get the opportunity to read a book that was much needed before it was released to the general public. And after reading it the first time, I was immediately able to declare unequivocally that this book delivered extremely effectively what the title promised! Now, I am a big fan of the most popular professional sport played in the United States, namely, the National Football League (NFL), being extremely fortunate to have attended Super Bowl XLVII between the San Francisco 49ers (my favorite team) and the Baltimore Ravens in New Orleans in 2013 (Yes, research methodologists do have a life!). Interestingly, a few weeks before I wrote this foreword, during halftime of a football game that occurred on a Monday night, while waiting for the teams to begin the second half, I decided to spend a few moments to read causally the Introduction chapter of this book. However, after reading this chapter, I found myself not being able to put the book down. Subsequently, I ignored completely the whole second half of the football