Theme 6 - Qualitative and case study research (2/2)

The lecture for theme six: qualitative and case study research was unfortunately cancelled which meant the only preparation for the seminar was the reading before the first blog post. I felt that this affected how much I learned during this week as the lectures have previously helped me get a better understanding of the theme, what the main concepts are as well as gaining other perspectives on the theme other than my own.

During the seminar we were encouraged not to focus too much on the topic of qualitative research as this was discussed in depth during the week with the theme quantitative research. The reason for this (as I discussed in the blog post for that week) is that I think you have to discuss both qualitative and quantitative research at the same time in order to understand each separately. Know what one research method entails means knowing what it doesn’t entail or what its opposite is.

Instead of talking about what qualitative research is, we mainly talked about case study research. We did this by presenting the article we had chosen and by talking about the 8 steps recommended in "Process of Building Theory from Case Study Research". During the group discussion we talked more broadly about case study research which I thought was more fulfilling than the small group discussion. We discussed how case studies do not seek out to address a specific hypothesis and it does not start with a specific hypothesis. A reason for this is that there is simply not enough data about the subject, which is also when case studies are useful. This form of research has a tendency to revolve around a specific context and it is a method that occurs in cycles. What I think is an important aspect of case studies is that the purpose is to build a theory rather than test a theory. You enter into a field, knowing very little about the area and use a case study methodology in order to find out more and construct a theory about the field you are studying. What I think makes case studies more difficult for me to grasp is that the method does not have a clear cut structure, which other research methods have. This makes it harder for me to gain a better understanding of the method and how it is carried out, but I also think that this is a strength, because it provides an advantage over other methods.

During the group discussion at the seminar one person gave an example of when case study is relevant which I though was interesting and which helped me grasp the concept of case study better. That person had chosen a paper from 2000 that looked into internet addiction during that time. A case study methodology had in that case been chosen to find out if internet addiction existed or not which I think gives a clear view of when case study is a relevant method.

Theme 5 - Design research (comments)

1. http://vadfinnsegentligen.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflection.html?showComment=1444709704380#c5120273207612591170

2. http://paullinderoth.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-design-research-after.html?showComment=1444710918413

3. http://oscarlimback.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-after.html?showComment=1444711299547

4. http://cliodile.blogspot.se/2015/10/after-theme-5-design-research.html?showComment=1444752593230

5. http://thetheoryabouteverything.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-theme-5-design-research.html?showComment=1444753353993

6. http://mashasthoughts123.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflection.html?showComment=1444753672786#c742789174150931914

7. https://agrik.wordpress.com/2015/10/12/design-research-or-research-design-2/#comment-40

8. http://u1ifqcuc.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-design-research-after.html?showComment=1444802315488#c2507614039717339727

9. http://fromplatotocasestudies.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflections.html?showComment=1444802616485#c876279063503236841

10. http://securepathofscience.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-design-research-reflection.html?showComment=1444803041441#c6767167090959469633

Theme 5 - Design research (2/2)

During the first lecture of this week’s theme we discussed problem solving to a great extent. Problem solving consists of two questions or two parts; how to define a problem and how to solve a problem and according to the lecturer, defining the problem is 90% of the issue and solving the problem is 10% of the issue. To explain this, the lecturer talked about how a large part of solving the problem is figuring out what the actual core problem is, which may not be the same as the at first perceived problem.

During the end of the lecture I felt that the entire lecture itself was summarized with five points. These points represent common problems and simply enough, how to solve those problems:

1) How to come up with an idea – Re-state the problem

2) How to filter ideas – Use a business mind

3) How to validate an idea – Proof of concept

4) How to evaluate an idea – Prototype

5) How to communicate your idea – Elevator pitch

During the second lecture we mainly discussed prototypes and why prototypes are useful. When brainstorming with the entire class we talked about using prototypes for conveying and idea, testing an idea and using prototypes for the evaluation of a proof of concept.

An aspect that I felt was a core concept during the lecture was what the purpose is of proving a concept. We discussed that the purpose of research is to find an answer, solve a problem, test a theory and most importantly, to gain knowledge.

As the theme of the week was design research we of course talked about how design and prototypes fit together. Through design, the prototype that searches for a certain answer is shaped. However, the prototype itself does not have to provide an answer to the research question but its purpose could be to provoke and test a situation in order to gain knowledge. A question posed during the lecture that I found interesting was if a prototype can provoke new knowledge?

An aspect that I think is important when conducting research is the way you think about the research process. During the lecture we talked about how choosing a method does not in itself mean that research is being conducted. It is the analysis that turns something into research. The chosen method only defines how the data is collected but when that data is analyzed then research is being conducted.

Since I have already studied this week’s theme during my Bachelor I found this week to be a repetition rather than learning something new. However, I still appreciated having this course and this theme as I was reminded of things that I had forgotten.

Theme 6 - Qualitative and case study research (1/2)

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

The qualitative method used in “Designing an Interactive Audio Interface for Climate Science” was interviews. Benefits of interviews are that they allow the possibility of getting a more detailed view of the landscape that is being researched and what the participant’s thoughts, feelings and experiences are which is not possible to the same extent with quantitative methods. Also, interviews (depending on the structural type) may have room for follow up questions and the participant can explain his or her thoughts. Limitations are however that data and results gathered from a small number of people can very rarely be generalized. Also, the volume of data collected is often very large and it is time and resource consuming to analyze the collected data.

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

Since I have already taken a few courses within the topic of theory and method and more specifically, qualitative and quantitative method, I did not feel that this paper specifically affected my knowledge of qualitative methods. We also discussed qualitative methods during the week with the theme quantitative methods so this theme is for me more of a repetition.

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

This is a difficult question to answer as the paper hardly provided any information about how the interviews were conducted. The study used interviews as a method but it did not say if these were structured, semi-structured or unstructured. It does not mention the number of participants either but quickly moves on to explaining the data analysis. The information provided about the interviews is that these were conducted in German while the paper was written in English. There is no motivation for this but my guess would be that it was more convenient to use the native language of the participants. This could have effect of the result of the study as the results of the interviews were translated which means that certain differences may have occurred due to cultural differences.

 --------

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

A case study is research that focuses on the development of a specific situation, organization, group or person over a certain amount of time. An example of this could be researching a specific school to see why they have e.g. a higher grade average than other schools in the area.

2.      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.

The following 8 steps are recommended by “Process of Building Theory from Case Study Research”. These serve as a roadmap for how case studies should be conducted. The paper I chose to analyze was “The Computer Integration of the Enterprise”.

Step 1) Getting started: define research question

I could not find a specific stated research question, only a problem area which means that this step was not fulfilled.

Step 2) Selecting cases

The paper described the enterprise chosen thoroughly, however the enterprise was described relatively late in the paper, i.e. not in the same order as recommended by “Process of Building Theory from Case Study Research”.

Step 3) Crafting instruments/protocols: data collection methods

The data collection methods used were surveys and interviews performed over two years. I felt the information provided about the data collection was sufficient to fulfill the demands for this step.

Step 4) Entering the field

This is done, especially when collecting data and defining the different definitions and specifications, analysis is done continuously through the paper as they explain and reason around the different definitions proposed.

Step 5) Analyzing data

I perceive that analysis is done in several steps and not only this one. The analysis has a clear correlation to the data collected.

Step 6) Shaping hypothesis

There was a hypothesis that was clearly stated in the paper. However, from the paper I couldn’t see if the process was iterative and looking into not only “what” but also “why” which is an important part of step 6.

Step 7) Enfolding literature

The paper includes other literature and compares other texts with its own definitions which is good, but the literature discussed only supports the paper. There is no literature that conflicts with the paper which is an important part of step 7.

 Step 8) Reaching closure

Yes, this is done to an extent that seems reasonable for the study.

Theme 4 - Qualitative research (comments)

1. http://gamlagreker.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflection.html?showComment=1444047315967

2. http://vadfinnsegentligen.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflection.html?showComment=1444116136568#c6110855987369451520

3. http://elindm2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflection.html?showComment=1444116427580#c8755344189617835408

4. http://fromplatotocasestudies.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflections.html?showComment=1444116707736#c8927455790345369043

5. http://securepathofscience.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-quantitative-methods-reflection.html?showComment=1444117166242#c237750415676330744

6. http://oscarlimback.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-quantitative-research-after.html?showComment=1444117817512#c3899353207448487146

7. http://meglia.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-theme-4.html?showComment=1444118168101#c3871495603521284646

8. http://lard-have-mercy.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-theme-4-quantitative-research.html?showComment=1444196645950#c3074573972559649559

9. http://literaturestuffm.blogspot.se/2015/10/normal-0-false-false-false-el-x-none-x.html?showComment=1444197045575#c7946830229810542634

10. http://mediatechnologybycorinna.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-quantitative-research-reflection.html?showComment=1444197160628#c264759341633171503

Theme 4 - Quantitative research (2/2)

I have previously studied several courses where we have learnt about qualitative and quantitative methods. Due to this I felt that I had a good foundation of understanding when it came to this week’s topic. For this reason I also felt that this theme was easier for me than previous themes have been. For this week’s theme I chose the paper “FoodLog: Multimedia Tool for Healthcare Applications” from the journal MultiMedia, IEEE. The paper studies the multimedia food recording tool FoodLog and looked into how users experienced the app through a questionnaire that gave an indication of e.g. how they used the app, how often they used it and how fun they thought the app was.

During the seminar we talked a lot about the differences between quantitative and qualitative methods but there were two aspects we discussed that I found particularly interesting. The first aspect was in which cases both qualitative methods and quantitative methods where useful or even needed. Here we came to the conclusion that it is useful when studying perceived use versus actual use.

The second aspect that I found interesting was a discussion between objectivity and subjectivity and how data from qualitative and quantitative methods do not differ in their objectivity/subjectivity. Researchers always influence the study with their preconceptions and social constructions and the same goes for the participants in the study. A common phenomenon is that participants answer according to what they think the “right” answer is, or according to what they think the researcher wants to hear. Therefore it is not possible to say that one method has is objective while the other is subjective. A phrase the lecturer said that I found summed up our discussion of objectivity in an eloquent way was “objectivity is elusive”.

Theme 5 - Design research (1/2)

1.      How can media technologies be evaluated?

The paper argues that usability within media technology can be evaluated through three aspects; effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction. Studying the effectiveness means looking at whether the user can accomplish a task within the system. Studying the efficiency means looking at how much effort is required by the user in order to complete the task at hand (e.g. reaction time). Studying the satisfaction means looking into the comfort and acceptability the user experiences when using the system.

2.      What role will prototypes play in research?

Prototypes are a valuable asset that can help improve the design and functionality of the final product.  A risk within research is that you miss flaws and errors in design because you become blind towards your own product. Therefore, it is helpful to gain insight into how someone with no previous connection to the product interacts with it in order to improve the product. Testing a prototype helps researchers figure out if the product is easy to use and if there are problems that they had not thought of.

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

Before creating a prototype it could be necessary to develop a proof of concept prototype to see if the idea is actually feasible. In this step, researches take a look at whether or not the product can be developed to meet certain criteria and to see if the product has enough potential of being used that the research should move forward.

4.      What are characteristics and limitations of prototypes?

Prototypes are useful as they allow testing of a product before launching it. This enables improvement of previously unknown errors or flaws to increase usability. It also gives insight into how people with no knowledge about the product interact with it which gives room for adjustment to the user’s behavior and expectations. Since it is not the final product being tested there are limitations (e.g. low quality) which may affect the test results. The prototype may also be missing certain functions which limits the testability.

5.      How can design research be communicated/presented?

Design research can be communicated and presented in several different ways depending on what the product is and what features are important to convey. It could be by using prototypes or models for a more detailed presentation or by using sketches, pictures and maybe even videos for a more basic presentation. In my opinion, choosing the presentation form depends on how complex the design research is and how you can present it so that your audience can understand it.

_____________________

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

In both the papers the empirical data is the data collected from testing the prototypes. In the paper by Anders Lundström empirical data is also data collected from interviews.

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

I think this is possible as practical design work reveals information about e.g. usability that can be used in other cases than the specific research case. A paper might conclude that “drag and drop” functionality is more intuitive than roll-down menus. Or that a certain icons mean different things to different people which limits the understanding of the product. These findings could then be adapted by others in order to improve their products without doing extensive research on their own.

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

I think that a difference may be that within a research project you are more open to change as you plan on testing a prototype after which you expect modifications to be made. In design in general I think that the person/organization building the product is more closed off and finishes the design according to their own plan without being as open for alterations.

4. 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? 

I think it is replicable to a certain degree, but as technology is developing so fast there is only a small window of opportunity where this is possible with the same time/historical setting. Regarding the skills of designers, in every study the researchers affect the result with their preconceptions. I don’t think that the replicability is affected within tech domains more than any other field.

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

A main difference is that design driven research is qualitative, empirical and iterative and the method needs to be more worked out in detail than quantitative methods in order to provide sufficient results. Other research types are often more focused on gaining new knowledge.