(For list of comments, see previous post)
We have now reached the end of this Theory and Method course. It has been a wild ride, filled to the brim with discussions and analyzes of varying depth, which has provided us with some new knowledge and an opportunity to question old belief. Without further ado, let me present to you the final blogpost with my thoughts of the course and different ways of doing research. For the sake of simplicity, let us start at the beginning and end at the end.
The first week we were thrown head first into the complex world of philosophy, where we got to read texts by Immanuel Kant and Plato. This was widely considered quite heavy and unexpected, an opinion I share. However, after discussing the subject it soon became clear that the main concept was how we as humans perceive the world, and that everybody thinks differently, which is an important aspect to think of in any type of human oriented research. Additionally, we also learned about different ways to gain knowledge, by assuming things from your own experience or to take it one step further and think “outside the box” and not only see things as they are. Both ways are in my opinion important methods, as some research requires a more practical approach and provides knowledge through actual experience, while others require an entire new approach separated from earlier belief in order to advance. As has been mentioned time and time again during the course, there really is no truth and no “right” way of doing things, the trick is to be open minded and use what works best for the research in question.
The discussions about perception and knowledge continued for the second week, as we discovered Benjamin and the philosophical duo Adorno and Horkheimer, who debated about enlightenment. The argument was that enlightenment could help advancing research and knowledge, since it went against earlier supernatural and superstitious belief that often ruled people through fear. However, it could also serve as a hindrance to new discoveries, since it tends to lean towards a posteriori knowledge, that is to perceive things through your own experience. As mentioned before, the danger is to only view objects and people as they are, and not what they can become. Once again, it is a question of balance, whereas the first step of achieving it is to be aware that the different sides exist. It is easy to interpret enlightenment as something to strive towards, especially as a future engineer who has previously learned that science and facts are the most trustworthy. Although I still trust science more than other statements, it is definitely worth looking at them to learn about other perspectives. I have noticed that there really is so much psychology involved in everything we do, not just on a personal level, but also in literally every field of work. This is a particularly huge aspect of our field of Media Technology, as media has a wide spread influence of people’s everyday life.
Another thing that was brought up here was the importance of history, which also requires a sort of balance. On one hand, looking back at historical events and how perception of art and media has changed with the tides of time helps us create the future (unfortunately not always free from the mistakes of the past), but sticking to old traditions could also have the opposite effect. As Copernicus demonstrated when going against earlier belief that every stellar body orbited around Earth, and instead proposed a new theory that it is in fact the sun that is the center of our galaxy. Or the scientists at Uppsala University that overlooked all the scientific articles stating that a certain substance was impossible to create, and created it anyways.
Speaking of scientific articles, the rest of the weeks were spent reading various papers that used different researching methods. Here we discussed the term “theory”, which is often misunderstood as a synonym to “hypothesis”, a mistake that I have made many times before. In reality, I would say that theory is the core of the research, since it helps to understand and answer a question of which the article is based on. As previously mentioned, it is important to note that a theory is not cut in stone, and that one should not be afraid to question both your own and others theories that came before. One of the benefits of reading several different researching articles were that we learned different ways of writing a paper of scientific measure, which is definitely useful for future endeavours. However, by criticizing them we also discovered that basically all researches have their flaws, which ties well together with what we learned in the beginning of the course. Even full fledged researchers and scientists have yet things to learn, as knowledge is ever expanding.
Finally, we also talked quite a lot about different researching methods, such as qualitative, quantitative and case studies. An interesting discussion we had was about which method we preferred, where the conclusion was that quantitative methods were more prevalent among technical scientists and researchers, while qualitative methods were more common in social studies. I still stand by my opinion that it is best to combine the methods, as they do complement each other. Where data is non-sufficient, another method can fill in the gaps. One could of course argue that it would count as several researches instead of one, but it could still constitute one article.
I would like to finish this reflection by adding my thoughts about the structure of the course and the importance of discussing things with others in order to gain knowledge. It really became apparent when the seminar was skipped for one week, and how difficult it became to reflect after that. One does not know all, but everybody knows something so to speak, and that is something to remember when doing research of any kind. And with that I end this final blogpost, thank you for reading!
Thursday, October 29, 2015
List of all Comments
Seminar 1
2. Nice reflection! I also agree that things became a little clearer after the lecture and seminar, but philosophy is indeed a complex thing. The human-brought-up-by-dogs-example is really interesting, and I also think that some things like basic understanding and perception are hardcoded in our brains and would still function somewhat properly, but other things may be lacking. Makes me think about the girl who was totally isolated from other humans for her entire childhood (terrible story, I think she was locked in a room for 13 years). When they found her she of course didn't know anything about the world, relations or language but learned quite quickly, although not 100% because of other psychological problems.
https://tmmkappa.wordpress.com/2015/09/12/theme-1-post-reflection/comment-page-1/#comment-3
3. I totally agree with you that the texts came as a mild shock compared to what we have read before (I also had to read the Kant texts more times than I'd like to admit in order to understand what even is). But it's a good practice, and after this we will be able to read anything! I also liked your point of finding no answer to the questions, which definitely don't go well together with the ordinary civilian engineer-practice, but maybe it's something that we also have to consider later in our professional lives. Nice reflection! http://platotheplatypus.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-post-reflection.html?showComment=1442587094210
4. Oh my god yes, the Kant text was brutal, I don't know how many times I had to re-read things in order to understand anything! I agree with you that it's strange to start thinking about everything in a philosophical way, which is so far from what we have learned before (although it does make sense in a way, and I think it might have a greater influence on things we do than we actually understand). Our seminar was great but then things got very deep and matrix-like. It sounds like you have learned a lot, nice reflection (and awesome blogg-style haha)! http://vadfinnsegentligen.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflection.html?showComment=1442587821327
5. I also had problem understanding the texts, and I think I got the terms wrong the first time XD But the seminar and lecture helped clear it up for me as well, and judging from what you and most others say, I think we're supposed to be confused in the beginning! Your E.T example is awesome, I haven't really thought about that before, really illustrates that there is so much more to objects and people than their names! http://u1ifqcuc.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and-theory.html?showComment=1442592375932
6. Interesting reflection! The discussion about the paradigm shift was somewhat abstract and I didn't understand it 100%, but your explanations kind of clear it up a bit. Nice that you've understood it! I also like that you have a different approach towards the seminar than many else who's blogposts I've read, that it didn't improve your knowledge about the texts per se, but that it created new questions and new discussions. I think that's how it's supposed to be, since philosophy doesn't have any clear answers and you can take discussions to infinite lengths. http://aris-totall-loss.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-in-retrospect.html?showComment=1442593449699
7. I totally agree with you about the theme, I was also confused for the entire week! But the seminar and lecture pieced it all together. And we also had a discussion about truth and that there isn't really any which in turn ended up in a "There is no spoon"-discussion :P As you said about modern science, I think that what we learn in this course can be applicable to what we do, and that we should keep in mind that everybody thinks differently. Nice reflection! http://thetheoryandmethodofeverything.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflections.html?showComment=1442594174786
8. I feel the same way about the Kant text, it kind of went in circles and became really abstract and hard to understand. Good that the seminar cleared it up, sounds like you had quite interesting discussions! I also like that you draw parallels to future technology, it really feels like what we learn in this course is applicable to our field, even though it might seem abstract in the beginning. Great analysis! http://thewind-egg.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflection-to-be-honest.html?showComment=1442594733125
9. Good that you've learned from that mistake, but really, I think that we are kind of supposed to be a little confused in the beginning since we have to rethink what we've learned before so it's only natural. You seem to have understood it quite well now! I also somewhat agree with you regarding the cup-example, but then again, someone else might think that it's in fact not the same cup, so perhaps there really is no true answer to that question, only perceptions :) Nice reflection! http://suchapriori.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-theme-1-reflection.html?showComment=1442595448466
10. Great reflection, it seems like you've grasped everything really well! And I like the quotes you've used, they summarize what we've done during the week nicely, especially “View nature with the intent of receiving information, not as a pupil who recites the teacher, but as a judge who compels the witnesses to reply to the questions he asks them”. This seems like an engineering quote, since I do believe that problem solving comes from thinking about things from a different perspective, through analysis and not only from observing an object as it is (although the last aspect does come in handy sometimes, so it's probably good to find a balance). Pretty blog layout as well! :) http://capitalmyboy.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-post-theme-post.html?showComment=1442737135544
Seminar 2
1. Great reflection! I kind of got what Adorno and Horkheimer was saying, but the words of Benjamin made a swoosh sound over my head in terms of politics, so I know how you feel! Now in retrospect it makes sense, and I think you summed it up nicely. In addition to what you're saying, I think that enlightenment, while making us think scientifically, also could be a hindrance since it doesn't give room for imagination which could actually advance the research in some cases. Also, great blog title! :P http://dont-panic-forty-two.blogspot.se/2015/09/in-retrospect-theme-2.html?showComment=1443015195465
2. Thank you for the explanations! I was having trouble understanding why Adorno and Horkheimer were critical of nominalism, as it was mentioned in the seminar that it could be compared to non-binary genders. In other words, that we shouldn't see people as either male or female, but that there are genders in between that people rather identify as, which I think sounds great really :P But I guess there is a balance required in everything. It would be interesting to hear more about what you think personally about the theme! http://theoatmeth.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-seminar.html?showComment=1443016344069
3. Really great reflection, it seems like you have grasped to content quite well! The running horse example is excellent, it really portrays how our ways of thinking changed with the birth of technology. It's both awesome and a little scary to see how powerful technology and media is in terms of politics and views. About nominalism, didn't Adorno and Horkheimer criticize it since by seeing objects just as they are, we are prevented from thinking how they could be, which in turn would prevent revolutionary thoughts and change? Great comparisons between the texts as well! http://mediafluttery.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-reflectioncritical-media-studies.html?showComment=1443017986835
4. Thanks for the explanations, it seems like you've understood the content quite well! I also had trouble understanding how enlightenment became myth and vice versa, but it soon became a little clearer. In addition to what you say, I think that enlightenment could be a hindrance since it doesn't give room for imagination. Sometimes imagination can actually help in the research, so one shouldn't be too enlightened :P Overall, great text, but it would be interesting to hear more about what you think personally about the content! http://tamfmtol.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-critical-media-studies.html?showComment=1443018896273
5. Hi, great analysis! I, too, had problems understanding nominalism, but more of why it could be considered a bad thing. We talked about genders and how nominalism was about thinking about it as a non-binary scale, where you can define yourself as more than just male or female. Although, as you say it could also be bad as one might fail to see the bigger picture if we only see things as they are. So in some cases I think nominalism is a good thing, but not always. You seem to have grasped the content well, and also made some excellent comparisons between the texts. Keep it up! http://lard-have-mercy.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-theme-2-critical-media-studies.html?showComment=1443204091825#c986559262443449892
6. Hi! It was interesting to follow your process, I think you have the right strategy with gathering information, not just from the texts but also from external sources, as that is somehow what Benjamin wanted. To think and look at it from different perspectives that is. Great that you felt 'enlightened' (huehue) afterwards! I also liked your comparison with the first theme, that different perspectives and perceptions become apparent when discussing things with your classmates. It all comes together nicely, right? :) It would be interesting to hear more about what you discussed, and how your thoughts about the content has changed since the pre-reflection. http://bjornsblogggg.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-reflection.html?showComment=1443205457153
7. Hello! Great reflection, your example with the refugee picture was excellent and really does describe how powerful media (and art) can be. I also find the cave analogy interesting, but I can’t help but think of Plato as a little arrogant for thinking that only philosophers are free to think differently (but what do I know, maybe he’s right? :P) As for nominalism, I agree that it’s an abstract term. But I think you’re on the right track when talking about individuality. For nominalism, everything is individual and unique (compare to aura!), which is good in a way since yes, we are all unique and shouldn’t be grouped together haphazardly (like genders, there are more than just male and female, some people define themselves as something in between or none at all). However, we have to group objects together sometimes or we’ll fail to see the bigger picture, and not just see things for what they are but also what they can become. https://agrik.wordpress.com/2015/09/21/theme-2-post-seminar/#comment-29
8. Hi, great reflection! I agree about the historical background of the texts, it would have been nice to know about it before reading them, as things probably would have made a little more sense. Great examples of nominalism and realism as well! I also had problems understanding the terms fully, but after having discussed it and read people's blogs, it's beginning to fall into place. It seems like there are pros and cons with both ways of seeing things, so a balance is probably necessary. To consider everything as individuals, but at the same time look up and see it as a whole. I'd say that the key is probably to be aware of the differences. http://amlinden.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-reflection.html?showComment=1443260022155
9. Hello! I also think that the leaf example cleared away a lot of confusion, which was great! Nominalism is basically the view of seeing things as unique individuals, which I think is good in some cases (as we are in fact all individuals), but bad if we were to see everything like this at all times. Sometimes you have to see things as concepts in order to understand them and see the whole picture. However, the horse example I did not understand as a horse does in fact have all feet above the ground for a moment when cantering/galloping :P I agree with Fredrik that you should write more about things you've learned during the week, it would be interesting to hear your opinions! http://cloudsong223.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2after.html?showComment=1443261172974
10. Hi! Great reflection, I really liked your explanations of realism and nominalism as what we see and what exists without our perceptions, it's a little different from what I've written. It makes sense! I think that there are good and bad things with both ways of seeing things, so it's probably good to have a balance between the two. As I've mentioned before, the key is to be aware of the differences and not get stuck in a certain view. Good that you're reading other people's blogs as well, I at least learn a lot from all of you! http://rickardsdm2572.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-seminar-reflections.html?showComment=1443261750946
Seminar 3
1. Hi, nice reflection! I, too, have thought of the word 'theory' as something else than we discussed during the week. That seems to be the aim of the course, to rethink everything we've learned so far :P I liked the quote from Leif, although a more general definition that we agreed upon was that it explains why something is, preferably as simple as possible. Your example with the Big Bang theory is great, it really captures the whole definition in my opinion! http://stinazwahlen.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-post-reflection.html?showComment=1443791964713
2. Hello! I also thought that the different theory types were a little tricky, but also to actually find the theory in the papers (the one I chose didn't have its own theory, but used two external ones)! Goes to show how complex theories can be, although it's probably a question of practice. It seems like you understood it eventually, which is awesome! I also found the KTH and SU comparison interesting, what with the "count math vs understand math". Nice reflection! http://dm2572elvira.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-research-and-theory-post-seminar.html?showComment=1443796328683
3. Hello! I totally agree that it was difficult to judge which type of theory was most applicable on the ones in the papers, especially as it is stated that a theory must be "testable", yet there are types which are supposedly not. I read your theory from the pre-analysis of this theme, and I'd agree that it is probably of prediction-type for the reason you mentioned (although, it totally depends on how you see it, so it's hard to tell!). Overall, great reflection! http://dm2572lisa.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-refection-post.html?showComment=1443954113996
4. Hi! I am very impressed by your analysis, as you have looked even deeper into Signal Theory and also connected it to our studies, which is great! Interesting point with old theories and how they are still used today, even though they have practically been replaced by newer ones. I also think it's important to go back and revise earlier belief, as they might contain answers to modern questions that was previously overlooked. Your explanations of the term was easy to comprehend, it seems like you have understood the theme well. Keep it up! http://dm2572rberggre.blogspot.se/2015/09/this-theme-was-about-understanding.html?showComment=1443955042132
5. Hi! Nice reflection, great that you've analysed an external source as well! What Zima said about observation sounds like what was mentioned during the lecture, that theory is about 'looking and perceiving', while in science it's about 'knowing'. Interesting point to compare this to Socrates and his view on knowledge, and I do believe that theory can be questioned just as knowledge since they are arguably the same. It's all about perceptions, and people can have different theories about the same things! What you said in the end that "theory is a process to understand and answer a question" I think sums the term up well. Great job! http://amlinden.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-reflection.html?showComment=1443957994594
Seminar 4
1. Hello! Nice reflection, what you came up with during the seminar seems to be exactly what I did as well. The opinion in my group leaned towards quantitative research being the better method, but I agree more with your opinion that none of them is better than the other one. As you said, it all depends on the research question, but I do think that quantitative research seems to be more popular among scientists, while qualitative research is preferred by researchers within social studies, which is interesting! Regarding questionnaires, they do seem more complicated than I first thought, there are so many aspects to think of when making them! As stated before, it's difficult to be objective, which I think one must try to be when making them, and not ask leading questions etc. But perhaps it's easier to be objective using quantitative methods, than qualitative methods which often requires a more intimate research? (it might be easier to distance oneself from the samples in quantitative research). http://pargman420.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-seminar-reflection-4.html?showComment=1444556956357#c3996592780764598953
2. Hi! Great reflection, I enjoyed reading it! I agree that the designing of research really is complex, especially questionnaires which seem simple enough to make, but actually require a lot of thought. It's not spoken of that much in papers, and I think that it's easy to lean on a 'genius design', which is that you rely solely on your own experience and opinions. In other words, many researchers might believe in themselves a little too much, and make questionnaires and researching methods without refining them. Your definitions of qualitative and quantitative research, and their differences, seem very legit and easy to understand which is great! The program that calculates how many participants you need sounds quite useful, what was it called? http://mediatechnologyatkth.blogspot.se/2015/10/reflection-what-i-learnt-during-week-40.html?showComment=1444558545600#c2778045856552768785
3. Hello! Yeah, I was also thinking that this theme was a little more obvious than the previous ones, but I agree that it was interesting to analyze it a bit more, and also to read articles where this method is used in different ways. I like what you said about people answering subconsciously, as I think that's very true since people might feel like they have more time formulating an answer when doing a questionnaire, as opposed to an interview. I hadn't really thought about it exactly like that before! Your workplace sounds very interesting, would you say that it's better to use qualitative methods BEFORE quantitative? I've always kind of gone for the opposite, that is quantitative research to gain a general understanding, and then qualitative to zoom in on the specifics. http://ixxzw.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-3-after.html?showComment=1444561303143#c7265144530656486650
4. Hello! I really enjoyed reading your reflection, it was interesting and easy to follow your logics! We were also talking about objectivity during the seminar, and according to what we've read and discussed before, I'd say that it's very difficult, if not impossible, to be entirely objective. But I wonder if it still isn't easier in a quantitative research than in a qualitative, since it might be easier to distance yourself from the participants if using a one way communication like a questionnaire (you don't have to be in the same room and ask follow up questions that is). Then again, I agree that it might lead to an inaccurate generalization, like in your example with the cinnamon rolls. The Cornell-example is very interesting as well, goes to show that you have to be critical to media and the information we're being fed. Great job! http://cliodile.blogspot.se/2015/10/after-theme-4-quantitative-research.html?showComment=1444562242014
5. Hello! Your conclusions seem to be the same as mine, and I agree that there were not as many ground breaking news this week compared to the previous themes. I did find it interesting discussing what people's opinions about the methods were, as quantitative research seem to be preferred by scientists and engineers, while qualitative methods are for social studies. After having done this week's theme, would you say that your opinions of the methods have changed? Would you have done your bachelor thesis any different? http://reb2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-theme-4.html?showComment=1444563132168#c3659853066844452504
Seminar 5
1. Good evening! I sooo agree with you regarding the lack of seminars this week, it was much harder writing a reflection because of it I think, since most of the exciting thoughts were born during our discussions (like in the Socrates text, heheh). About the idea being the most important, I wouldn't say exactly that, as even a great idea can lead to utter failure if the execution isn't good enough. There are many examples but the one I can think of at the top of my head (since I saw a Reddit thread about it) was Google+. People were kinda psyched about it at first, but they started it all by having "invite only" users. When everybody got access people had forgotten about it, and then everybody with gmail accounts were forced to use it, which wasn't popular. So I'd say idea and execution goes hand in hand. Anyways, nice reflection, it seems like you have grasped the content well despite having no seminar! http://u1vfukfo.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-post-posting-design-research.html?showComment=1445113808224#c6110466909969830263
2. Hi! You seem to really have understood the content of this week, even though we didn't have any seminars! I had problems following the lectures, so it was nice reading your summaries. What you said about design is "seeing under empirical data" makes sense, as design really is an important part when doing research. I get the feeling that it is often overlooked by some scientists and researchers who tend to do things more theoretically, or who believe in their own knowledge a little too much. I would have liked to read a bit more about your opinions of the theme, otherwise; great job! http://ixxzw.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-after.html?showComment=1445116719557#c1295952177936815110
3. Hi! I also agree with you about us not having seminars for this theme, even though the subjects might not be as deep and abstract as during the first weeks, we still got a lot from discussing them. Anyways, I think you summarize the content really well despite that, so well done! The part where defining the problem takes 90% and solving it takes 10% was an interesting point, and in my opinion very true in most cases (and quite relevant to our studies as problem solving engineers!). I would have liked to read more about your own opinions of the theme, and perhaps you could draw some parallels to society or maybe even some own experiences? http://mediatechnologybycorinna.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-design-research-reflection.html?showComment=1445118490864#c8801631828563817467
4. Hello! I like what was said about great ideas not necessarily being a technological innovation, it's very true and something that I think we as students focusing on technology tend to forget at times. It's important to note that not all things can be solved by technology, as we talked about in the Sustainability course. Otherwise, nice and fluent text, it was easy to follow! It would be interesting to hear more about what you think personally about the theme, did you agree with everything that was being said? And did you miss the seminars? (I know I did, it was so much easier writing a reflection after having discussed the theme with others!) http://dm2572byen.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-design-research_10.html?showComment=1445277321530
5. Hello! Great reflection, it seems like you have really given the theme some thought! Good that you brought up the aspect of basing an idea on how much money it can generate, I agree with you that it seems like a bad thing to do, as many reaaaaally good ideas have benefited humanity for free (I know some medicines were given to hospitals and manufacturers for free, I can't find exactly which ones though. Open-source inventions are becoming more popular as of late as well!). Nice job, keep it up! http://ninopmedia.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflections-0-false-18-pt-18-pt.html?showComment=1445278809570
Seminar 6
1. Hi! Nice reflection, it seems like you have about the same understanding of case studies as I do - that it's a way to research behavior in certain situations, but also to gain new knowledge. We also thought that it's a good way to begin a research, as it helps in developing new theories. I liked what you said about case studies applying the observed information on science, making it scientific (did I understand you correctly?), which I think is a good point. About what you said about it being difficult to distinguish whether we get the correct information or not with only seminars and no lectures, I'd say that there are no correct answers to these themes, the true aim being that we learn by hearing other people's perceptions and compare it to our own. Anyways, good job! http://rchcc.blogspot.se/2015/10/reflection-of-theme6.html?showComment=1445592434807#c5228240931142206164
2. Hello! I agree with you about the lectures and how they help us getting a better general understanding of the topic. The combination of lectures and seminars were great in my opinion, and it was interesting to see how it was one week without the seminar and one week without the lecture! Your findings about case studies seem to correspond with mine, that a case study is used to build a theory and not test theory I think is a good summary! The paper example about internet addiction seems interesting, I would have liked to hear more about it as well as some of your own opinions of this method! http://mediatechnologybycorinna.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-qualitative-and-case-study_19.html?showComment=1445594933702#c2637231636885271234
3. Hi! Great reflection, seems like you had some interesting discussions during the seminar! I agree that it was hard at first to define case studies, as every research basically includes a case of some sort (which was our initial definition). However, we also came up with the same conclusion as you did, that it does not begin with a hypothesis, and is used to gain new knowledge about a specific topic. Your discussion about case studies needing to be in a specific time and space is really interesting and something I haven't thought about myself. I agree that it doesn't necessarily have to be true, one could maybe use case studies on fossils for example, which would investigate history? Anyways, good job! http://sannanodm2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflection.html?showComment=1445596050294#c3117201351535769164
4. Hi Luff! Thanks for the most entertaining reflection I've read for this course, you captured the essence of the content really well in my opinion! I think the amount of topics was alright, there's of course no limit to how deep one can go when it comes to analyzing these themes, but I think we covered it quite well anyways :) I also agree that the red thread between all themes was choice of methods. As someone who has done the bachelor thesis, has your opinions/knowledge of the matter changed after having taken this course, and would you have done anything differently? Finally, I also found what you said about papers not being case studies, even though they say they are, quite interesting. Goes to show that not all papers and articles out there are perfect, and that there is always room for improvement even for established researchers. Something that links together with what we are learning here; that there is always more knowledge to gain. Great job! http://dont-panic-forty-two.blogspot.se/2015/10/in-retrospect-theme-6-but-is-quality.html?showComment=1445597565204#c3624733027279260136
5. Hello! Really nice reflection, it's interesting to hear your own opinions on the subject as well! What you said about the error of thinking that the difference between quantitative and qualitative research is the number of participants is spot on, I tended to think like that before we had this course. We talked about a quantitative study with only one participant, who could have a really rare disease for example (the quantitative data being measures of the person's biological levels). I also agree with you that it was quite difficult to judge what is a case study and what isn't, and sometimes it feels like many other researchers out there don't know either, so you can't fully trust the titles at all times! It seems like you, at least, have grasped the term well, good job! http://remarkableathenianyouth.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-qualitative-research-or-its-all-in.html?showComment=1445607052376#c4749989607359844135
Friday, October 23, 2015
Theme 6 Comments
1. http://rchcc.blogspot.se/2015/10/reflection-of-theme6.html?showComment=1445592434807#c5228240931142206164
2. http://mediatechnologybycorinna.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-qualitative-and-case-study_19.html?showComment=1445594933702#c2637231636885271234
3. http://sannanodm2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflection.html?showComment=1445596050294#c3117201351535769164
4. http://dont-panic-forty-two.blogspot.se/2015/10/in-retrospect-theme-6-but-is-quality.html?showComment=1445597565204#c3624733027279260136
5. http://remarkableathenianyouth.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-qualitative-research-or-its-all-in.html?showComment=1445607052376#c4749989607359844135
2. http://mediatechnologybycorinna.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-qualitative-and-case-study_19.html?showComment=1445594933702#c2637231636885271234
3. http://sannanodm2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflection.html?showComment=1445596050294#c3117201351535769164
4. http://dont-panic-forty-two.blogspot.se/2015/10/in-retrospect-theme-6-but-is-quality.html?showComment=1445597565204#c3624733027279260136
5. http://remarkableathenianyouth.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-qualitative-research-or-its-all-in.html?showComment=1445607052376#c4749989607359844135
Monday, October 19, 2015
Theme 5 Comments
1. http://u1vfukfo.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-post-posting-design-research.html?showComment=1445113808224#c6110466909969830263
2. http://ixxzw.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-after.html?showComment=1445116719557#c1295952177936815110
3. http://mediatechnologybycorinna.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-design-research-reflection.html?showComment=1445118490864#c8801631828563817467
4. http://dm2572byen.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-design-research_10.html?showComment=1445277321530
5. http://ninopmedia.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflections-0-false-18-pt-18-pt.html?showComment=1445278809570
2. http://ixxzw.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-after.html?showComment=1445116719557#c1295952177936815110
3. http://mediatechnologybycorinna.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-design-research-reflection.html?showComment=1445118490864#c8801631828563817467
4. http://dm2572byen.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-design-research_10.html?showComment=1445277321530
5. http://ninopmedia.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflections-0-false-18-pt-18-pt.html?showComment=1445278809570
Theme 6 - Reflection
For the last theme we investigated qualitative methods and case studies, and did so by once again reading articles using these techniques. Since we touched upon the subject of qualitativeness last week, we did not have much new to discuss. We did talk about objectivity again (a recurring theme!), and my argument was that it’s probably more difficult to be objective when doing a qualitative research using a more intimate approach, such as interviews, than investigating samples from afar where you can distance yourself. However, does one really have to be objective? I would argue that yes, scientific research would benefit from that, but then again, we have already noted that it probably is impossible to be entirely objective. And many articles does come with a personal analysis, so yeah.
We also talked about the definition of qualitative methods as being a research with a select few test subjects, as opposed to quantitative methods where there can be many test subjects. However, the conclusion was that this definition is false, as there can actually be quantitative researches where only one subject is used and qualitative researches where a lot of subjects are involved (which would probably require a bit more time to conduct though). An example of the first option could be a person who has a very rare illness, like “the only one in the world with that illness”-sort of rare, and you could do a quantitative research on that person where the biological levels for each day are used as samples.
Moving on to case studies. First off, we tried to define the term and got stuck since the line between a case study and any other study is a bit blurry. I mean, for every research there is a case being investigated, right? Furthermore, I was under the impression that a case study was about watching test subjects do something, but that doesn’t necessarily have to be the case either. After discussing a bit we decided that case studies is a method investigating the specifics. It’s also about finding out new things, and not about proving old theories. In that aspect, case studies are also a good way to begin a research and establish a theory which you can further investigate using quantitative and qualitative measures. Ilias had a rather funny example where strange purple people wearing visual headgear suddenly appear and walk around on the street. We don’t know what questions to ask them, so instead we go around and take of their headgears to see what’s underneath first.
To summarize this week and the previous, I think that I’ve actually learned a lot, even though I previously thought that I already knew enough about all these terms and subjects. There is always more knowledge to acquire, and different ways to perceive things, which is important to acknowledge in whatever business field we choose in the future.
We also talked about the definition of qualitative methods as being a research with a select few test subjects, as opposed to quantitative methods where there can be many test subjects. However, the conclusion was that this definition is false, as there can actually be quantitative researches where only one subject is used and qualitative researches where a lot of subjects are involved (which would probably require a bit more time to conduct though). An example of the first option could be a person who has a very rare illness, like “the only one in the world with that illness”-sort of rare, and you could do a quantitative research on that person where the biological levels for each day are used as samples.
Moving on to case studies. First off, we tried to define the term and got stuck since the line between a case study and any other study is a bit blurry. I mean, for every research there is a case being investigated, right? Furthermore, I was under the impression that a case study was about watching test subjects do something, but that doesn’t necessarily have to be the case either. After discussing a bit we decided that case studies is a method investigating the specifics. It’s also about finding out new things, and not about proving old theories. In that aspect, case studies are also a good way to begin a research and establish a theory which you can further investigate using quantitative and qualitative measures. Ilias had a rather funny example where strange purple people wearing visual headgear suddenly appear and walk around on the street. We don’t know what questions to ask them, so instead we go around and take of their headgears to see what’s underneath first.
To summarize this week and the previous, I think that I’ve actually learned a lot, even though I previously thought that I already knew enough about all these terms and subjects. There is always more knowledge to acquire, and different ways to perceive things, which is important to acknowledge in whatever business field we choose in the future.
Sunday, October 11, 2015
Theme 4 Comments
1. http://pargman420.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-seminar-reflection-4.html?showComment=1444556956357#c3996592780764598953
2. http://mediatechnologyatkth.blogspot.se/2015/10/reflection-what-i-learnt-during-week-40.html?showComment=1444558545600#c2778045856552768785
3. http://ixxzw.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-3-after.html?showComment=1444561303143#c7265144530656486650
4. http://cliodile.blogspot.se/2015/10/after-theme-4-quantitative-research.html?showComment=1444562242014
Theme 5 - Reflection
First off, I would like to begin this reflection by saying how much I missed the seminar discussion this week, which was replaced by another lecture. I know that these last themes might not be as philosophical and discussable as the previous ones, but they have still been awesome in terms of learning and hearing about other people’s perceptions.
Anyways, let’s move on to the lectures of this week. The first one was with our own Haibo Li, who talked about design and problem solving, which was demonstrated by a short clip from the movie Johnny English. Here the main character, played by Rowan Atkinson, follows the bad guy across the roof. The bad guy parkours his way forward, while Johnny English takes an alternative, easier route past the hurdles (such as going through doors and using ladders). The morale of this story is that there are several ways to solve a problem, some may be a little easier than others, but they can all lead to a solution. The trick is to observe and to deconstruct the problem into smaller parts. Sometimes, the problem might even be something different than you think, such as with the example with the teacher, student and the hungry bear. The problem isn’t to outrun the bear, but to outrun the slowest companion.
So the point with design research is to basically design problem solving. The solutions are based upon observations, where the design prototype is used as a medium. It’s a good way to understand how other people or objects other than oneself react to certain things. Don Norman, who’s a cognitive psychologist and author of The Design of Everyday Things, explains this as follows: “We tend to project our own rationalisations and beliefs onto the actions and beliefs of others”. Thus it’s not always good to assume things a priori, as discussed during previous themes. We simply have to acknowledge that others don’t think as us, and also that our own minds don’t work as objectively as we would like. The opposite to this, which we learned during the Human-Computer-Interaction course, would be ‘Genius Design’. Here the designer takes it upon themselves to design something without the input of other potential users, which some say is possible if the designer is very skilled at what he/she does. However, after having taken this course, I wouldn’t be so sure about that.
The other lecture was with Anders Lundström, and I have to admit that I had problems following the content, since it was a bit unstructured. What I did catch was that prototyping is supposed to “provoke to gain knowledge” and doesn’t have to really solve anything. As in Anders paper, the one about charge displays in electric cars which we read before this theme, it wasn’t a proof of concept. The aim was therefore not to prove anything, but rather to see how the design itself would work. In other words, knowledge was gained, but there was never a final design for the display. This was an excellent example of prototyping not only being used in the development of new products, but also for the research itself.
Anyways, let’s move on to the lectures of this week. The first one was with our own Haibo Li, who talked about design and problem solving, which was demonstrated by a short clip from the movie Johnny English. Here the main character, played by Rowan Atkinson, follows the bad guy across the roof. The bad guy parkours his way forward, while Johnny English takes an alternative, easier route past the hurdles (such as going through doors and using ladders). The morale of this story is that there are several ways to solve a problem, some may be a little easier than others, but they can all lead to a solution. The trick is to observe and to deconstruct the problem into smaller parts. Sometimes, the problem might even be something different than you think, such as with the example with the teacher, student and the hungry bear. The problem isn’t to outrun the bear, but to outrun the slowest companion.
So the point with design research is to basically design problem solving. The solutions are based upon observations, where the design prototype is used as a medium. It’s a good way to understand how other people or objects other than oneself react to certain things. Don Norman, who’s a cognitive psychologist and author of The Design of Everyday Things, explains this as follows: “We tend to project our own rationalisations and beliefs onto the actions and beliefs of others”. Thus it’s not always good to assume things a priori, as discussed during previous themes. We simply have to acknowledge that others don’t think as us, and also that our own minds don’t work as objectively as we would like. The opposite to this, which we learned during the Human-Computer-Interaction course, would be ‘Genius Design’. Here the designer takes it upon themselves to design something without the input of other potential users, which some say is possible if the designer is very skilled at what he/she does. However, after having taken this course, I wouldn’t be so sure about that.
The other lecture was with Anders Lundström, and I have to admit that I had problems following the content, since it was a bit unstructured. What I did catch was that prototyping is supposed to “provoke to gain knowledge” and doesn’t have to really solve anything. As in Anders paper, the one about charge displays in electric cars which we read before this theme, it wasn’t a proof of concept. The aim was therefore not to prove anything, but rather to see how the design itself would work. In other words, knowledge was gained, but there was never a final design for the display. This was an excellent example of prototyping not only being used in the development of new products, but also for the research itself.
Sources
Friday, October 9, 2015
Theme 6: Qualitative and case study research
The assignment for this week was to chose a research article which uses qualitative methods, something that was easier said than done since it would seem like quantitative methods are more popular for some reason. Anyways, after some googling I found “A Qualitative Examination of the Impact of Social Media on Media Relations Practice“ by Dustin W. Supa, which analyses how social media has affected the relationship between journalists and PR-professionals.
In order to do this, the author has chosen to conduct semi-structured interviews with people from both professions. He mentions that there has been quantitative research about this before, but that the aim of this paper is to get a better understanding and fill in some gaps, which it actually manages to do it would seem. The results were that the PR-people thought that social media aided in establishing better relationships with the journalists, which leads to more trust and, ultimately, better business. What this particular research also noticed was that the journalists did not agree fully, as the majority thought that the rise of social media hadn’t really changed much of the relationship. One journalist stated that “it’s another medium they [the PR-people] use to bug me” (Supa p.6), which I think is hilarious.
After having read the article, I would say that qualitative methods really are good to use, as it did give more detailed information about the subject which had not been brought up before. As was discussed last week, the disadvantage of quantitative research is that the answers are limited to the questions, which may result in lost additional information or incorrect generalization. By conducting interviews and asking follow-up questions, things like this can be prevented. The limitation with using qualitative methods is that the interviewer has to be skilled enough to conduct them correctly, and not affect the results with personal opinions which might sometimes be difficult.
After having read the article, I would say that qualitative methods really are good to use, as it did give more detailed information about the subject which had not been brought up before. As was discussed last week, the disadvantage of quantitative research is that the answers are limited to the questions, which may result in lost additional information or incorrect generalization. By conducting interviews and asking follow-up questions, things like this can be prevented. The limitation with using qualitative methods is that the interviewer has to be skilled enough to conduct them correctly, and not affect the results with personal opinions which might sometimes be difficult.
A negative aspect with the paper was that the author does not mention what questions were asked, just what general questions he wanted answers to. It would have been nice to have more samples of what was being said, in an appendix for example, as it now becomes difficult to judge how the research could have been done differently. Apart from that, the samples were diverse and chosen with care, which was good.
1. Briefly explain to a first year university student what a case study is.
According to Eisenhardt, a case study is a “research strategy which focuses on understanding the dynamics present within single settings” (Eisenhardt p.534). In other words, someone who does a case study investigate situations, or cases, and how the participants behave and interact. These cases often include a problem or dilemma which the participants have to solve or discuss in some way (Eberly Center). One could probably compare this to roleplaying games in some cases, for example “Cluedo” where the players are facing various situations, which the players have to act upon. The researching methods within a case study can be both quantitative or qualitative, include interviews and/or simply observations (Eisenhardt p.534).
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.
My chosen article was “Technology, Pedagogy and Digital Production: A Case Study of Children Learning New Media Skills” by Rebekah Willett. This was a case study conducted during a game making course for 9-13 year old children in Great Britain, where the author was present during all sessions and gathered data through observation, recordings, and by analyzing the products being made. At the end of the course, individual interviews were conducted in order to clarify and complement the data. The aim of the research was to investigate how digital media and an informal setting influences the learning process, which is an interesting and relevant topic seeing as more and more schools are adopting this way of learning.
..............
1. Briefly explain to a first year university student what a case study is.
According to Eisenhardt, a case study is a “research strategy which focuses on understanding the dynamics present within single settings” (Eisenhardt p.534). In other words, someone who does a case study investigate situations, or cases, and how the participants behave and interact. These cases often include a problem or dilemma which the participants have to solve or discuss in some way (Eberly Center). One could probably compare this to roleplaying games in some cases, for example “Cluedo” where the players are facing various situations, which the players have to act upon. The researching methods within a case study can be both quantitative or qualitative, include interviews and/or simply observations (Eisenhardt p.534).
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.
My chosen article was “Technology, Pedagogy and Digital Production: A Case Study of Children Learning New Media Skills” by Rebekah Willett. This was a case study conducted during a game making course for 9-13 year old children in Great Britain, where the author was present during all sessions and gathered data through observation, recordings, and by analyzing the products being made. At the end of the course, individual interviews were conducted in order to clarify and complement the data. The aim of the research was to investigate how digital media and an informal setting influences the learning process, which is an interesting and relevant topic seeing as more and more schools are adopting this way of learning.
When reading this article, the advantages of doing a case study for this kind of research become evident. For example, by observing the children the author noticed that older children understood things quicker, and could also remember things better as they had a more sophisticated general understanding of the software. This is something that is difficult to discover by doing ordinary research methods, especially among children who might not be as good at self-reflecting.
After having studied the points in Eisenhardt’s article, I would say that Willett’s case study has many strengths - she uses different research methods within the study, analyses all factors thoroughly and makes comparisons between the relationships. One disadvantage could be that the author conducted this case study alone, whereas it might have been good to have different input from another researcher. Furthermore, the software used for the study wasn’t chosen with the research in mind, and therefore obviously affected the results. However, it was still a good way to investigate how children used this kind of software which could also benefit the research of user friendliness.
Sources
Sources
Supa, D.W. (2014). A Qualitative Examination of the Impact of Social Media on Media Relations Practice. Public Relations Journal, 8(2). Available online: http://www.prsa.org/intelligence/prjournal/documents/2014supa.pdf
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
Willett, Rebekah (2007) Technology, Pedagogy and Digital Production: A Case Study of Children Learning New Media Skills. Learning, Media and Technology, 32. pp. 167-181. ISSN 1743-9884.
Available online: http://eprints.ioe.ac.uk/227/1/Willett2007Technology167_%282%29.pdf
Eberly Center. Case Studies.
https://www.cmu.edu/teaching/designteach/teach/instructionalstrategies/casestudies.html
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
Willett, Rebekah (2007) Technology, Pedagogy and Digital Production: A Case Study of Children Learning New Media Skills. Learning, Media and Technology, 32. pp. 167-181. ISSN 1743-9884.
Available online: http://eprints.ioe.ac.uk/227/1/Willett2007Technology167_%282%29.pdf
Eberly Center. Case Studies.
https://www.cmu.edu/teaching/designteach/teach/instructionalstrategies/casestudies.html
Sunday, October 4, 2015
Theme 3 Comments
1. http://stinazwahlen.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-post-reflection.html?showComment=1443791964713
2. http://dm2572elvira.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-research-and-theory-post-seminar.html?showComment=1443796328683
3. http://dm2572lisa.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-refection-post.html?showComment=1443954113996
4. http://dm2572rberggre.blogspot.se/2015/09/this-theme-was-about-understanding.html?showComment=1443955042132
Theme 4 - Reflection
This week’s theme was all about quantitative research, which we investigated by reading articles that used these methods in different ways. First off, defining what quantitative research is was a little more complex than I’ve always thought (as with most terms discussed so far in this course, so nothing new there), even though it’s generally simple to actually recognize when the method is used. The definition that was agreed upon was that it’s a method where the acquired data can be calculated on in order to find correlations among a group of subjects. It often includes numbers, as in how many has this or that opinion, how many percent, how often etc. I also added that it can be used to generalize something relatively fast.
During the seminar we had a relatively heated discussion about what was best, quantitative or qualitative research. I argued that it was best to combine both, for example to begin with quantitative methods in order to gather lots of general data, and then use qualitative methods to selectively gather more details. This opinion was somewhat questioned as it would count as two different researches, so it’s not really a combination, but I stand firm on that opinion. Furthermore, we also discovered that a quantitative approach was more popular among us because it’s a very “engineery” approach, where easy answers to easy questions is often desired (it even had a term - “scientism”!). Qualitative research leans more towards the social science spectra, where it’s interesting to discover more about how people think psychologically.
Then we were introduced to the term “wicked problem”, which is difficult or impossible to solve because of incomplete or contradictory data, or when too many variables influence the answers. This is something that might arise when using quantitative methods, so one has to be careful when setting up the research. For example, it would be a bad idea to ask “How would you go about designing a smartphone?” in a quantitative way, since there are a lot of answers to this question, which would make it difficult to calculate the data.
To summarize; I think this theme was interesting, but no new groundbreaking knowledge was acquired, as we have come upon quantitative research many times before. However, I haven’t discussed it as critically as we did now, and it was interesting to see how other people saw it. Reading the articles was a great way to see how quantitative research can be conducted in different ways, which is definitely something to remember for future references.
During the seminar we had a relatively heated discussion about what was best, quantitative or qualitative research. I argued that it was best to combine both, for example to begin with quantitative methods in order to gather lots of general data, and then use qualitative methods to selectively gather more details. This opinion was somewhat questioned as it would count as two different researches, so it’s not really a combination, but I stand firm on that opinion. Furthermore, we also discovered that a quantitative approach was more popular among us because it’s a very “engineery” approach, where easy answers to easy questions is often desired (it even had a term - “scientism”!). Qualitative research leans more towards the social science spectra, where it’s interesting to discover more about how people think psychologically.
Then we were introduced to the term “wicked problem”, which is difficult or impossible to solve because of incomplete or contradictory data, or when too many variables influence the answers. This is something that might arise when using quantitative methods, so one has to be careful when setting up the research. For example, it would be a bad idea to ask “How would you go about designing a smartphone?” in a quantitative way, since there are a lot of answers to this question, which would make it difficult to calculate the data.
To summarize; I think this theme was interesting, but no new groundbreaking knowledge was acquired, as we have come upon quantitative research many times before. However, I haven’t discussed it as critically as we did now, and it was interesting to see how other people saw it. Reading the articles was a great way to see how quantitative research can be conducted in different ways, which is definitely something to remember for future references.
Thursday, October 1, 2015
Theme 5: Design research
Part 1
This week we are looking into design research, something that I think was demonstrated quite well in the article “Turn Your Mobile Into the Ball: Rendering Live Football Game Using Vibration” by Shafiq ur Réhman, Jiong Sun, Li Liu, and Haibo Li. Here the authors aim to create an alternative way of watching football/soccer on a mobile phone, where the phone’s vibrations are used to make the game feel more vivid and exciting. In order to create such a game, the authors decided to conduct a quantitative research and make a prototype which would be tested by students and teachers at Umeå University.
There are many benefits in using a prototype in the researching process. If the goal is to create a product or application of some sort, it makes it cheaper if a simpler version is thoroughly tested before releasing the actual product to the public, which without the first step could be both faulty and expensive. Nowadays, many products are really user-oriented, and with social media all users become potential and powerful critics. If a new operating system or game is full of bugs when released, everybody will know about it very soon. Thus, testing using the actual consumers before hand is almost necessary in some cases, I would say. Furthermore, there are many aspects within technology that needs to feel right. As for this research, it was a question about how strong the vibrations should be, how to behave and when to be triggered. Things that are difficult to know beforehand. Another role of prototypes could be that it’s a good way to learn how the test subjects behave in general, which could be used in other research fields.
The fact that the prototypes are often simpler and cheaper could also act as a limitation, as they don’t work exactly as the end product. In the article, the product would use automatic video analysis to trigger the vibrations, and react to cues like which team has the ball, when it’s kicked and when someone shoots for goal. Some really complex coding had to be done here, but to solve it in a simpler and faster way, the researchers used manually controlled vibrations instead.
Part 2
In the paper “Finding Design Qualities in a Tangible Programming Space” by Ylva Fernaeus & Jakob Tholander, it is investigated on how to combine digital and physical interaction. Here, the empirical data was the testing through experience, where children got to try out the system and interact with physical objects and see how they corresponded to the things on screen.
The second article, “Differentiated Driving Range: Exploring a Solution to the Problems with the “Guess-O-Meter” in Electric Cars” by Anders Lundström, doesn’t focus as much on prototyping and testing, but is a doing research based on design nevertheless. Here the author writes about the energy display in electric cars, and how it isn’t perfect in telling how far the car can get with the remaining electrical charge. In order to design a better display, Lundström not only interviews drivers of electrical cars, but also test drives a number of different models himself, which would be the empirical data in this case.
Whether practical design work can be considered a 'knowledge contribution’, I’d say that it certainly can. It would probably fall under the a posteriori knowledge category, as it’s about gaining knowledge through experience which Lundströms research is a perfect example of. Many people learn by doing, and in some research it’s even necessary to be practical and not only theoretical, as in the Tangible Programming article where the results would be far more inconclusive if just analysing how the computer system works.
About the differences between research oriented design and other types of design works, I'd say that the first one is designed to aid the research and prove theories, while the other is often created to accomplish things by itself. For example, the Tangible Programming system was created to research how the children behaved when experiencing multi-media interaction, but a real programming platform is used as it is and not necessarily to study the users.
When it comes to differences with design driven research compared to other research practices, let’s say the quantitative research methods we were discussing in the previous theme, the main difference would probably be that the sooner is more user-oriented and practical. That is, that the research is done in a posteriori, to actively participate with the ambition to create something new. The latter is done by analyzing data in order to gain knowledge about something that already is.
Sunday, September 27, 2015
Theme 3 Reflection
This week we got to investigate the wonderful and complex world of theories, and also choose research articles to read which was a good practice for future paper writing (I have not done the bachelor thesis yet, and in that sense I think this course is an excellent preparation).
Compared to the previous themes, I’d say that this theme was not as philosophical and abstract, which of course was reflected in the seminar discussions. Here we instead tried to define the term ‘theory’, which I’ve always thought was the same as ‘hypothesis’. Actually, ‘theory’ as an everyday term is rarely used correctly in either Swedish nor English, as it is often correspondent to “I think…”. Our conclusion was that a theory explains why something is in a way that is as simple as possible (preferably at least).
We also discussed what makes a theory strong or weak, which none of us was completely sure of at first. So basically, an example of a weak theory could be that when you’re at a beach and eat ice-cream, you’ll get attacked by sharks (the theory being that you get attacked by sharks because you have eaten ice-cream). This is just based on a correlation, and not even applicable everywhere which it indirectly states. However, it is still a theory, since nothing says that a theory must be “true”. Another thing about theories is that they should be “testable”, and that one shouldn’t be afraid to question them.
As for the articles, I chose one with a psychological theme about media addiction, and what factors cause people to become dependent on internet and television. Here the authors didn’t have any theories of their own, but instead used two external theories and put them up against each other. We talked about if this was an okay strategy, and came to the conclusion that it actually was. In a way, most theories are based on others that came before them, and revising them is necessary if we want to advance. I was thinking about the new type of magnesium carbonate with super absorption-powers that was discovered by scientists at Uppsala University. For over one hundred years, scientists had written articles explaining that it was impossible to create this substance. After many failed attempts, the Uppsala scientists accidentally managed to create it after having left the test beaker over the weekend, proving all previous theories wrong. This is just one of many examples which prove the importance of questioning earlier belief.
Source
http://swednanotech.com/2013/07/uppsalaforskare-upptacker-nytt-material/
Compared to the previous themes, I’d say that this theme was not as philosophical and abstract, which of course was reflected in the seminar discussions. Here we instead tried to define the term ‘theory’, which I’ve always thought was the same as ‘hypothesis’. Actually, ‘theory’ as an everyday term is rarely used correctly in either Swedish nor English, as it is often correspondent to “I think…”. Our conclusion was that a theory explains why something is in a way that is as simple as possible (preferably at least).
We also discussed what makes a theory strong or weak, which none of us was completely sure of at first. So basically, an example of a weak theory could be that when you’re at a beach and eat ice-cream, you’ll get attacked by sharks (the theory being that you get attacked by sharks because you have eaten ice-cream). This is just based on a correlation, and not even applicable everywhere which it indirectly states. However, it is still a theory, since nothing says that a theory must be “true”. Another thing about theories is that they should be “testable”, and that one shouldn’t be afraid to question them.
As for the articles, I chose one with a psychological theme about media addiction, and what factors cause people to become dependent on internet and television. Here the authors didn’t have any theories of their own, but instead used two external theories and put them up against each other. We talked about if this was an okay strategy, and came to the conclusion that it actually was. In a way, most theories are based on others that came before them, and revising them is necessary if we want to advance. I was thinking about the new type of magnesium carbonate with super absorption-powers that was discovered by scientists at Uppsala University. For over one hundred years, scientists had written articles explaining that it was impossible to create this substance. After many failed attempts, the Uppsala scientists accidentally managed to create it after having left the test beaker over the weekend, proving all previous theories wrong. This is just one of many examples which prove the importance of questioning earlier belief.
Source
http://swednanotech.com/2013/07/uppsalaforskare-upptacker-nytt-material/
Saturday, September 26, 2015
Theme 2 Comments
1. http://dont-panic-forty-two.blogspot.se/2015/09/in-retrospect-theme-2.html?showComment=1443015195465
2. http://theoatmeth.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-seminar.html?showComment=1443016344069
3. http://mediafluttery.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-reflectioncritical-media-studies.html?showComment=1443017986835
4. http://tamfmtol.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-critical-media-studies.html?showComment=1443018896273
5. http://lard-have-mercy.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-theme-2-critical-media-studies.html?showComment=1443204091825#c986559262443449892
6. http://bjornsblogggg.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-reflection.html?showComment=1443205457153
7. https://agrik.wordpress.com/2015/09/21/theme-2-post-seminar/#comment-29
8. http://amlinden.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-reflection.html?showComment=1443260022155
9. http://cloudsong223.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2after.html?showComment=1443261172974
10. http://rickardsdm2572.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-seminar-reflections.html?showComment=1443261750946
2. http://theoatmeth.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-seminar.html?showComment=1443016344069
3. http://mediafluttery.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-reflectioncritical-media-studies.html?showComment=1443017986835
4. http://tamfmtol.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-critical-media-studies.html?showComment=1443018896273
5. http://lard-have-mercy.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-theme-2-critical-media-studies.html?showComment=1443204091825#c986559262443449892
6. http://bjornsblogggg.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-reflection.html?showComment=1443205457153
7. https://agrik.wordpress.com/2015/09/21/theme-2-post-seminar/#comment-29
8. http://amlinden.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-reflection.html?showComment=1443260022155
9. http://cloudsong223.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2after.html?showComment=1443261172974
10. http://rickardsdm2572.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-seminar-reflections.html?showComment=1443261750946
Thursday, September 24, 2015
Theme 4: Quantitative research
1. Article: “Internet and Social Media Use as a Resource Among Homeless Youth”
Eric Rice, Anamika Barman-Adhikari (2013)Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcc4.12038/epdf
For this week I chose the article “Internet and Social Media Use as a Resource Among Homeless Youth” by Eric Rice and Anamika Barman-Adhikari. Here the authors have chosen a quantitative method to study how young homeless people between the ages 13-24 use internet in terms of communication, job application and house searching. The research includes 194 participants, all randomly recruited from a drop-in agency for homeless, who got to answer a survey consisting of various questions about their internet habits. The benefits of conducting a research like this could be that it generates data from many subjects in a short amount of time. Also, with a sufficient number and diversity of samples, it is possible to generalize which the authors seem to be aiming for.
The limitations with using a survey is that the participants may not be entirely truthful with the answers, especially when it’s a multiple-choice questionnaire which leaves little room for developed answers. As I understood it, there weren’t any options where the participants could evaluate themselves, which I think is a major error. This could be used as an alternative to personal interviews, which the authors stated were not possible since the youth’s were difficult to contact because of their living conditions. Furthermore, it would have been interesting to see if the results would differ depending on different regions, as opposed to just Hollywood where the research was conducted, but that’s just a personal opinion.
All in all, I found the research interesting and well thought through. The data was structured, where the authors have taken into account everything from ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and different kinds of living situations, since homelessness can be considered a diffuse term. The participants also received one 20$ gift card each for their cooperation, which was very thoughtful.
2. Article: “Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality: The Body Shapes the Way We Play”
Konstantina Kilteni, Ilias Bergstrom and Mel Slater
https://www.kth.se/social/files/56000bc9f2765448c25c5279/Drumming%20in%20Immersive%20Virtual%20Reality.pdf
In the article “Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality: The Body Shapes the Way We Play” by Konstantina Kilteni, Ilias Bergstrom and Mel Slater, it is discussed how body ownership illusions affects our behaviour. The research was done by letting 36 students play drums while wearing a head-mounted display and a motion capture suit, which created a virtual world with an avatar mimicking the movements of the real life player. The students were divided into two groups where each participant in one group got to play as a dark skinned, casually dressed male, while the other group was represented by a light skinned, formally dressed male.
The results were that the participants in the second group tended to “feel more expressive” than normal while playing the drums, as it matches the stereotype. As for the type of research, I would guess that it leans towards quantitative, as the test subjects were not handpicked, but recruited from a university campus. Furthermore, the research was done in a structured manner with a demonstration, the actual experiment followed by a questionnaire. Finally, the results were used as statistics based on all individual results, which is also typical for a quantitative method.
3. Which are the benefits and limitations of using quantitative methods?
As mentioned before, the benefits of using quantitative methods could be that with sufficient randomly picked samples, it is easier to generalize somewhat accurate in a shorter amount of time. This could also be something negative, but I think it all depends on the kind of research you’re doing. Another benefit is that by doing surveys, it could allow people to be anonymous and therefore answer otherwise uncomfortable questions.
4. Which are the benefits and limitations of using qualitative methods?
The benefits of using qualitative methods are that it allows you to be more deep and thorough in the research, as only a couple of handpicked subjects are chosen for a personal interview or an experiment. The limitations are that the results might not be applicable to a larger population.
The conclusion I draw from reading both articles and thinking about pros and cons with both quantitative and qualitative research, is that it’s probably best to mix the two. That is, to use quantitative methods to gather data and statistics in order to get a broad perspective, and to use qualitative methods to get more details.
Eric Rice, Anamika Barman-Adhikari (2013)Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcc4.12038/epdf
For this week I chose the article “Internet and Social Media Use as a Resource Among Homeless Youth” by Eric Rice and Anamika Barman-Adhikari. Here the authors have chosen a quantitative method to study how young homeless people between the ages 13-24 use internet in terms of communication, job application and house searching. The research includes 194 participants, all randomly recruited from a drop-in agency for homeless, who got to answer a survey consisting of various questions about their internet habits. The benefits of conducting a research like this could be that it generates data from many subjects in a short amount of time. Also, with a sufficient number and diversity of samples, it is possible to generalize which the authors seem to be aiming for.
The limitations with using a survey is that the participants may not be entirely truthful with the answers, especially when it’s a multiple-choice questionnaire which leaves little room for developed answers. As I understood it, there weren’t any options where the participants could evaluate themselves, which I think is a major error. This could be used as an alternative to personal interviews, which the authors stated were not possible since the youth’s were difficult to contact because of their living conditions. Furthermore, it would have been interesting to see if the results would differ depending on different regions, as opposed to just Hollywood where the research was conducted, but that’s just a personal opinion.
All in all, I found the research interesting and well thought through. The data was structured, where the authors have taken into account everything from ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and different kinds of living situations, since homelessness can be considered a diffuse term. The participants also received one 20$ gift card each for their cooperation, which was very thoughtful.
2. Article: “Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality: The Body Shapes the Way We Play”
Konstantina Kilteni, Ilias Bergstrom and Mel Slater
https://www.kth.se/social/files/56000bc9f2765448c25c5279/Drumming%20in%20Immersive%20Virtual%20Reality.pdf
In the article “Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality: The Body Shapes the Way We Play” by Konstantina Kilteni, Ilias Bergstrom and Mel Slater, it is discussed how body ownership illusions affects our behaviour. The research was done by letting 36 students play drums while wearing a head-mounted display and a motion capture suit, which created a virtual world with an avatar mimicking the movements of the real life player. The students were divided into two groups where each participant in one group got to play as a dark skinned, casually dressed male, while the other group was represented by a light skinned, formally dressed male.
The results were that the participants in the second group tended to “feel more expressive” than normal while playing the drums, as it matches the stereotype. As for the type of research, I would guess that it leans towards quantitative, as the test subjects were not handpicked, but recruited from a university campus. Furthermore, the research was done in a structured manner with a demonstration, the actual experiment followed by a questionnaire. Finally, the results were used as statistics based on all individual results, which is also typical for a quantitative method.
3. Which are the benefits and limitations of using quantitative methods?
As mentioned before, the benefits of using quantitative methods could be that with sufficient randomly picked samples, it is easier to generalize somewhat accurate in a shorter amount of time. This could also be something negative, but I think it all depends on the kind of research you’re doing. Another benefit is that by doing surveys, it could allow people to be anonymous and therefore answer otherwise uncomfortable questions.
4. Which are the benefits and limitations of using qualitative methods?
The benefits of using qualitative methods are that it allows you to be more deep and thorough in the research, as only a couple of handpicked subjects are chosen for a personal interview or an experiment. The limitations are that the results might not be applicable to a larger population.
The conclusion I draw from reading both articles and thinking about pros and cons with both quantitative and qualitative research, is that it’s probably best to mix the two. That is, to use quantitative methods to gather data and statistics in order to get a broad perspective, and to use qualitative methods to get more details.
Sunday, September 20, 2015
Theme 2 - Reflection
This week we were enlightened (harhar) of the concept of enlightenment and the power of media, which was quite interesting and very relevant to our program. I haven’t really thought about the complexity of the term before, it’s actually a lot more to it than just gaining knowledge.
So basically, enlightenment encourages people to gain knowledge through observation and research instead of filling the unknown with fantasy and ‘myths’. However, enlightenment could also have some negative sides as discussed during the seminar. For example, if one would at all times observe things scientifically as they are, it wouldn’t leave much room for imagination which could actually lead to new discoveries. Compare this to Theme 1 and Copernicus, where he used a little imagination and tried doing research while assuming that the planets didn’t revolve around Earth, but instead around the sun which actually came closer to the truth. Thus I think it’s probably good to have a balance between the two.
During the week it has also become even more apparent how dangerous media is in the wrong hands. Here we discussed fascism and communism, and how media was distributing propaganda used to glorify politics. I believe that the conclusion was that mass media channels enlightenment, since it portrays society for us through research. It’s good if we experience media, while at the same time being critical to it and not believe everything that we’re being fed. If we don’t we’ll be doing what political propaganda wanted us to do, that is just conforming to everything that is portrayed. This is even more relevant today, what with social media and jaded information being spread like wildfire (I’m thinking about anti-immigration pictures for example).
Regarding the text material for this week in general (Benjamin, Adorno and Horkheimer), I found them much easier to read than the previous week’s philosophical bombshells. Other than enlightenment, they spoke of art and its footprints in time and how it portrays our perception of society. I also learned about “aura” of an art piece, it’s authenticity which is lost upon reproduction. Although reproduction also makes art available to society, spreading new ideas and sharing different perceptions.
So basically, enlightenment encourages people to gain knowledge through observation and research instead of filling the unknown with fantasy and ‘myths’. However, enlightenment could also have some negative sides as discussed during the seminar. For example, if one would at all times observe things scientifically as they are, it wouldn’t leave much room for imagination which could actually lead to new discoveries. Compare this to Theme 1 and Copernicus, where he used a little imagination and tried doing research while assuming that the planets didn’t revolve around Earth, but instead around the sun which actually came closer to the truth. Thus I think it’s probably good to have a balance between the two.
During the week it has also become even more apparent how dangerous media is in the wrong hands. Here we discussed fascism and communism, and how media was distributing propaganda used to glorify politics. I believe that the conclusion was that mass media channels enlightenment, since it portrays society for us through research. It’s good if we experience media, while at the same time being critical to it and not believe everything that we’re being fed. If we don’t we’ll be doing what political propaganda wanted us to do, that is just conforming to everything that is portrayed. This is even more relevant today, what with social media and jaded information being spread like wildfire (I’m thinking about anti-immigration pictures for example).
Regarding the text material for this week in general (Benjamin, Adorno and Horkheimer), I found them much easier to read than the previous week’s philosophical bombshells. Other than enlightenment, they spoke of art and its footprints in time and how it portrays our perception of society. I also learned about “aura” of an art piece, it’s authenticity which is lost upon reproduction. Although reproduction also makes art available to society, spreading new ideas and sharing different perceptions.
Theme 1 comments
1. http://happyblogger7.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1learning-summary.html?showComment=1442583929222
2. https://tmmkappa.wordpress.com/2015/09/12/theme-1-post-reflection/comment-page-1/#comment-3
3. http://platotheplatypus.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-post-reflection.html?showComment=1442587094210
4. http://vadfinnsegentligen.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflection.html?showComment=1442587821327
5. http://u1ifqcuc.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and-theory.html?showComment=1442592375932
6. http://aris-totall-loss.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-in-retrospect.html?showComment=1442593449699
7. http://thetheoryandmethodofeverything.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflections.html?showComment=1442594174786
8. http://thewind-egg.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflection-to-be-honest.html?showComment=1442594733125
9. http://suchapriori.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-theme-1-reflection.html?showComment=1442595448466
10. http://capitalmyboy.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-post-theme-post.html?showComment=1442737135544
2. https://tmmkappa.wordpress.com/2015/09/12/theme-1-post-reflection/comment-page-1/#comment-3
3. http://platotheplatypus.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-post-reflection.html?showComment=1442587094210
4. http://vadfinnsegentligen.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflection.html?showComment=1442587821327
5. http://u1ifqcuc.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and-theory.html?showComment=1442592375932
6. http://aris-totall-loss.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-in-retrospect.html?showComment=1442593449699
7. http://thetheoryandmethodofeverything.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflections.html?showComment=1442594174786
8. http://thewind-egg.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflection-to-be-honest.html?showComment=1442594733125
9. http://suchapriori.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-theme-1-reflection.html?showComment=1442595448466
10. http://capitalmyboy.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-post-theme-post.html?showComment=1442737135544
Friday, September 18, 2015
Theme 3: Research and theory
Select a research journal that you believe is relevant for media technology research. The journal should be of high quality, with an “impact factor” of 1.0 or above. Write a short description of the journal and what kind of research it publishes.
I’ve chosen the journal “Media Psychology” (see link below) with an impact factor of 1.1, and a five-year impact factor of a whopping 2.457. The journal publishes about 4 issues a year, with empirical research within the intersecting field between media, communication and psychology. The research topics include media use and its effect on people and society in general, where the most popular articles seem to be about media and gaming addiction, body images and how television/internet affects our behavior, which all sound interesting and relevant to me.
http://www-tandfonline-com.focus.lib.kth.se/action/journalInformation?show=aimsScope&journalCode=hmep20#.VfhyH53tmko
Select a research paper that is of high quality and relevant for media technology research. The paper should have been published in a high quality journal, with an “impact factor” of 1.0 or above. Write a short summary of the paper and provide a critical examination of, for example, its aims, theoretical framing, research method, findings, analysis or implications.
The article I chose is named “Unregulated Internet Use: Addiction, Habit, or Deficient Self-Regulation” by Robert LaRose, Carolyn A. Lin and Matthew S. Eastin. As the title states, it’s about addiction to media (or “dependency on media” as the authors prefer to call it), and different factors that might cause or contribute to addiction in certain individuals. The authors propose a range of hypotheses of how it’s all connected which is best described by the image below.
(Note: Here ‘self-efficacy’ means how well one uses internet. ‘Self-reactive Outcome Expectations’ is basically why we use it in terms of rewards, eg. to relieve stress, boredom or depression).
Gregor, S. (2006). The Nature of Theory in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611-642.
Sutton, R. I. & Staw, B. M. (1995). What Theory is Not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371-384.
I’ve chosen the journal “Media Psychology” (see link below) with an impact factor of 1.1, and a five-year impact factor of a whopping 2.457. The journal publishes about 4 issues a year, with empirical research within the intersecting field between media, communication and psychology. The research topics include media use and its effect on people and society in general, where the most popular articles seem to be about media and gaming addiction, body images and how television/internet affects our behavior, which all sound interesting and relevant to me.
http://www-tandfonline-com.focus.lib.kth.se/action/journalInformation?show=aimsScope&journalCode=hmep20#.VfhyH53tmko
Select a research paper that is of high quality and relevant for media technology research. The paper should have been published in a high quality journal, with an “impact factor” of 1.0 or above. Write a short summary of the paper and provide a critical examination of, for example, its aims, theoretical framing, research method, findings, analysis or implications.
The article I chose is named “Unregulated Internet Use: Addiction, Habit, or Deficient Self-Regulation” by Robert LaRose, Carolyn A. Lin and Matthew S. Eastin. As the title states, it’s about addiction to media (or “dependency on media” as the authors prefer to call it), and different factors that might cause or contribute to addiction in certain individuals. The authors propose a range of hypotheses of how it’s all connected which is best described by the image below.
(Note: Here ‘self-efficacy’ means how well one uses internet. ‘Self-reactive Outcome Expectations’ is basically why we use it in terms of rewards, eg. to relieve stress, boredom or depression).
The research was done by letting 465 college students in three communication classes at two different universities answer a survey with questions regarding their use of internet and television. I immediately reacted to this method as a non optimal decision, since
1. The students are all studying communication and therefore probably use internet a lot more than others, which could be compared to ourselves at the Media Technology program (this was actually mentioned further down in the “Limitations” section in the article, so they are aware of this problem).
2. They might not be aware of their own addiction and/or usage, or simply denying it which would lead to different answers to the survey. A complementary method would probably be to study them for a couple of days as they use internet or watch television. However, all questions were based on certain scientific models for addiction and the data actually proved the majority of the theses, albeit with a more complex correlation as seen by figure 2.
1. Briefly explain to a first year university student what theory is, and what theory is not.
When speaking of theory, it is easy to confuse it for a synonym for ‘hypothesis’ (I know I did), which apparently is not the case. Long story short, a theory is “the answer to queries of why” (p.378. Sutton, R. I. & Staw, B. M). In other words, it is a logical explanation of why something is or has happened, learned from empirical studies. Secondly, it’s also supposed to be “testable” and raise discussion (Gregor, S). However, writing a strong theory is not as easy as it seems, and there are almost more don’t:s than do:s. For example, a theory shouldn’t be crammed with references, but come from your own mind. Nor should it consist of pure data, lists of variables or diagrams, which rather answer the question of ‘what’ instead of ‘why’. Although, these aspects may be used to back up a theory.
2. Describe the major theory or theories that are used in your selected paper. Which theory type (see Table 2 in Gregor) can the theory or theories be characterized as?
In the article, the authors criticize two external theories, one that explains addiction as a result of a certain personality prone to addiction, while the other explains it as a conditioning process. The first theory is argued against by data showing “low to moderate correlation among television, Internet, and video game addictions, and alcohol addiction” (p.229, Larose et al). The article also mentions that any correlations could be a result of culture or lifestyle. Depression seems to be linked to any addiction, but is most likely a result of the addiction itself, and not a cause. The other theory explains addiction as a progress in four stages: initiation, transition to ongoing use, addiction, and behavior change (p.230, Larose et al).
The authors themselves proposes many hypotheses, but since none of them explains exactly why addiction occurs, I’m guessing that they are just that and not theories. After having scanned through the article, I draw the conclusion that the authors don’t really have any theory of their own, but base the research around the two external theories. These two theories are probably “Analysis”-type since they explain addiction as a result of two different causes, both of them discussable as theories should be. If they weren’t that, they could also pass as “Description”-type.
3. Which are the benefits and limitations of using the selected theory or theories?
The benefits of using several theories could be that it gives an opportunity to truly investigate the subject from different perspectives, and also question earlier belief and opinions. However, there can also be limitations on using other people’s theories as a foundation of your own research, as it might stand in the way of new ideas when only focusing on old ones. But that probably depends on how they are used.
Sources
Robert LaRose , Carolyn A. Lin & Matthew S. Eastin (2003) Unregulated Internet Usage: Addiction, Habit, or Deficient Self-Regulation?, Media Psychology, 5:3, 225-253, DOI: 10.1207/S1532785XMEP0503_01. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0503_01
1. The students are all studying communication and therefore probably use internet a lot more than others, which could be compared to ourselves at the Media Technology program (this was actually mentioned further down in the “Limitations” section in the article, so they are aware of this problem).
2. They might not be aware of their own addiction and/or usage, or simply denying it which would lead to different answers to the survey. A complementary method would probably be to study them for a couple of days as they use internet or watch television. However, all questions were based on certain scientific models for addiction and the data actually proved the majority of the theses, albeit with a more complex correlation as seen by figure 2.
1. Briefly explain to a first year university student what theory is, and what theory is not.
When speaking of theory, it is easy to confuse it for a synonym for ‘hypothesis’ (I know I did), which apparently is not the case. Long story short, a theory is “the answer to queries of why” (p.378. Sutton, R. I. & Staw, B. M). In other words, it is a logical explanation of why something is or has happened, learned from empirical studies. Secondly, it’s also supposed to be “testable” and raise discussion (Gregor, S). However, writing a strong theory is not as easy as it seems, and there are almost more don’t:s than do:s. For example, a theory shouldn’t be crammed with references, but come from your own mind. Nor should it consist of pure data, lists of variables or diagrams, which rather answer the question of ‘what’ instead of ‘why’. Although, these aspects may be used to back up a theory.
2. Describe the major theory or theories that are used in your selected paper. Which theory type (see Table 2 in Gregor) can the theory or theories be characterized as?
In the article, the authors criticize two external theories, one that explains addiction as a result of a certain personality prone to addiction, while the other explains it as a conditioning process. The first theory is argued against by data showing “low to moderate correlation among television, Internet, and video game addictions, and alcohol addiction” (p.229, Larose et al). The article also mentions that any correlations could be a result of culture or lifestyle. Depression seems to be linked to any addiction, but is most likely a result of the addiction itself, and not a cause. The other theory explains addiction as a progress in four stages: initiation, transition to ongoing use, addiction, and behavior change (p.230, Larose et al).
The authors themselves proposes many hypotheses, but since none of them explains exactly why addiction occurs, I’m guessing that they are just that and not theories. After having scanned through the article, I draw the conclusion that the authors don’t really have any theory of their own, but base the research around the two external theories. These two theories are probably “Analysis”-type since they explain addiction as a result of two different causes, both of them discussable as theories should be. If they weren’t that, they could also pass as “Description”-type.
3. Which are the benefits and limitations of using the selected theory or theories?
The benefits of using several theories could be that it gives an opportunity to truly investigate the subject from different perspectives, and also question earlier belief and opinions. However, there can also be limitations on using other people’s theories as a foundation of your own research, as it might stand in the way of new ideas when only focusing on old ones. But that probably depends on how they are used.
Sources
Robert LaRose , Carolyn A. Lin & Matthew S. Eastin (2003) Unregulated Internet Usage: Addiction, Habit, or Deficient Self-Regulation?, Media Psychology, 5:3, 225-253, DOI: 10.1207/S1532785XMEP0503_01. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0503_01
Sutton, R. I. & Staw, B. M. (1995). What Theory is Not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371-384.
Sunday, September 13, 2015
Theme 1 - Reflection
I’ll have to be honest, when I first read the text by Immanuel Kant, I understood nothing. It was all so abstract and even though I grasped the basics, the very meaning was lost on me. However, after the Monday lecture, things started to fall in place. Then after the seminar, (and after having skimmed through the text once again), I think I’m starting to understand what it was all about.
Basically, the entire discussion is about the world and our knowledge of it. The argumentation goes that we see with our mind, and not objectively with our eyes. Thus we all perceive things differently, and therefore cannot understand the world as it is without tainting it with our own opinions. One could say that there are as many worlds as there are people, since each and every one of us is the main character of our own story and perceive things from a first person view.
Kant argues exactly this, that we can’t be truly objective about things, so if we truly want to gain knowledge we have to “climb down from God’s point of view” and investigate objects as we see them. This is also what is meant by a priori, that objects can be assigned attributes based on what we know about them without having actually investigated them in person.
So while Kant says that we cannot ignore our senses, Plato argues that we can and should ignore them in order to see the world as it is. I myself have always kind of thought that you can be objective if you just distance yourself far enough, but am now having second thoughts. Perhaps it is impossible, since people do have opinions about everything, even though we don’t want to admit it (they could be subconscious of course). If one wants to be objective, one would have to distance him or herself entirely from life, which sounds like a tedious task if you ask me. But what I've understood from this weeks discussions is that there is no real answer when it comes to philosophy. Just perceptions.
Another conclusion of this week’s theme could be that we have to keep in mind that all people are different, and thus perceive the world differently. If one would relate this to our field within media technology, it would be that systems and products we develop and/or work with have to take this into consideration. The same goes for all kinds of research and investigation really. But that’s just how I perceive it.
Basically, the entire discussion is about the world and our knowledge of it. The argumentation goes that we see with our mind, and not objectively with our eyes. Thus we all perceive things differently, and therefore cannot understand the world as it is without tainting it with our own opinions. One could say that there are as many worlds as there are people, since each and every one of us is the main character of our own story and perceive things from a first person view.
Kant argues exactly this, that we can’t be truly objective about things, so if we truly want to gain knowledge we have to “climb down from God’s point of view” and investigate objects as we see them. This is also what is meant by a priori, that objects can be assigned attributes based on what we know about them without having actually investigated them in person.
So while Kant says that we cannot ignore our senses, Plato argues that we can and should ignore them in order to see the world as it is. I myself have always kind of thought that you can be objective if you just distance yourself far enough, but am now having second thoughts. Perhaps it is impossible, since people do have opinions about everything, even though we don’t want to admit it (they could be subconscious of course). If one wants to be objective, one would have to distance him or herself entirely from life, which sounds like a tedious task if you ask me. But what I've understood from this weeks discussions is that there is no real answer when it comes to philosophy. Just perceptions.
Another conclusion of this week’s theme could be that we have to keep in mind that all people are different, and thus perceive the world differently. If one would relate this to our field within media technology, it would be that systems and products we develop and/or work with have to take this into consideration. The same goes for all kinds of research and investigation really. But that’s just how I perceive it.
Friday, September 11, 2015
Theme 2: Critical media studies
Dialectic of Enlightenment
1. What is "Enlightenment"?
Enlightenment according to Adorno and Horkheimer is “mythical fear radicalized” (p.11) and is used to “dispel myths, to overthrow fantasy with knowledge” (p.1). In other words, enlightenment was a new way of thinking, a more scientific approach to the previous superstition that was prevalent in society. With enlightenment came criticism and knowledge, which also turned the power over to the bourgeois instead of the royals and the priests.
2. What is "Dialectic"?
'Dialectic' is, according to the dictionary, “a method of examining and discussing opposing ideas in order to find the truth”. This basically means to thoroughly analyze a concept through dialogue from different perspectives and try to arrive to a conclusion that is most truthful. In a way, ‘enlightenment’ is dialectic since it also criticizes and questions itself as stated in the text, which makes it strong enough to shatter myths and become the new truth.
3. What is "Nominalism" and why is it an important concept in the text?
‘Nominalism’ is a theory where objects which can be described by the same name, for example two trees (the name here being ‘tree’), have nothing in common except for their name. Generally, abstract concepts are treated as names instead of realities. It is probably an important concept in the text since nominalism treats objects and concepts individually and doesn’t allow generalization and fantasy, which sounds like a good quality found in dialectic methods and enlightenment.
4. What is the meaning and function of "myth" in Adorno and Horkheimer's argument?
‘Myth’ as explained by Adorno and Horkheimer, is fantasy and stories that is designed to awake fear in people, and in doing so controlling them (an example from the past is the church). Enlightenment is described as the antidote for this concept, as it shatters the falsehood of the myths and tells the truth about the world.
The Work of Art in the Age of Technical Reproductivity
1. In the beginning of the essay, Benjamin talks about the relation between "superstructure" and "substructure" in the capitalist order of production. What do the concepts "superstructure" and "substructure" mean in this context and what is the point of analyzing cultural production from a Marxist perspective?
Since the two terms were not explained in sufficient detail in the text, I had to google them in order to find out what was actually going on. Turns out that they were coined by Karl Marx himself, and are theoretical concepts used to describe human society. 'Superstructure' means all aspects in society that don’t include production (so no factories, land or material), such as political structure, ideology, social institutions and culture etc. The 'substructure' would be the economic structure of a society, whether it’s capitalistic or socialistic etc. As Benjamin states, the superstructure changes much more slowly than the substructure, but they do go hand in hand and can be analyzed in order to see how culture (and other subjects) have developed in the history of our society.
2. Does culture have revolutionary potentials (according to Benjamin)? If so, describe these potentials. Does Benjamin's perspective differ from the perspective of Adorno & Horkheimer in this regard?
Benjamin mainly focuses on two cultural subjects, mechanical reproduction and photography, which both have revolutionary potentials. As for reproduction, it made it possible to reproduce works of art and severely increase the distribution to the general public, creating a new sort of media powerful enough to affect politics and ideology. Then came photography, which “accelerated the pictorial reproduction so enormously that it could keep pace with speech” (Benjamin Part I), making way for the movie industry. Adorno and Horkheimer also speak of revolutionary ideas which derive from culture and knowledge.
3. Benjamin discusses how people perceive the world through the senses and argues that this perception can be both naturally and historically determined. What does this mean? Give some examples of historically determined perception (from Benjamin's essay and/or other contexts).
Benjamin argues that our perception has changed with our society and culture, and gives an example of the late Roman art industry of the 5th century, where the art style changed and became more realistic and inspired by the ancient greek artform (Benjamin Part III). When replication became popular, it destroyed the “aura” of the art, and therefore also changed the way we perceive it. One could probably say that our perception within the field of art depends on the artform of the time, as we perceive a painting or a photograph through the brush strokes of the artist or the lens of a camera. Thus we not only perceive it through our eyes, but also through the eyes of the one who created the art piece. Naturally determined perception could be the perception which we have biologically (such as color vision etc).
4. What does Benjamin mean by the term "aura"? Are there different kinds of aura in natural objects compared to art objects?
Benjamin describes the term “aura” as something unique and authentic, something that is perceived in the presence and cannot be replicated. In natural objects, the aura is created by distance and space, which could be the shadow cast from a tree branch or the reflection on water surface. As for art, the aura vanishes if the art is replicated, or if for example an actor is watched through a camera lens instead of on a stage in person (Benjamin Part IX).
Question: “Because faith is unavoidably tied to knowledge as its friend or its foe, faith perpetuates the split in the struggle to overcome knowledge: its fanaticism is the mark of its untruth, the objective admission that anyone who only believes for that reason no longer believes” (The Concept of Enlightenment p.14) What does it mean with “faith”, is it faith in God/higher power or something else?
1. In the beginning of the essay, Benjamin talks about the relation between "superstructure" and "substructure" in the capitalist order of production. What do the concepts "superstructure" and "substructure" mean in this context and what is the point of analyzing cultural production from a Marxist perspective?
Since the two terms were not explained in sufficient detail in the text, I had to google them in order to find out what was actually going on. Turns out that they were coined by Karl Marx himself, and are theoretical concepts used to describe human society. 'Superstructure' means all aspects in society that don’t include production (so no factories, land or material), such as political structure, ideology, social institutions and culture etc. The 'substructure' would be the economic structure of a society, whether it’s capitalistic or socialistic etc. As Benjamin states, the superstructure changes much more slowly than the substructure, but they do go hand in hand and can be analyzed in order to see how culture (and other subjects) have developed in the history of our society.
2. Does culture have revolutionary potentials (according to Benjamin)? If so, describe these potentials. Does Benjamin's perspective differ from the perspective of Adorno & Horkheimer in this regard?
Benjamin mainly focuses on two cultural subjects, mechanical reproduction and photography, which both have revolutionary potentials. As for reproduction, it made it possible to reproduce works of art and severely increase the distribution to the general public, creating a new sort of media powerful enough to affect politics and ideology. Then came photography, which “accelerated the pictorial reproduction so enormously that it could keep pace with speech” (Benjamin Part I), making way for the movie industry. Adorno and Horkheimer also speak of revolutionary ideas which derive from culture and knowledge.
3. Benjamin discusses how people perceive the world through the senses and argues that this perception can be both naturally and historically determined. What does this mean? Give some examples of historically determined perception (from Benjamin's essay and/or other contexts).
Benjamin argues that our perception has changed with our society and culture, and gives an example of the late Roman art industry of the 5th century, where the art style changed and became more realistic and inspired by the ancient greek artform (Benjamin Part III). When replication became popular, it destroyed the “aura” of the art, and therefore also changed the way we perceive it. One could probably say that our perception within the field of art depends on the artform of the time, as we perceive a painting or a photograph through the brush strokes of the artist or the lens of a camera. Thus we not only perceive it through our eyes, but also through the eyes of the one who created the art piece. Naturally determined perception could be the perception which we have biologically (such as color vision etc).
4. What does Benjamin mean by the term "aura"? Are there different kinds of aura in natural objects compared to art objects?
Benjamin describes the term “aura” as something unique and authentic, something that is perceived in the presence and cannot be replicated. In natural objects, the aura is created by distance and space, which could be the shadow cast from a tree branch or the reflection on water surface. As for art, the aura vanishes if the art is replicated, or if for example an actor is watched through a camera lens instead of on a stage in person (Benjamin Part IX).
Question: “Because faith is unavoidably tied to knowledge as its friend or its foe, faith perpetuates the split in the struggle to overcome knowledge: its fanaticism is the mark of its untruth, the objective admission that anyone who only believes for that reason no longer believes” (The Concept of Enlightenment p.14) What does it mean with “faith”, is it faith in God/higher power or something else?
Sources
Horkheimer & Adorno (1944). Dialectic of Enlightenment. Stanford University Press, California.
Benjamin, W (1936). The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. Schocken/Random House.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nominalism
http://sociology.about.com/od/Key-Theoretical-Concepts/fl/Base-and-Superstructure.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)