Finding the “Field” in our “Homes” and our “Homes” in the “Field”: A Critique of the “Home–Field” Dichotomy

ABSTRACT The “home–field” dichotomy has long been a core assumption of fieldwork in political science. As in other social science disciplines, political scientists rely on these categories to contextualize our research within particular time–space nexuses and to separate our personal lives and private dwellings and institutions from our sources, participants, and broader research environments. Although the spatial, temporal, and emotional divisions between our “homes” and “fields” have always been arbitrary, they are increasingly blurred when we use remote and online methods for research, especially for qualitative studies. This article problematizes the home–field dichotomy within the context of remote and online political science field research. We contend that the overlap of our homes and fields in digital fieldwork poses different challenges for our professional boundaries than offline research, particularly in terms of separating our personal and research lives, mitigating risk, and protecting our mental health. Given the growing use of remote and online methods, we argue that the discipline of political science must account more seriously for the muddling of our homes and fields to support rigorous, transparent, and ethical empirical research.