Plato the Platypus

fredag 9 oktober 2015

Theme 6 - Pre Seminar

Qualitative research

I have chosen the paper Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones & social media by Joanne Gikas and Michael M. Grant [1]. It explores both teaching and learning when devices such as smartphones and cellphones were implemented in higher education.

Which qualitative method or methods are used in the paper? Which are the benefits and limitations of using these methods?
The study uses focus groups interviews as its only method. The main benefits of focus group interviews are that they provide an opportunity for free discussion among the participants, it saves both time and money compared to individual interviews and tone of voice, body language and other visual and auditory queues can be detected by the moderator which would go unnoticed in a survey or questionnaire. But there are also limitations to using focus group interviews; since the interview is conducted in a group setting some participants will take more space in the discussion than others meaning that some opinions might not be fully voiced, there could be social pressure to agree with the common opinion and some participants might not be comfortable with sharing certain information in a interview or group setting.

These interviews were conducted online, which provides some extra benefits and limitations. The main benefits are that there is a lower cost to conduct these interviews and it allows for easier participation over long distances, the main limitations are that there might be technical difficulties and delay which could hinder discussion, the participants also won't be able to interact in the same way as they would face to face and auditory and visual queues are much harder to detect in an online setting.

What did you learn about qualitative methods from reading the paper?
I learnt that focus group interview can be used as the only method in a study, I have never really considered it a viable alternative as a sole method. But the study was conducted in a very good way in my opinion, and it also showed how important the opinions of participants can be when conducting research and that quantitative data is not always needed to draw compelling conclusions.

Which are the main methodological problems of the study? How could the use of the qualitative method or methods have been improved?
I would say say that the main methodological issue in this study is that the interviews were conducted online. While it did make it possible for the researchers to conduct interviews with students from institutions from different parts in the US the technology is still very limiting. I believe that individual interviews are to be preferred when conducting them online, this mainly due to delay which makes group discussions close to impossible, and that this study could have been improved either by having online individual interviews or in person focus group interviews.

Case study

Briefly explain to a first year university student what a case study is

A case study is a reseach method which focuses on one or several specific subjects, or cases, in a specific context; this could for example be persons, events, projects etc. It focuses on understanding the dynamics present and provides an in-depth view into this subject and can be used in both social and natural sciences but is more commonly used in social sciences. Within a case study several other research methods are used, both qualitative and quantitative, such as interviews, observations and experiments. Case studies are used to create new theories and descriptions as well as to test existing theories. [2,3]

Use the "Process of Building Theory from Case Study Research" (Eisenhardt, summarized in Table 1) to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of your selected paper.
I have chosen the study Social Media Competetive Analysis and Text mining: A Case Studt in the Pizza Industry by Wu He, Shenghua Zha and Ling Li [4]. It analyses unstructured text content on the three largest pizza chains in the US's Facebook and Twitter in order to perform a social media competitive analysis.

The main strengths of this study is the first steps in Eisenhardt's eight steps of the process of building theory from case study research. It is very clear and precise when getting started, selecting cases, crafting instruments and protocols, entering the field and analysing data. Especially the selection of cases is done with good reasoning and data behind it. The population "pizza chains" was chosen because it was one of the first industries that entered the social media arena for business purposes and has a large social media user base, then the three largest pizza chains. The outputs Twitter and Facebook because they have been shown by previous research to be the largest social media outlets and lastly the time period of October because it is the busiest period for pizza chains. It has also chosen both a qualitative, text mining and analysis and quantitative, looking at follower count etc, methods of data collection which provides a good ground for theory to stand upon.

The weaknesses of this study would be the latter steps in the process: sharping hypotheses, enfolding literature and researching closure. In my opinion they do not compare the three cases with each other, which one of the research questions was based on. No competitive analysis, meaning identifying and evaluating competitors' strategies and their strengths and weaknesses relative to your own [5], is actually being done in my opinion. There is also a lack of comparison with both conflicting and similar literature.

[1] Gikas, J., & Grant, M. M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones & social media. The Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18-26.
[2] http://www.ne.se/uppslagsverk/encyklopedi/l%C3%A5ng/fallstudie
[3] Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research.Academy of management review, 14(4), 532-550.
[4] He, W., Zha, S., & Li, L. (2013). Social media competitive analysis and text mining: A case study in the pizza industry. International Journal of Information Management, 33(3), 464-472.
[5] http://www.entrepreneur.com/encyclopedia/competitive-analysis

söndag 4 oktober 2015

Theme 4 - Post reflection

This week's theme focused on quantitative research, and naturally qualitative research was also brought up to contrast and discuss.

The reading consisted of a paper of our own choosing which used qualitative research methods and a study conducted by Kilteni et al. about virtual reality, VR, and body ownership during those circumstances. I found the reading very interesting! The paper about VR used qualitative research methods in the sense that is measured participants movement patterns and drew conclusions based on the numbers alone. The paper I chose was called "Information, expression, participation: How involvement in user generated concent relates to democratic engagement among young people", it investigated if youths who post a lot of unser generated concent online are more engaged in politics both online and offline. It was a very readable study! It used a quantitative questionnaire as its main method, one containing no free text questions but only ones which's answers could be quantified and be used in statistical measurements.

During the lecture qualitative and quantitative methods were discussed a bit and the paper on VR was explained in depth, especially the statistics they had done to arrive at their result. Even though I did find the study interesting I did not find the lecture especially giving. I think there was too much specific information on that one study for my liking.

During the seminar we discussed in smaller groups, my group discussed both qualitative and quantitative methods and their weak and strong points. We discussed how quantitative research provides data on which statistical measurements can be conducted and therefore the result could be generalised on a wider sample than the specific one used in the study, it is also in many cases less time consuming to collect data but a great deal of data has to be collected in order for the result to be statistically relevant. Qualitative methods often provide a wider picture since it contains more open questions and issues and pheomenons the researcher did not anticipate could occur more easily since the study is not as "boxed in". However qualitative data cannot be generalised and so the result is relevant on a much smaller sample, it is also often more time consuming than qualitative methods in both the data gathering and analysis. We also discussed how in qualitative research it is even more important that the researcher try to remain as objective as possible since the data gathered has to be analysed using a more subjective method than statistical measurements.

During the dicussion we discussed that if the time and resources are available a mix between both methods could sometimes be a good alternative. It is also good if qualitative research leads to quantitative and the other way around, if one study looks into something using quantitative methods it is sometimes relevant for another study to look into the same thing using qualitative methods.

I feel that during this theme I could relate to things I had done and learnt before to a greater extent than during the previous themes. Quantitative and qualitative research methods were discussed in depth during the degree project we wrote last semester. In my small seminar group we also discussed what everyone had done in their project and what research methods were used. We concluded that by conducting a study in that project we learnt a lot about research methods and that when we conduct our final degree project we will look at research methods in a different light after having actually used them. Another very interesting subject we touched upon during this discussion is how not actually getting a result in a study is perhaps looked down upon, why publish a study with a non-result? But those studies are interesting too! The fact that no result was found is a result in itself.

I do not know if I learnt that much specific information during this week's theme. The concepts were pretty clear to me before. But I found it interesting to discuss studies and learn how others thought about the concepts.

Theme 3 - Comments

fredag 2 oktober 2015

Theme 5- Pre Seminar

1.How can media technologies be evaluated?

Media technologies can be evaluated using many different approaches. In the study by Réhman et al. 2008 they evaluated a prototype of their concepts with user tests. In these tests they aimed to evaluate the usability of the concept using the aspects effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction. This approach seems like a good choice to me, to evaluate usability using several perspectives. Usability is an important concept in many parts of media technology and a concept which in important to evaluate.

Media technology could also be evaluated using a pure technological approach. A user is often involved in media technology, but it cold also be pure machine to machine communication. In such a case it could be effectively evaluated without involving a user but otherwise user tests feels like an important part of evaluating media technology.

2.What role will prototypes play in research?

It depends heavily on the type of research being performed. In the field of media technology, and many others, prototypes let you perform test and get a more hands on approach in your research. When evaluating for example usability being able to present a user with an actual prototype is important if one is not evaluating an existing product. When a user is presented with a prototype it is easier to find flaws and receive relevant feedback than if simply presented with a concept.

3.Why could it be necessary to develop a proof of concept prototype?

A proof of concept prototype could be important in order to show that a product is achievable. Instead of creating an entire product one creates a proof of concept which shows that the concept has potential for real world application. Such a prototype can be tested and reviewed before an actual real life product is created, making changes to a prototype is often cheaper than developing a fully functioning product and then go about reviewing and making changes [1].

4.What are characteristics and limitations of prototypes?

A prototype is a model of something from which new prototypes and in the end a finished product can be developed. It can take many forms, such as software and hardware in different combinations. Various tests are performed on the prototype in order to gain information that will be useful when creating the finished product.

The main limitation of prototypes is that they are just prototypes, one prefers to not spend more time and money than necessary on it in order to maximize efficiency. Therefore a prototype will always have compromises and there is a risk that the limitations found during tests it due to the fact that a prototype is used and not a finished product. A prototype cannot remove all risk involved when developing a product since it is not a finished product.

5. How can design research be communicated/presented?

It can be presented through research papers such as the ones we read for this theme. Researchers can also create a prototype or product based on the findings in their research and present it in such a way. The Furhat Head being developed here at KTH comes to mind as an example.

What is the 'empirical data' in these two papers?

The empirical data in “Finding Design Qualities in a Tangible Programming Space” by Fernaeus and Tholander is the empirical data gained when observing the children try out the system, interact with the physical objects and the screen.

In “Differentiating Driving Range: Exploring a Solution to the Problems with the ‘Guess-O-Meter’ in Electric Cars” by Lundström gathers data through interviews and observation and analyzing of online forums.

Can practical design work in itself be considered a 'knowledge contribution'?

I believe practical design work can be considered a knowledge contribution! We can gain knowledge through experience, a posteriori, when doing practical design work. The finding can then be used in relation to what is already known about the subject and therefore contribute with knowledge.

Are there any differences in design intentions within a research project, compared to design in general?

In a research project the design intentions are often of an exploratory character, the hope is to gain knowledge though the design and the testing of it. Design in general to me is not aimed at gaining knowledge to the same extent; here one is often hoping to simply solve a problem using design, while in design research the problem itself is explored as well as a solution.

Is research in tech domains such as these ever replicable? How may we account for aspects such as time/historical setting, skills of the designers, available tools, etc?

In my opinion one could try to replicate research like this if the method is fully explained, but it feels like the result would vary to a greater extent than in other areas of research. Technology moves forward in such a pace so that the conditions of the research would change quickly, testing on users would also change due to the knowledge of the users and the technology they are used to.

Are there any important differences with design driven research compared to other research practices?

The design driven research is often user-oriented to a degree which is selfdom found in other areas. It is not as often about finding the “answer” to a hypothesis but rather to explore a concept.

[1] https://www.techopedia.com/definition/4066/proof-of-concept-poc

måndag 28 september 2015

Theme 2 - Comments

söndag 27 september 2015

Theme 3 - Post Reflection

This week focused around the concept of scientific theory. When starting out this week’s reading I had a completely different view of what theory meant, to me it was the more casual definition which is more or less synonymous with hypotheses. To me a theory was something one thought could be true. But as I read I realized that scientific theory was concerned with why things are, more explanatory than a hypothesis. I enjoyed the way Sutton and Saw went about explaining what theory is by discussing what theory is not, this in combination with Gregor’s text where theory in the field of information systems was divided into five different categories with different attributes gave a good overview of theory during the reading!

I also chose a paper of my own to read and discuss on my blog. I felt it was rewarding to actually apply the theory categories on an actual work, it was also a bit tricky to identifty the theories and the categories they could belong to! It gave me a new way of thinking about papers when reading them which was interesting.

I unfortunately missed the lecture this week due to work, this made me appreciate how much going to the lectures actually does for the learning process during the theme. This week when going to the seminar I felt like I had not got to hear someone else’s view on theory, I had just my own thoughts, unlike previous weeks when the lecture had provided me with new perspectives before the seminar.

During the seminar I asked other members of my group for a small recap of the lecture, we also discussed how all of us had interpreted scientific theory. Previous to this I had felt this was a really straight forward theme, however discussing it in a group made me realize that we all still had a bit differing view on exactly what theory is. We talked a great deal about practice vs. theory, how one can see practice as applied theory and theory as abstracted practice.

All in all I felt this theme was more up my alley, so to speak, than the previous ones. I do feel more comfortable discussing theory than I did knowledge during theme 1. I believe that is because theory as a concept felt more tangible and definable than knowledge even though it too is somewhat abstract. Or perhaps I feel that way because this course already has made me more comfortable with thinking about and discussing abstract concepts.

fredag 25 september 2015

Theme 4 - Pre Seminar

I have chosen to discuss the paper Information, expression, participation: How involvement in user-generated content relates to democratic engagement among young people, published in 2012 by Johan Östman in the journal New Media & Society which has an impact factor of 2.007.

1. Which quantitative method or methods are used in the paper? Which are the benefits and limitations of using these methods?

This paper uses a quantitative questionnaire. It contains multiple-choice questions where the researcher assigns numerical values to the answers in order to perform statistical calculations on the results.

For example the question: “How often do you watch the following types on programs on TV?” presents the participant with several types of programs where the response options for each ranged from: “Never” which is assigned the numerical value 1, through “A few times a week” = 3, to “Daily” = 5. This type of question was asked about various types of media use as well as similar ones regarding time spent on the Internet and political participation online and offline.

The questionnaire also contained factual questions about politics where a correct answer was assigned 1 and a false one 0.

The main benefit I can identify is that this method provides numerical data on which statistical measurements and calculations can be made in order to show its validity. It is to some extent also more objective than the closest alternative, which would be a qualitative questionnaire where participants are allowed to formulate their own free text answers to the questions. This type of questionnaire would require much more subjective analysis from the researcher, such as deciding which answers are relevant and how to link together the answers from different participants in order to observe patterns.

The main limitation is that while the analysis of the results may become more objective in a sense using quantitative questionnaires the questions are harder to formulate in order to account for all the variations the participants might answer. In this paper this could for example be in the question regarding user-generated content (UGC) participation; the researcher has decided to use these alternatives of UGC: “Produce videos”, “Publish own music or videos on e.g. MySpace, YouTube”, “Share music, film or video files” and “Write personal blog”. These are just a few activities among all the different variations of UGC available online, if the questionnaire instead had been based on free text answers there might have been more users answering that they take part in UGC.

2. What did you learn about quantitative methods from reading the paper?

In the Degree Project in Media Technology, First Cycle, me and my partner used both quantitative and qualitative questionnaires, so I did have some knowledge regarding this specific method. The part of the use of the method in this paper that I will mainly take with me would be the use of factual questions that could be right or wrong and assigning correct answers 1 and incorrect ones as 0 for statistical reasons. While this might be a bit obvious from programming where 1=True and 0=False I had not thought about it in a questionnaire situation before.

3. Which are the main methodological problems of the study? How could the use of the quantitative method or methods have been improved?

I believe the main methodological problem of this study is the lack of variation in the alternatives both in the types of media being used and the political activities offered as alternatives in the questionnaire. I believe the researcher could have provided a few more alternatives, such as sharing illustrations on DeviantArt, and still have kept the questionnaire qualitative. There could also have been some sort of qualitative method as a complement to the questionnaires.

Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality

This was a really interesting paper which feels very relevant considering the growth of VR technology. The result showing that body ownership illusion can be affected by the appearance of the body can surely be used in many interesting ways! I have myself tried a VR headset and played a game where the goal was to try and make me move my hands off a keyboard by having things happening to the VR hands; even though this game lacked the sensory parts I still did not manage to keep my own hands on the keyboard through the entire game but removed them reflectively when a knife fell down into the VR-hand. So I have experienced some sort of body ownership illusion myself and feel intrigued by the result of this study!

Which are the benefits and limitations of using quantitative and qualitative methods respectively?

By using a qualitative method one can in many cases as previously mentioned obtain a wider, more detailed image of the subject in question. It also requires fewer participants since no statistics is being produced, but the lack of statistical data is also a limitation. It is also not possible to generalise results on a group outside of your participants.

Quantitative methods on the other hand has the great benefit of producing data which can be statistically examined and results can therefore be generalised on a larger group. It is also faster and easier to obtain more data through qualitative methods. As previously mentioned in more depth one of the largest limitations of qualitative data is that the result is limited to the specific data the researcher provide the participants with so to speak.

Östman, J. (2012). Information, expression, participation: How involvement in usergenerated content relates to democratic engagement among young people New Media & Society September 2012 vol. 14 no. 6 1004-1021

Kilteni, K., Bergstrom, I., & Slater, M. (2013). Drumming in immersive virtual reality: the body shapes the way we play. Visualization and Computer Graphics, IEEE Transactions on, 19(4), 597-605.

http://www.ehow.co.uk/info_8179604_pros-cons-qualitative-quantitative-research.html [obtained on September 25]

https://www.researchoptimus.com/blog/qualitative-vs-quantitative-research/ [obtained on September 25]