There are many ways in which one may approach complex research questions. Some researchers succeed in digging deep, others end up only having scratched the surface of the issue at hand. But what determines the success of research? If there is one thing this course has taught me, it is that method is perhaps the most essential aspect.
Emmanuel Kant was a pioneer with his approach to knowledge. And even before him, Plato raised a similar question. What is knowledge, and how do we ever ensure that we have attained it? Since the times of these great thinkers, approaches on how to attain knowledge has evolved, and extensive efforts have been put into perfecting the ways in which we go about studying the world. As a student in the field of media, both historical and contemporary research approaches to media technology are of great interest to me. The works by Adorno and Horkheimer (1944) and Benjamin (1936) offered insight into the complexity that is modernization, and their works opened my eyes to the necessity of constantly and critically examining the surrounding world by discussing a subject that hit close to home for me. I was intrigued by the notion of how we attain- and adapt to new knowledge, and I wanted to know more.
The old philosophers and I have something in common; we want to know more about the world. And with a hunger for knowledge comes the need for the skills to attain it. We started this course by looking at the very foundation of knowledge, and we finished it by studying a method that elegantly combines various ways of attaining it. During these past weeks I have learned a lot about how to approach not only knowledge, but method too. I have widened my perception of what constitutes data, and I have reflected on the various ways in which one can go about attaining it.
The importance of well-motivated uses of methods cannot be stressed enough, and the benefits and limitations of all research methods are essential for researches to be aware of. Methodological implications are common in the global academia, and the misuse of methods or misinterpretation of results can have troublesome outcomes. Hence, there are many aspects to consider when choosing method for a study. Will the study best be brought out by qualitative or quantitative methods? What research has been done in the field earlier, and what theories could be applicable to this particular study? What are the researcher’s prerequisites (and prejudices) regarding the question at hand, and will they lead to him/her being bias when conducting the research?
Should one be looking to measure different variables and use that data to answer to a hypothesis, one may choose a quantitative method. By being able to quantify data, researchers may identify statistical patterns and perform complex analyses. Something that quantitative methods tend to lack, however, is understanding of beliefs, meaning and experiences. Such “softer” or more abstract variables are more suitably examined through qualitative methods, which enables in-depth understanding and nuanced data for analysis. If the area of interest is not the result of actions, but rather the process leading up to them, design oriented research methods are preferable. Case studies, which can combine the above mentioned quantitative and qualitative methods to understand specific phenomena, is another example of how to approach the unknowns of the world.
All researchers must ask themselves which method would be the best for their study. Qualitative, quantitative, or perhaps a mix? Is it the process or result of a phenomena that is of interest in the study? Are the hypotheses set from the start, or should they rather come later on in the process?
Researchers must reflect on what their chosen methods may enable them to study, but also what they possibly could prevent them from discover. By understanding the benefits, and maybe even more important, the limitations of various methods, researchers can combine different methods in order to fully and reliably answer their study’s questions.
Thank you for an interesting course, and thanks to all my peers for great comments throughout the past weeks!
Theme 1
http://u10o7oqf.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-1-pt-2.html#comment-form
Thank you for an interesting post!
Your way of discussing the notion of objectivity is interesting. By contradicting (or at least challenging) the idea of objectivity being the ideal form of knowledge, I believe that you raise an interesting question. Why do we even need objectivity? And more specifically; why do we need it beyond scientific research?
I am sure that you, just like me, understand the benefits of having an objective state or map out what is right and wrong for e.g. doctors to do. But just like you say in your post; if every thought still is limited by our personal perceptions, it is an utopia. So shy should we strive to reach a state that is impossible?
-
http://u1kq1ay0.blogspot.se/2016/09/second-blog-post-theme-1-theory-of.html#comment-form
You write that mentally unstable people might perceive their surroundings "more intensely", and that would make them more aware of whats happening around them. I agree with you in one sense, especially when applying that concept to hypersensitive people (an important note; hypersensitivity and depression is not the same thing). But I also reflected on whether mental instability might come from the opposite form of perception, too?
Perhaps some mentally ill people experience their surrounding too little, rather than too intensely. That their conception of the world, and hence their own existence, lacks proof or mirroring effects of what is actually happening around them? In other words, they are not putting their own human existence in relation to space and time. After all, it is a classic behaviour among mental ill people to turn inwards, to not engage in the outside world.
-
https://u1cq6h0z.blogspot.se/2016/09/reflection-on-theme-1theory-of.html?showComment=1474137427125#c7182583674010103222
The way you reflect on Kant's category "Relation" is interesting. I too believe that the increased digitalization (and perhaps even more; mediatization) has had great influence on the way we humans interact. We have new social schemes, and we thus arrange and reflect differently upon the world today compared to earlier times.
But is it really legit to say that body image was "not that much of a big deal" before this digital revolution? Human kind seems to enjoy organizing the world, and I am convinced that it was the same mechanisms that today have created unreasonable body ideals (especially for women) that led to e.g. the aristocrat's corsets. In other words, I believe that it is incorrect to say that this notion of modifying ourselves to fit into societal conceptions or norms (i.e. putting ourselves in relation to it) is a new thing. Rather, I believe that social media has provided a new, perhaps increased, way of doing it.
-
http://u1818rgq.blogspot.se/2016/09/post-2-theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and.html#comment-form
To engage in a new field of research and shift focus from science to philosophy is challenging, but it is a sign of human health that you still set out to do so! Because just like both Kant and Plato suggested, we humans will always strive to understand our surroundings.
Your discussion on whether our faculties of knowledge should be updated was interesting to read, and I started to wonder what these updated faculties could be. I started thinking about Artificial Intelligence and robots, and my initial approach was that they would eexamplify "modern" ways of attaining knowledge. But aren't they, in a way, also following Kant's already defined faculties of knowledge? The robots clearly depend on quality, quantity, modality and relations when making sense of their surroundings, even if they are run by computers. I.e., could it be that Kant's (and Plato's) faculties are sufficient, even if the world in which they were created looked very different from our modern world?
On another note, I really enjoyed JaPaHe's question. We obviously cannot know the things we don't know, and it is evident to me that we must strive to erase as many of the unknowns in our lives to minimize the danger of "the unknown unkowns".
-
http://u1wdx0i7.blogspot.se/2016/09/post-theme-1.html#comment-form
Thank you for a very interesting post! I really enjoyed getting a glimpse into the mind of an engineer.
I liked the way you concluded that there are no correct answers to metaphyscial questions. Yet, while you said that metaphysical questions cannot be empirically answered, I found it interesting to read about how you still search for systematic explanations like the maps in our brains.
When you wrote about knowledge of art, I reflected on whether we can really educate us about abstract things. There are no correct answers, so what is it that we could really learn? I agree with you that education has fundamental influence over us and our perceptions, and I simply wish to discuss whether education could be ascribed the same legitimizing/explaining function in fields like art.
-
http://scarsickbg.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-1-blog-post-2-reading-plato-and.html#comment-form
Thank you for a very interesting read!
Your texts brought me to think about so called "filter bubbles". The way ones social media (and real life) becomes centered around already confirmed perceptions of the world, it only reproduces opinions and definitions of truth. What would happen with, say, my political opinion if not 80% of my friends voted for the same party as me?
But how do we maintain an open mind if we do not know what we don't know? In another student's blog, I read about a will to minimize "the unknown unknowns". In order to leave a filter bubble, one would have to understand that he or she is in one to begin with. And how do w do that, if everything around us confirms- and corresponds with our world views?
I really enjoyed your conclusion of a need to maintain "a healthy dose of skepticism". I am, just like you seem to be, afraid of the "spiritual, social, cultural and intellectual stagnation" that the world may face with the emergence of filter bubbles. But I hope for media technologies like e.g. Wikileaks to help break the trend!
-
http://u1dn0y6t.blogspot.se/2016/09/post-reflection-theme-1.html#comment-form
Describing planet Earth as 7 billion worlds is an interesting idea. Just like you write, there is a valid point in looking at individual perceptions of the world as constituting the world. Because after all, the only world that I know is the world that I perceive. Just like one of the previous commentators wrote, it is impossible to say that people with completely different backgrounds (and presents, too) perceive the same world. And since all is perception, it should also be impossible to say that they life in the same world.
-
http://u17fpbu5.blogspot.se/2016/09/post-theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and.html#comment-form
I, too, have thought about the concept of individual worlds (i.e. that there could be 7 billion worlds on planet earth). I think that the idea opens upp for social acceptance and cross-cultural understanding. I am, how ever, not sure that sharing thoughts with other people will per definition make life more clear. Perhaps it will offer some ease, or a perceived state of reaching truth. But I think that just might be an effect of ending up in a filter bubble.
When you write that information has never been "more shared, talked and discussed", I partially disagree. In one sense, it is clear that there has been an increased distribution of information i society. But are people, on a more personal level, really widening their views of the world? I believe that the increased information flow has backfired and brought out tendencies where people protect their own views of the world in order to not feel completely lost in what is and what isn't.
-
https://u1gixy4z.blogspot.se/2016/09/after-theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and.html?showComment=1474137120287#c1133996065045851270
Your reference to how Kant's thought were opposed in society are interesting. What he himself referred to as a total revolution in epistemology truly was groundbreaking, and his way of critically investigating the notion of pure reason was much needed in the post-enlightement movement society.
I wonder whether your statement of "the world not being a world without me" is correct. Or, rather, if I agree with it (since, as we all know by now, there are no correct answers). Perhaps it is the term "world" that has to be re-defined, rather than the statement's implicite reference to the world not existing if people doesn't. If we re-define the term and accept that there is no such thing as a universal perception of the world, I think your statement hold high validity.
-
https://u1bauz11.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-1-reflection.html?showComment=1474136992960#c7074957497985566473
Your blog entry is a concise summary of this weeks theme, and I appreciate the effort to keep it simple.
I would have, just like previous commentators, liked to hear about your own opinions or thoughts on the theme. When you write that Kant is misinterpreted, does that apply to you as well? Were the concepts clear from day 1?
You comments on Kant's critique on the sovereignty of empiricism is relevant and interesting. Kant's "copernican revolution" is an interesting study theme, and it was neat to link it to its source ("Kant asks how it could be possible to have sythetic knowledge a priori").
Theme 2
http://u10o7oqf.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2-critical-media-studies-part-2.html
Thank you for interesting reflections!
Just like you, I slightly changed my perception of the definition of enlightenment made by Horkheimer and Adorno. The fact that the notion is about more than "only" knowledge, about more than rising beyond the mythological, is my own key take away from this week, too. The fact that we are all part of knowledge hierarchies, just like you write, made me wonder though. Where in this hierarchy can we as students be placed? Does our active search for knowledge put us high on the scale, or rather low since the notion requires us to not know things yet (i.e. before examina). Food for thought!
-
http://u1eqtjc8.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2-reflection.html
http://u1eqtjc8.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2-reflection.html
I like the way you give your learning a timeline; once you understood the concept of enlightenment further, you could also better see the connection it has to myth. The way you describe their link (i.e. that they both lead to mimesis) is interesting; myths are concepts which refer to manmade strategies to erase the unknown, and it is the same mechanism of control or aim to understand the world around us that serves as the momentum for enlightenment.
I also appreciated you concluding note on how Benjamin had no idea of how what he regarded as positive would come to be used as a tool of manipulation later on. It made me wonder - what of the things that we see as positive today will later on prove to be negative? For example, is our positive view of the internet as a democratic platform going to be proven negative someday in the future?
-
http://u1h4muxc.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-22-reflection.html
http://u1h4muxc.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-22-reflection.html
Your post and reflections are presented well, and your detailed descriptions of what lead up to the observations and insights of the studies are highly adequate. I like the way you link the media technologies of the time (and especially how they were put in use) to these thoughts on knowledge and the reproduction of it.
As powerful tools to manipulate the masses, I appreciated your way of putting the worried thoughts of Adorno & Horkheimer and Benjamin, on our modern context. Like you seem to be, I am too worried about what the consequences of our modern media technology use. Sometimes I wonder if we have become to comfortable, to used to the idea of that the misuse of media technology is behind us (e.g. propaganda). Just like you wrote, the technical innovations of the early 1900's lead to unexpected results. So where will our modern innovations bring us?
Thank you for an interesting post!
-
http://omg-dm2572.blogspot.se/2016/09/after-theme-2_19.html
Hi! I really enjoyed reading about your thoughts on presidential debates in relation to dialectics, much since it is an issue that has bothered me for quite some time. I think the concept of dialectics in the field of politics should go even further, beyond two candidates looking to gain public support and spotlight. Because, how wonderful wouldn't party politics be if both sides (as in the american system) agreed to work together to find the best solution? I believe, just like you seem to do too, that politics today suffer from the fact that the individual ambition to win has grown stronger than the wish to do what's best for society.
-
http://dm2572-16.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-22.html
http://dm2572-16.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-22.html
Hi! Thanks for a nice reflection.
Your quote on how it is "okay" for the stronger to kill the weaker made me further reflect on the notion and problematics of nominalism. Adorno & Horkheimer rejected the notion of people simply observing their surroundings to find rights and wrongs. Rather, they insisted on the need for visions and said that abstract ideas are what help people question their present beliefs.
Adorno and Horkheimer would probably have stressed the fact that abstract ideas (which nominalism rejected) are needed in order for the stronger to realize the value of not killing the weaker. Perhaps this is something you could have added, maybe also relating it to the fascist context in which their text was written!
-
http://u11zdo9t.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2-critical-media-studies-2.html
Thank you for a nice reflection! Just like previous commentators, I believe that your reflections on the importance of putting the texts into historical context are valid. However, I wish you would have elaborated on which these contexts were!
The fact that the texts were written under fascist rulings is fundamental for the conclusions drawn in them. Could Adorno and Horkheimer have come up with their criticism of nominalism if it wasn't so that they had seen the misuse of it by governmental oppression? Would Benjamin have discussed the issues of historically determined perception if it weren't for his observations of nazism and fascist "rights and wrongs"?
I would have enjoyed some further comments on these context, but over all your reflections were a nice read. And I'm happy that you got some Aha-moments!
-
http://u1gixy4z.blogspot.se/2016/09/after-theme-2-critical-media-studies.html
Thank you for a nice reflection!
In your first paragraph, you say that your first blog post on the theme answered the questions correctly but without profound understanding of- or reflection on the ideas. This is, in my opinion, a wonderful proof of the idea of nominalism. You observed the texts and gave the answer you sought right; you didn't reflect on the abstract entities or question their existence. You fell under the "oppression" of our teachers asking for a response.
Just like you say, Adorno and Horkheimer suggested that we must question the truths around us to evolve. I believe that this post - your reflection and new gained understanding of the ideas - is a great example of such questioning.
-
http://u1818rgq.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2-critical-media-studies-post-2.html
Thank you for interesting reflections and a well written post!
Your question on whether we want things just as they are, or if we want to change society into what we want it to be, made me think of the concept of mimesis and the dangers of having a society based on mythology. Because, if we strive to explain the world by making it into what we want it to be (i.e. understandable) we might fail to acknowledge the reality around us.
Your post was easy to follow, and I really appreciated your way of bringing media technology in as an explaining factor for aura and the potential loss of it through media.
-
http://u1j8du7c.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-22.html?m=0
Thank you for a nice reflection!
I agree with you and believe in the democratic potential of media, too. The innovation-boom of media technology has indeed led to increased possibility of democracy, but in my eyes it has also brought up new questions regarding what democracy really is. Is democracy simply to make everyone able to speak their mind, or is democracy really for the governing elites to listen to those voices as they make policies for society?
I have thought about if the concept of aura could be transferred to the "art" of an idea. The aura is intact as long as the idea is, but with the fast information flow of today, ideas get slightly changed as they are reproduced (and hence their aura "rubs of" as you so nicely put it). Perhaps this could contribute to governing organs to not take the ideas coming from the internet as serious as ideas presented to them already in the elite's discussions. Food for thought!
-
http://u1cq6h0z.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2reflection-on-critical-media.html
Thank you for a well written post and interesting reflections. Seems like you learned a lot this week!
I appreciate your clarification of nominalism and categorizations. However, I think it would have been nice to add an example of such which relate to the context of Adorno and Horkheimer (and hence, explains why their text was written to begin with). The example of a table is vivid, but perhaps you could have added something about the racist categorizations of their time. The reason for this is that I think your comments on how A&H were critical towards nominalism because it lead to the creation of a superficial society might be misinterpreted without it!
Theme 3
http://u1j8du7c.blogspot.se/?m=0
Hi!
Thank you for an exceptionally thorough walk-thru of your growing perception and knowledge of the concept of theory. It was both interesting and enlightening to read your post, and I enjoyed it very much.
Your final definition of theory is all-consuming, at least in my opinion. It covers the ambiguous aspects of the notion; the fact that theories by tradition tend to be contradicted is what made this theme a bit blurry for me, and by adding that factor to the very definition of the notion I believe that you made it more clear. Thank you!
-
https://u1mv5a16.blogspot.se/
Interesting post!
When you write that "theory does not belong to any individual it's a collective interpretation of experiences and observations" I disagree with you slightly. In my interpretation of theory, the role of the researcher (i.e., an individual) is central. Even if the work he or she reasons around, and later forms the theory from, is by others, it is still not the collective's interpretation that constitutes the theory. Of course, the fault may be in my interpretation of the concept, but it is still interesting to note that we conceived the notion of where theory "belongs" / comes from differently. Or perhaps it is just a selfish dream of someday being the owner of a theory, just like Newton or Hawkings ;)
-
http://u1bauz11.blogspot.se/
I agree with you that theory sometimes feels differently defined depending on what papers you read, and the concept you (and your seminar group) decided on consequently fits my perception, too. However relevant your definition of theory was in terms of dependency on field and creation of a framework, I believe that you might have benefited from mentioning the disproving of theories as a part of your definition. As another classmate defined the notion, "Theories are tested ideas of understanding, used as supporting logic for current scientific studies – until they have been contradicted". I think it is important to discuss the disproving or contradicting of theories, since that is a central concept in knowledge production!
-
http://u1h02pv3.blogspot.se/
Hi! This post was extraordinary; your academic insight is impressive and admirable.
I enjoyed reading your reasoning and comparison of scientific and philosophical theories, and particularly how it led up to your definition of what theories are for (;enabling and easing the process of understanding the world by structuring and conceptualizing knowledge). When you write about the process of tensions and contradictions as inherent parts of the concept of theory, I started thinking about how that very fact must be included in the definition of the concept. Because if we do so, we do not risk divesting disproven theories of their attribute of being a theory. If we include the contradicting of theories in its definition, we may broaden the understanding of what theory actually is. Then, perhaps explaining the concept to a first year student won't be as challenging.
-
http://scarsickbg.blogspot.se/
Hi! I liked your full post, but in particular the ending. When you describe how theories can lead to the production of new knowledge, I think you tap into the core of the notion and hence leave your reader with a valid understanding of it. Theory makes us understand the world around us; it explains (just like you write) new phenomena.
When you write that theories can be used to disprove results from previous research, I got slightly confused regarding wether you meant that it can disprove theories or simply the empirical results that led up to them. I am assuming that you were referring to the former, but if so wasn't the case I would have enjoyed reading a clarification!
-
http://u1c051gg.blogspot.se/
Hi! Thank you for a nice reflection.
When you write that theory is supported by institutions, I would have enjoyed a further definition of what such may be. Are you referring to academic institutions? Commercial research institutes? Big companies that have earn institutional status? I believe that a clarification of what institutions you mean is needed. My own interpretation of the notion of theory and its connection to "institutions" is that all of the previously mentioned sources of research can be home of the creation of new theories.
I also believe that you could have been more clear in your definition of the differences between theory and hypotheses, since that is a common trap where many, less cultivated scholars than ourselves, get confused ;)
-
http://u1kq1ay0.blogspot.se/2016/09/second-blog-post-theme-3-research-and.html#comment-form
Hi! I liked the passage of your post where you write that theory is designed by us. I think that this is one of the most important things to keep in mind when discussing and reflecting on the notion of theory; researchers are the clue needed to turn data into knowledge, and without them our world will be left without any new knowledge contributions. I also think that this issue is linked to the disproving of theories; since theories are designed by "us", they can also be disproven by us.
-
http://u1cq6h0z.blogspot.se/
Hi! I feel like we gained some similar insights during our seminars and lecture. I too found the quote "knowledge advances one funeral at a time" interesting, but for me it awoke thoughts of which theories we have today that will "die" in the future. It would have been nice to read about your thoughts on that subject! However, I do believe that it was nice of you to add the part about hos theories don't simply stop existing once disproven. It gives me hope as a potential future researcher; even if my research would be disproven someday, my lifework would not have been discredited as not constituting a (even if disproven) theory!
-
http://u11zdo9t.blogspot.se/
Hi! I really enjoyed reading your post. It is clear that you have done some reflecting on the theme, and you've successfully been able to translate that into words.
Your passage about "a chain of flawed theory" is, in my opinion, the absolute strongest part of your post. It is highly relevant, and it is a topic that tends to inhabit my mind very often. What of the perceptions of knowledge that we have today is jsut a second layer of an actually flawed idea? In media and on my social media feeds, I hear a lot of criticism of the nation state. So many other ideas (social welfare, education, hospitals etc) are build on the fact that the nation state is a good idea. But what if that very original idea itself is flawed? I myself do not believe it is, but it might be food for thought.
Again - thanks for a nice read!
-
http://u1dn0y6t.blogspot.se/
Hi! Your post was nicely structured and contained loads of interesting thoughts. Thanks!
I liked your passage about hypotheses in relation to theory. I believe that this is the most common trap; it confuses people around the subject. The common language use of saying "I have a theory about X" has coloured my own mind deeply, and even well into this theme I had a hard time letting go of that definition of what a theory is. But now my definition is (hopefully...) the way it should be. I believe you summed it up nicely; "you form a hypothesis, try it, and if it proves successful you have formed a theory") made the concept much cleared". Thanks for that!
Theme 4
https://u1wdx0i7.blogspot.se/2016/10/post-theme-4.html?showComment=1475936744350#c3346535474210867450
Hi! Nice reflection. I agree with you about the difficulties researchers (and the over all academic field) face regarding objectivity and "true knowledge". Quantitative methods might have a reputation of being more objective, but at the end of the day even quantitative papers are written by a subjective being. So how do we minimze the risk of skewed results? Just like you write, I believe it is an impossible mission to set out on. I think your conclusion of criticism being key is very valid!
-
https://scarsickbg.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-4-blog-post-1-quantitative.html?showComment=1475937112914#c2451604806875332175
Hi! Another nice reflection from you!
I liked your comments on irrationality for specific studies. I think this is a trap many researchers fall into; in their quest for legitimacy, I believe many researchers to adapt specific methods that others (who's work has been accepted and celebrated) have used, leaving them unable to answer their own initial questions.
In the beginning of you post, you write that questionnaires can be either written by the researchers themselves, or reused from others. I think that the reusing of questionnaires offer unnecessary risk; make your own questionnaire and certify that your method is valid for YOUR study!
-
https://u1c051gg.blogspot.se/2016/09/42-quantitative-research-reflection-310.html?showComment=1475937569788#c8466948541941779978
Thank you for a very good reflection! I always enjoy your entries - they are well presented and it is obvious that you put a lot of reflection into them.
Thank you for a very good reflection! I always enjoy your entries - they are well presented and it is obvious that you put a lot of reflection into them.
For this week's theme, I was also confused (and a little bit upset, to be honest) about the sample and its ethnic homogeneity. Even with the given explaination of caucasians being easier to access, I believe that the sampe for the study was problematic. I think that great research has to go beyond what is accessible, beyond what it easy.
It would be interesting to read some of your reflections on the sample, now that you know the reason for its homogeneity!
-
https://u1kq1ay0.blogspot.se/2016/10/second-blog-post-theme-4-quantitative.html?showComment=1475938053675#c8510363972650188880
Interesting read!
Ensuring validity of results is hard indeed, and I believe it to be one of the greatest challenges of modern academia. With increasing amounts of technical tools to conduct research with, surveys and other quantitative (...and qualitative) methods are brought so far from the researcher that definitely ensuring the validity of the sample or the genuiness of their answers becomes impossible.
Perhaps one simply needs to respect and trust the academic honor codes that exist at many institutions around the world, and rely on the power of peer reviewing.
-
https://u1cq6h0z.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-4reflection-quantitative-research.html?showComment=1475938460701#c5792740744480715326
Hi! My key take away from your post is that you've understood that research is extremely time consuming. A great insight, to say the least. Beyond just investing time in their own research, researchers have to go through so many steps in order to finalize and publish their contributions to the academia. The process of validating the results are, just like you write, a big part of this! And probably one of the most important aspects of the research process, too.
Your post made me wonder - how much of my time at university has been spent trying to ensure that what I write or do is valid? Food for thought.
-
https://u1j8du7c.blogspot.se/2016/09/42.html?showComment=1475939232831#c3325157351904492754
Hi! Nice post and reflection - you thoroughly go through what you've learnt during the week, and it's clear that you have gained some insight into the method of quantitative research. When you write that results per definition have to be generalizable, I slightly disagree. What if the study is set out to only investigate a certain sample, without the amibition to generalize?
-
https://u1818rgq.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-4-quantitative-research-post-2.html?showComment=1475958407395#c6543246833550606802
Seems like a lot of us reflected on potentially skewed empirical results this week! Perhaps it is an expectation of quantitative methods being "solid" or waterproof that backfires. With our past themes awakening questions such as "what is knowledge?" and "is there ever an objective idea?", it is not hard to understand why we have become critical to hard facts.
Thanks for an interesting read!
-
https://u1dn0y6t.blogspot.se/2016/10/post-reflection-theme-4.html?showComment=1475958849834#c2761147647430627271
Hi! Thanks for yet another interesting post. You always sum up the weeks really well!
Your shift in perception from quantitative to qualitative method is interested and well motivated. I too find it hard to determine whether some methods are either qual- or quant, and perhaps especially when the overall research question concerns behaviour. But as long as one goes back and reflects on the foundation of quantitative research (i.e remembers that it is dependent on numerical measurements), on should be able to do a quick assessment of a given method's character.
Good job!
-
https://u10o7oqf.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-4-reflection.html?showComment=1475959276467#c4288969701532364285
Such a great post, Loviisa!
Your reflections on the "limitations of numbers" are strikingly accurate. It is first when one learns how to analyse the statistics, that numbers are of interest. Because, as you write, "we're not actually measuring the object or phenomenon itself but rather the features that it has".
I loved that you brought up Rosling. I went to a lecture of his a couple of years back, and he truly in an original. Even if his approach might be a little bit over optimistic, the Gapminder foundation is indeed interesting (and important!). Because, where would the world end up if we simple swallowed the skewed information that's served to us be the media? Indeed, knowing how to read (and criticize) statistics is important.
Thanks for a great read!
-
https://u1gixy4z.blogspot.se/2016/10/post-theme-4-quantitative-research.html?showComment=1475960443543#c2738074109903388552
Hi! Nice reflection. Sounds like the seminar was interesting!
When you write that you, as a student from a social sciences and humanities field, have not had many opportunities to come across the depth of quantitative research, I wonder why. Since quantitative methods are very frequently used in social sciences as well, I started to wonder what it is that you hade studied that made you miss out on this methodological field. It would have been nice if you had elaborated on that and explained!
Regarding online surveys, I have thought about their limitations a lot recently. My main concern is about how answering a survey online makes respondents "forget" that it is research; the activity simple becomes another thing that they do on their computer. Respect for honesty or valid answers then might not be as high, or at least that is my worry. From what I read out of your text, you are not as worried about the dangers. Or perhaps you are, but you realize the danger of criticizing media technology while enrolled at KTH and this specific course ;)
Theme 5
https://scarsickbg.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme5-blog-post-2-design-research.html#comment-form
Hi! Interesting post!
Just like you (and most others, as it seems), I didn't have a very extensive understanding of RtD before entering this course. Your summary of this week's theme is a great example of a process of acquiring knowledge, and it was interesting to read your motivation of why and how RtD is a "superior form of knowledge contribution". I also appreciated your notes on replicability (and the lack of it...).
I think you managed to show how RtD can work in practice, and with your given example it is clear that you have reached some sort of understanding of the phenomena. Thanks for sharing that (and the funny video)!
-
https://u10o7oqf.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-5-design-research-part-2.html#comment-form
Great post! I liked how you highlighted the 4 D's and their importance. I believe them to clarify lots of the ambiguity that's surrounding RtD. By doing exactly what your doing - describing that design research is "so much more than the interface" - I believe one can reach a fuller understanding of how RtD can contribute with knowledge to the world. And just like you say, it is a wide area to study!
I agree with your comments on historical replicability, and feel like if it is perhaps harder than ever to ensure the reliability of a replicated study. In an age of constant technological development, I believe researchers to have an increased responsibility to reflect on their own context and compare it to previous researchers' (and the conclusions they came to).
-
https://u1dn0y6t.blogspot.se/
Interesting post and conclusions!
I feel like if we dealt with the same questions during this week. I too came to reflect on the difference between "aesthetic" design and research design projects, and felt like if it was hard to fully separate the notions. I liked your way of brining in a business perspective in the comparison between the two - even if I personally believe there to be some similarities in the way commercial design seeks revenues, and research design seeks funds.
Your chosen quote is very illustrative for this weeks theme (and the entire course, really)!
-
https://u1kq1ay0.blogspot.se/2016/10/second-blog-post-theme-6-qualitative_72.html?m=1
I found the discussion during the seminar to be the most rewarding part of the theme. Because just like you, my group (together with Lundström) came to talk about the process of choosing and developing a method that really suits you and your chosen study. We discussed how one might have an initial idea of what or how they want to go about investigating an issue, but that an important part of the design research process is to truly reflect on what approach would be beneficial to the study. And just like you write, that process in itself can contribute with new knowledge!
-
https://u1cq6h0z.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-5-reflection-on-design-research.html?m=1
Interesting to read about how your understanding of design research was improved by the lecture and seminar! The fact that you came to understand that the researcher's interaction (and hence creation) with the material is great; to me, that's the core of design oriented research. But perhaps it is also the reason why some (...myself included) find the concept slightly ambiguous. When there's no black and white definition of what is data and what is method, one has to be careful not to jump to conclusions when trying to grasp a study!
-
https://u1j8du7c.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-52.html?m=1
I liked the way you made it clear that design research doesn't have to be put in contrast to neither quantitative nor qualitative research in order to me legitimized as a research form. With its key strength constituted by understanding the processes of things, I believe design oriented research to be a great way of acquiring new knowledge.
Your notes on replicability are interesting and spot on - it is very hard to replicate a study perfectly, and perhaps this age of technology has made it harder than ever!
-
https://u1818rgq.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-5-design-research-post-2.html#comment-form
Your progress from a slightly diffuse initial post, to this more concrete summary, is exactly what these blogs are for. You think, learn, and test your ideas. Good job!
When you discuss the questionable need for replicability regarding design research, I think you reach an interesting topic. Because - does the same standards and wishes apply to design research as for "traditional" hard data research? I think not! But just as previous commenters have noted, I believe you to have to take a second look at what replicability is in terms of method replicability (rather than result). I think Loviisa put in perfectly - the fact that the results differ could even be profitable in terms of knowledge contributions.
-
https://u1c051gg.blogspot.se/2016/10/52-reflection-design-research.html?showComment=1476734634631#c3340624442557546569
Interesting and thoughtful post! I didn't quite follow some of your ideas (e.g. the infidelity), but on others you were crystal clear. Just like you, I cam to further develop my understanding of this theme during the lecture and seminar. The emphasis that you put on the analysis in design research is well motivated - to me, it is the very core of the notion. Because without constant analysis, neither data nor prototypes would evolve and contribute to the studies.
Thanks for an interesting post!
-
https://u1gixy4z.blogspot.se/2016/10/after-theme-5-design-research.html?showComment=1476736863544#c8645636825268700081
What an exceptional post! Great job.
I particularly enjoyed your passage about the design process and the wonderful illustration that clarified the entire concept for me.
Your final comments on the role of the researcher is important, perhaps especially for this theme. Since the researcher is such a fundamental part of design oriented research, due to its process oriented type, I am happy to see you include it. The way you describe how researchers are able to take decisions regarding direction is definitely true, but I would have liked to see you elaborate on the fact that these decision can happen anytime during the research process and not just in the initial research planning.
Thanks for a great post!
-
https://u1wdx0i7.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-5.html?showComment=1476737480835#c8396789322097658710
Your final passage about the problematics of the perhaps unreachable "goal" of design research (i.e. finding the correct process) were really interesting. Just like you, I see the difficulties regarding objectivity in this type of research, and I have also reflected on whether this particular approach to research perhaps opens up for more subjectivity than other forms. It might be the constant researcher-data-interactions that brings me to that idea, or perhaps it is the fact that processes in general are subject to individual interpretations.
PS! I liked your way of including the concept of super- and substructures; it shows a great understanding for both past and present themes, and something tells me that it is a dream come true for our professors ;)
Theme 6
https://scarsickbg.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-6-blog-post-2-qualitative-and.html?showComment=1477171370861#c7100711991937796328
Nice summary of what you learned during this theme! It seems like you really grasped the concept, and you successfully communicated it through your post.
Your notes on how researchers aren't familiar with the phenomenons they are studying were interesting (even if I do believe that most researcher tend to study fields that they are indeed familiar with, due to interests). I too believe that hypothesises in general may pose some threats to the reliability of results; if one has already visualised what the results will be, it is more likely that evidence will appear to prove that idea. I hence agree with you and your seemingly positive take on the fact that hypotheses in case study research comes along first later in the process! With more data, research questions and hypotheses can be more relevant and narrow, which is a prerequisite for case studies and their specific character.
-
https://u10o7oqf.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-6-reflection.html?showComment=1477173771473#c2757082338638460590
Thank you for a terrific post (as always)!
As I am sure that other student will happily engage in writing about how spot on your descriptions of the various aspects of both case studies and general qualitative studies, I would like to elaborate on your note on the expenses of qualitative research. As a student in social sciences, I am worried about the fact that the resources and encouragement put into such institutions seems to be less, not only in Sweden but on a global scale.
There is an organization in Sweden called Vetenskap & Allmänhet, and every year they conduct a survey asking Swedes what they think are important areas to do research on. Environment, allergies and heart diseases topped last year's list, and as one might guess, past year's charts have not been very different. These areas are beyond relevant to study, but I do believe there to be a slight problematic. Since qualitative research (i.e. research that will most probably be conducted far away from the laboratories that should gain governmental financial support according to the peers in the previously mentioned survey) tend to get lower rankings in studies like this, I think that researchers with divergent or abstract topics in the humanities field might reflect on the relative unlikeliness of there study getting funds and hence perhaps not engage in the research after all. Don't get me wrong - I do believe that it is of utmost importance that research in science are conducted and financed. But how will society evolve if the more philosophical studies stop being conducted?
I do not have an answer on how to solve the situation of lacking funds in research. One might wish to get "Everything for Everyone", but as reality has it, that cannot be the case.
-
https://u1dn0y6t.blogspot.se/2016/10/post-reflection-theme-6.html?showComment=1477175504660#c3842033212289350223
Hi! Thank you for a very interesting post. It is clear that you developed your understanding of case studies during the week, and it was clear to follow your development from your initial post to this reflection. I liked how you wrote about your own confusion towards the research form, mainly since I believe many students (myself included) to have gone through similar thoughts prior (and perhaps even after) the lecture and seminar.
Hi! Thank you for a very interesting post. It is clear that you developed your understanding of case studies during the week, and it was clear to follow your development from your initial post to this reflection. I liked how you wrote about your own confusion towards the research form, mainly since I believe many students (myself included) to have gone through similar thoughts prior (and perhaps even after) the lecture and seminar.
The way in which you explained what constitutes a case study, and how you took the concept beyond just being "specific" and explained how it could be about a specific phenomena and not just a specific settings. Further, I really appreciated your concluding section about how case studies aren't about answering question, but posing them. I think that fact summarizes the entire notion of case studies; they are about understanding a phenomena well enough to be able to come up with relevant questions regarding it.
Great job!
-
https://u1kq1ay0.blogspot.se/2016/10/second-blog-post-theme-6-qualitative_70.html?showComment=1477177500689#c3554697242426622079
Hi! Thanks for an interesting post!
Your comments on how a case study can be applied on cases of which researchers do not have prior knowledge, and hence it enables any kind of result to show itself. I think that is a very important aspect of case studies, and I am glad to see you bring it up.
Case studies do not origin with set out hypotheses, but instead offer researchers the ability to pose them when sufficient data is gathered to pose relevant questions. Just like you write, the possibility to adjust the data collection process (and hence let analysis and data interact) is essential to the concept of case studies. This overlap offers researchers a flexibility that I have found hard to identify in other methods, and I am happy to see you bring it up in your post. It's a sign of understanding!
Your notes on semi-structures interviews were also interesting, even though I would have enjoyed reading a little bit elaborated passage about the validity of study samples. I think you illustrated it well with the example of a couple, but should I not have done a great deal of qualitative studies in my past I would probably have needed some more info. However, your comments on how invalid samples lead to misguiding results probably would have made me understand the importance of making sure that your are interviewing the right people!
Good job!
-
https://u1cq6h0z.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-6-reflection-on-qualitative-and.html?showComment=1477178691013#c2221384852653752324
Interesting post, and a clear growth in understanding of the theme(s) for this week!
I think your comments on bias, and in extension hypotheses, is very relevant. To me, the fact that case studies allows and encourages researchers to continuously interact and analyse their data is what makes the method/concept interesting. In contrast to other forms of research, where the relationship between researcher and data is less interactive and the framework for research topic more rigid, case studies continue to evolve and motivate their questions until they (just like you write) reach saturation.
After the seminar and lecture, I have asked myself wether or not case studies could be a never ending stories for researchers that are to critical to themselves and hence never establish this saturation. "What if we find more?", "What if there are other aspects to consider?". I can only speak for myself, but sometimes it is hard to know what you have found if you didn't know what you were looking for in the first place. Food for thought!
-
https://u1818rgq.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-6-qualitative-and-case-study_17.html?showComment=1477303992176#c1207720230518917036
Thanks for a well written and clearly structured post!
I feel like we have the same approach to the perks of qualitative methods. I appreciated the way in which you describes your perception of interviews etc leading to "honest and real answers". This very fact had been a topic I've reflected a lot upon lately.
Every other day, I see links to academic project surveys on Facebook, and I get targeted marketing with companies asking me to rate them in quick surveys. The amount of studies one can partake in thanks to media technologies (in this case the internet) is endless, and it has made me doubt the honesty/reliability of the answers given in them. This concerns my own answers, too. Because, when the human link to the researcher is lost, what responsibility do I REALLY have to answer with true reflection and thought, rather than just checking boxes to get done with the survey?
I think this is a real problem linked to media technologies and their implementation in research. But perhaps it is just evolution; perhaps human interaction past screens and the internet will be out of fashion soon anyways ;)
-
https://u1c051gg.blogspot.se/2016/10/62-qualitative-and-case-study-research.html
Good post!
I liked how your reflection included a passage about trans- and inter disciplinary research(ers). As the media management program is highly interdisciplinary, I often think about what roles me and my classmates might end up with in research projects, and how different our "hats" might look. When working on group projects, may they even be tiny case studies, we hence constitute interdisciplinary teams due to our different backgrounds. I think this is a key to success, and hence I think the same applies for research teams.
I think this notion may relate to your comments on how case studies investigate existing phenomenas rather than creating new ones. If researchers wear hats that allow them to identify all the various data that they might encounter, I think that the case which they investigate is more likely to be fully understood. In conclusion, I really appreciate interdisciplinary research!
-
https://u1j8du7c.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-52.html?m=1
Interesting post! It made me reflect on the links between case studies and a reflexive approach to ones own research. I think that researcher who get into case studies are required to be open minded, since they need to continuously interact with their data and analyse their findings as they go. They need to stay open to what ever results they may encounter, which I think is disturbingly uncommon among researchers. Bias is everywhere - even in academia.
-
https://u1gixy4z.blogspot.se/2016/10/after-theme-6-qualitative-and-case.html
Nice post!
Just like you conclude in your post, case studies offer a great way of fully understanding a phenomena. This approach to research is interesting in the way it studies the practice of things; it goes way beyond text books and simple data sets! The way in which case studies may come up with research questions rather than answering them is interesting, but it made me think about the potential exhaustion among researcher. When can one say to have reached the goal, if the goal is "simply" another new question? It might very well just be me that enjoys seeing things "close" or come together, but to me it would be a struggle to not finish my research with "an answer".
-
https://u1wdx0i7.blogspot.se/2016/10/theme-5.html?showComment=1476737480835#c8396789322097658710
Thanks for a great post!
Your writings about case studies in the media technology field was interesting, and it related to a thought that this past theme has awakened in me. When discussing the perks of qualitative research, such as researcher-subject connection and in-depth understandings, I came to think about all the various studies that are conducted online through media technologies. I think this phenomena - online research - could (and probably is...) be the basis of an interesting research. How does the fact that the study is conducted via a screen affect the results? Etc.
I think this is interesting, because just like your write, case studies can be crucial for understanding human behaviour!
