In order to answer a complex research question, one would have to define the research question to begin with (if not already defined). This can be very important, Haibo’s theory [1] was that you should put 90% effort into the definition of a problem and 10% on the solving the problem.
A research question definition explanation was included in the last seminar, where the book “Building Theories from Case Study Research” included the definition in the very first step. As I understood it, the reason for the definition is to focus the efforts in the research so you for example can reduce the amount of data gathering [2].
I think while there are several methods to answer research questions, perhaps they are divided into categories and sub-categories or divided into their own category. For example, one could put qualitative methods and quantitative methods in the same category and case studies in its own.
So to categorize methods in one way:
General research methods
Qualitative methods
I think the best strengths of the qualitative method is the depth and the unexpected results it can achieve. The time consumption may be its disadvantage.
Quantitative methods
I think the quantitative method especially have its strength when one have already narrowed the research down and need specific reliable data.
Combination of qualitative method and quantitative method
I think the methods can complement each other very good when both used in a research. Of course, one would need to know when to use them, for example the paper “Educational magic toys developed with augmented reality technology for early childhood education” [4] (which I chose in Theme 6 for the qualitative research questions) I think have good use of both the qualitative and quantitative method. For example, the qualitative method was used to gather the children’s opinions for example while teacher’s opinions were gathered through a survey (quantitative).
Case studies
Case studies can combine both qualitative and qualitative methods but perhaps qualitative method gives most strength to the case study research. I believe so because the observation of the ongoing case study can give much value as many unexpected events can happen, but qualitative method is more of a direct method where you already have asked the questions and limited the number of answers.
Design research
On the UX website uxbooth.com [3] the design research is explained in relation the user-centred design process. This is a practical design research process I think, with an end-user in mind. You have a proposed idea, you do initial design thinking, you make a prototype and test the prototype for the audience and receive feedback while having techniques to analyze the process. In the research paper ‘Demystifying “Design Research”’, they mention that design research by academics is different as I understand it. It can be a ‘kind’ of research, basically a “practice-based” research, comparing to for example research in mathematics or physics. It can be a part of a larger design practice which I think can mean that its result might not be directly implemented as a solution but can be a part of the whole design solution in the end [6].
In design research I think you can probably combine both qualitative and qualitative methods. Case study can be used in design research. It can be used to validate and analyze the research but it can also be used to conduct the design research according to the paper “Case study method for design research”. It is said in the conclusions that case study are of good use when developing theories in design research [8].
The philosophic approach
The philosophical approach I think can include reasoning one way from the definition of the problem to the answer or solution to the problem. You look beyond the empirical research and facts, not necessarily relying on the direct observation, like A priori. Although I should need a source here, the term A priori have I seen been used in one research paper at least.
In the metaphysics you basically can go beyond the empirical research, which makes it useful.
Discussion
I think it can be quite difficult to combine some of these methods to answer a certain research question. I guess it really depends on what kind of research one is conducting.
Some thinking around different topics is as follows.
In order to answer humanistic questions, I think one could use the philosophical approach, while considering on using other methods. Historically, I think empirical observations have changed the world view quite a bit, so empirical research could be a chosen method as well.
To come up with solutions to sustainability problems one might use design (research) thinking to come up with solutions, perhaps rather than philosophical thinking. Quantitative method can be used to analyse the current state of the sustainability field.
In order to discover potentials in new and innovative technology, one could use design research with prototyping and test the prototype with an audience together with a qualitative or quantitative analysis. Here, I think the philosophical thinking more likely would be ruled out.
Combining methods can reduce bias in one’s research, although this is something I saw being mentioned on a UX (User Experience) website [5] you could apply this for other research as well. One method is called Triangulation which means that you use more than one method in order to strengthen the research. The internet article “How Triangulation Strengthens Action Research” describes the method as to research A and research B results in C where C could never be achieved without both A and B [7]. If one research let’s say a survey have biased results because of a external factor, the other research which takes a different approach but still on the same subject could bring balance back to the research.
Combining methods can be quite effective, I think it also can be important to use the method which is most suitable for the research. Knowing when to use the qualitative and the quantitative method, depending on the time and costs of the research, number of possible participants etc.
References
[1]
Li, H. (2015). Theme 5 - Haibo Li's slides (Lecture).[2]
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
[3]
Maier, A. (2010). Complete Beginner’s Guide to Design Research. URL: http://www.uxbooth.com/articles/complete-beginners-guide-to-design-research/ Retrieved Oct 2015.[4]
Rabia M. Yilmaz, Educational magic toys developed with augmented reality technology for early childhood education, Computers in Human Behavior, Volume 54, January 2016, Pages 240-248, ISSN 0747-5632, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.040.
[5]
Kennedy P. (2009). How to combine multiple research methods: Practical Triangulation.
URL: http://johnnyholland.org/2009/08/practical-triangulation/ Retrieved Oct 2015.
[6]
Faste, T, Faste, H. (2012). Demystifying "Design Research": Design is Not Research, Research is Design, IDSA Education Symposium. URL: http://www.idsa.org/sites/default/files/Faste.pdf
[7]
Murphy, J. (2011). How Triangulation Strengthens Action Research. Bright Hub. URL: http://www.brighthub.com/education/postgraduate/articles/112609.aspx Retrieved Oct 2015.
[8]
Teegavarapu S, D. Summers J. (2008). Case study method for design research. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
URL: http://www.clemson.edu/ces/cedar/images/0/07/Case-study-design-research.pdf
fredag 30 oktober 2015
måndag 19 oktober 2015
Theme 6 - Reflections
Qualitative research
I thought it was more difficult to find a qualitative research paper than a quantitative research paper. I sensed that when I was searching through papers, it seemed to be more common to use the quantitative method, perhaps because of the advantage with the method, being easier and less time consuming to conduct. I tried to find a paper which was not too much theoretical but rather researched on a ‘physical’ object. Once I found the paper, it was not so hard I thought to go through the questions of the theme. I think it can be ‘difficult’ to discuss quantitative research without discussing qualitative research sometimes, as the other one’s advantages can be the others disadvantage. Thus, analyzing the qualitative method, I thought about the advantages and disadvantages with the quantitative method as well.
Although in the seminar, the discussion was about qualitative research, quantitative research also came to discussion. The question about whether qualitative research can involve only one participant was raised, and the answer would be yes, it is possible in theory. If the research is for example performed over a long period of time, one could obtain a sample under certain intervals to see in case of a medical research the status of the participant at a certain time.
Case studies
I had some difficulties going through the table of building theory from case study research in the literature [1], admittedly I think I should have put more time in understanding it and thus been better at analyzing the chosen paper. There were also some words or concepts that I probably could have asked about at the seminar.
One thing I would add to the paper is that the data collection methods used in the paper were of both the quantitative and qualitative kind which can be seen as a strength. For the gamebook, quantitative analysis were performed, and different tests used different kinds of analysis methods. For the game, a questionnaire and an interview were used to perceive the participants comments on the game [2].
As far as seminar goes, I thought the case study session was the most interesting part of the seminar and where I got most input from. Some things that I think I got clarification in:
* Case studies can be used to develop new theories.
* Sometimes, quantitative methods are not always the most appropriate to use in case studies. It kind of makes sense, because I think, if one would compare a case study with qualitative research it would match better than with quantitative research. Both of them usually have a fewer “subjects” to study than quantitative research.
* When choosing the case study, one should think about whether it stands out.
[1]
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
[2]
Túlio Teixeira Cota, Lucila Ishitani, Niltom Vieira Jr., Mobile game design for the elderly: A study with focus on the motivation to play, Computers in Human Behavior, Volume 51, Part A, October 2015, Pages 96-105, ISSN 0747-5632, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.026.
I thought it was more difficult to find a qualitative research paper than a quantitative research paper. I sensed that when I was searching through papers, it seemed to be more common to use the quantitative method, perhaps because of the advantage with the method, being easier and less time consuming to conduct. I tried to find a paper which was not too much theoretical but rather researched on a ‘physical’ object. Once I found the paper, it was not so hard I thought to go through the questions of the theme. I think it can be ‘difficult’ to discuss quantitative research without discussing qualitative research sometimes, as the other one’s advantages can be the others disadvantage. Thus, analyzing the qualitative method, I thought about the advantages and disadvantages with the quantitative method as well.
Although in the seminar, the discussion was about qualitative research, quantitative research also came to discussion. The question about whether qualitative research can involve only one participant was raised, and the answer would be yes, it is possible in theory. If the research is for example performed over a long period of time, one could obtain a sample under certain intervals to see in case of a medical research the status of the participant at a certain time.
Case studies
I had some difficulties going through the table of building theory from case study research in the literature [1], admittedly I think I should have put more time in understanding it and thus been better at analyzing the chosen paper. There were also some words or concepts that I probably could have asked about at the seminar.
One thing I would add to the paper is that the data collection methods used in the paper were of both the quantitative and qualitative kind which can be seen as a strength. For the gamebook, quantitative analysis were performed, and different tests used different kinds of analysis methods. For the game, a questionnaire and an interview were used to perceive the participants comments on the game [2].
As far as seminar goes, I thought the case study session was the most interesting part of the seminar and where I got most input from. Some things that I think I got clarification in:
* Case studies can be used to develop new theories.
* Sometimes, quantitative methods are not always the most appropriate to use in case studies. It kind of makes sense, because I think, if one would compare a case study with qualitative research it would match better than with quantitative research. Both of them usually have a fewer “subjects” to study than quantitative research.
* When choosing the case study, one should think about whether it stands out.
[1]
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
[2]
Túlio Teixeira Cota, Lucila Ishitani, Niltom Vieira Jr., Mobile game design for the elderly: A study with focus on the motivation to play, Computers in Human Behavior, Volume 51, Part A, October 2015, Pages 96-105, ISSN 0747-5632, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.026.
måndag 12 oktober 2015
Theme 5 - Reflections
This prior week, I was unfortunately absent from the second lecture, and as there were no seminar I will largely reflect on the first lecture and the theme’s questions.
In the first lecture which was about Design research by Haibo Li, I think the main subject could be seen as ‘ideas’. Haibo’s theory was that you should put 90% effort on the defining of a problem, and 10% on solving them.
Furthermore, it was said in the lecture that it is in the technical evaluation where we have use of skills such as math.
In order to validate your idea, you may use a proof-of-concept. If this is gonna be something of great potential, you probably will need to to validate for example the effectiveness of the concept.
One of the things talked about in the later part of the lecture was how to communicate the idea. As I understood it, as an entrepreneur you would need a good overall approach to presenting the idea to an investor, as it probably would not be enough to just have the skills of a salesman in order to sell the idea, and probably not be enough to have just the skills of explaining your idea as a researcher.
I thought the “90% problem 10% solving”-theory was interesting so if I was to choose one thing I take with me from this lecture it would probably be this.
I think these weeks question’s had a good balance in both looking up facts and building up your own thoughts on the theme and I could work my way through it. I was not entirely sure about each question though, but hopefully I was not too far off in the overall idea.
Two questions that I think the lecture complemented to in my answers were:
How can media technologies be evaluated?
Here I would add that skills in for example natural science such as math for example would aid in the technical evaluation.
How can design research be communicated/presented?
Probably as engineer, I got the impression that you would need to present the idea as an entrepreneur by backing up your ideas with proof-of-concepts, be able to tell the potential in the market by for example quantitative research and probably even have a financial plan if it’s gonna go from an idea to a reality.
In the first lecture which was about Design research by Haibo Li, I think the main subject could be seen as ‘ideas’. Haibo’s theory was that you should put 90% effort on the defining of a problem, and 10% on solving them.
Furthermore, it was said in the lecture that it is in the technical evaluation where we have use of skills such as math.
In order to validate your idea, you may use a proof-of-concept. If this is gonna be something of great potential, you probably will need to to validate for example the effectiveness of the concept.
One of the things talked about in the later part of the lecture was how to communicate the idea. As I understood it, as an entrepreneur you would need a good overall approach to presenting the idea to an investor, as it probably would not be enough to just have the skills of a salesman in order to sell the idea, and probably not be enough to have just the skills of explaining your idea as a researcher.
I thought the “90% problem 10% solving”-theory was interesting so if I was to choose one thing I take with me from this lecture it would probably be this.
I think these weeks question’s had a good balance in both looking up facts and building up your own thoughts on the theme and I could work my way through it. I was not entirely sure about each question though, but hopefully I was not too far off in the overall idea.
Two questions that I think the lecture complemented to in my answers were:
How can media technologies be evaluated?
Here I would add that skills in for example natural science such as math for example would aid in the technical evaluation.
How can design research be communicated/presented?
Probably as engineer, I got the impression that you would need to present the idea as an entrepreneur by backing up your ideas with proof-of-concepts, be able to tell the potential in the market by for example quantitative research and probably even have a financial plan if it’s gonna go from an idea to a reality.
fredag 9 oktober 2015
Theme 6 - Qualitative and case study research
Qualitative methods
The paper [1] chosen is about Educational magic toys, meaning toys which have for example digital screens showing virtual objects. There are numerous possibilities to use this in an educational way, for example you can have puzzles and other funny interactions in them. In the research, both teachers and children were participants. It was focused on the early education of children (Abstract and 1. Introduction).
The paper itself describes the methods for the qualitative research pretty clear ([1] Table 3). Content analyses were done on children’s opinions and descriptive analyses were done on children's cognitive attainment (abilities), both in interview forms ([1] 2.6 Data analyses).
It seems like the examination of children’s opinions were conducted in a way that made it easy to interact with the children, they could freely express their opinion making it much more precise than for example just asking ‘yes’ or ‘no questions. The number of children participants were 33 ([1] 2.2 Sample), so even though qualitative methods can often be limited by a smaller number of participants than in the quantitative methods, in this case it was as many as in the quantitative methods in the same paper. In general, a disadvantage with the qualitative method however is that it can be quite time consuming [2].
In the examination of children's cognitive attainment, the children’s appearance description of the AR in the toy were better than the extensive description (extensive meaning the child’s comments or thoughts about the object in the AR, other than the appearance) ([1] 3.3). Less data on the extensive description could be seen as a limitation, using another method could have perhaps gotten more data in this category.
[1]
Rabia M. Yilmaz, Educational magic toys developed with augmented reality technology for early childhood education, Computers in Human Behavior, Volume 54, January 2016, Pages 240-248, ISSN 0747-5632, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.040.
[2]
ACET, Inc. (2013).
Selecting an evaluation: Qualitative,
quantitative, and mixed method approaches.
Minneapolis, MN.
Case studies
I would say that Case studies are way of conducting research on one or several cases based on both observation and use of quantitative and/or qualitative method ([1] p.534).
I chose a paper [2] which conducted a research on mobile game design for elders. Two case studies were used in the paper. The first case study was about a Game book which was sort of a reference book where details and video/images about a specific game was shown and the participants chose a scoring of the games. The second study was about a game which the participants played and evaluated.
The paper have reference to support one of the hypothesis in the paper, that the elderly often like traditional games which include games which can be played without the aid of a device. In the paper, the hypothesis was tested and verified in the study as the participants liked card games.
I think one weakness of the paper can be that the hypothesis are not clearly defined in the paper, there are results of the hypothesis though.
[1]
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
[2]
Túlio Teixeira Cota, Lucila Ishitani, Niltom Vieira Jr., Mobile game design for the elderly: A study with focus on the motivation to play, Computers in Human Behavior, Volume 51, Part A, October 2015, Pages 96-105, ISSN 0747-5632, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.026.
måndag 5 oktober 2015
Theme 4 - Reflections
Despite the name of the theme this week was Quantitative research, Qualitative research was a part of the weeks lectures and discussions and even one of the questions in the theme, which naturally couldn’t be avoided as I think knowledge to qualitative research is necessary in order to distinguish quantitative research.
One of the things I take with me this prior week is that qualitative research can be of use in the humanistic field, like psychology. It can also be used in relation to prototypes as a kind of tool to observe its design and its performance.
One thing I looked further into after the seminar was “Wicked problem”. I think it can be something worth knowing about and there are papers written on this subject [2]. It is used in the cases where it is hard to or impossible to solve a problem [1]. I think this goes in relation to the next theme because of the connection between Wicked problems and Design thinking [3].
I do not think I would change my answers to the questions in the theme that much after the lecture and seminar. But one thing I probably would have looked more into was how many participants are required into having a reliable results in a survey as there are guidelines in how to calculate the number of required participants (as talked about in the lecture).
In my conclusion, I think it can be of importance to know the difference between qualitative and quantitative research when doing research even though one does not take a whole course in the subject. Which one to use for what purposes, can be decisive in the matter of results in the work of a good quality paper.
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem Retrieved Oct 2015.
[2]
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1511637?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents Retrieved Oct 2015.
[3]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_thinking#Wicked_problems Retrieved Oct 2015.
One of the things I take with me this prior week is that qualitative research can be of use in the humanistic field, like psychology. It can also be used in relation to prototypes as a kind of tool to observe its design and its performance.
One thing I looked further into after the seminar was “Wicked problem”. I think it can be something worth knowing about and there are papers written on this subject [2]. It is used in the cases where it is hard to or impossible to solve a problem [1]. I think this goes in relation to the next theme because of the connection between Wicked problems and Design thinking [3].
I do not think I would change my answers to the questions in the theme that much after the lecture and seminar. But one thing I probably would have looked more into was how many participants are required into having a reliable results in a survey as there are guidelines in how to calculate the number of required participants (as talked about in the lecture).
In my conclusion, I think it can be of importance to know the difference between qualitative and quantitative research when doing research even though one does not take a whole course in the subject. Which one to use for what purposes, can be decisive in the matter of results in the work of a good quality paper.
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem Retrieved Oct 2015.
[2]
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1511637?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents Retrieved Oct 2015.
[3]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_thinking#Wicked_problems Retrieved Oct 2015.
fredag 2 oktober 2015
Theme 5 - Design research
- How can media technologies be evaluated?
It seems to me that media technologies can be evaluated in terms of both hardware and/or software in order to create an experience or to be used as a tool. In the research, one could create a prototype and analyze it or analyze an existing technology.
- What role will prototypes play in research?
In order to test a concept, I think a prototype can be of great help in the research. It has practice details that is harder to get in for example a survey.
- Why could it be necessary to develop a proof of concept prototype?
I think it is, in order to demonstrate the possibilities of the concept and to show that the prototype does what it is expected.
- What are characteristics and limitations of prototypes?
One limitation is that the prototype is not the final product and thus can’t be fully evaluated. However, if one wants to, it can go fast to make one prototype and it can be cheap. The prototype can also be more advanced as well [4].
I think another limitation can be that you won’t be able to test the prototype in a larger scale in the case of a physical device. Thus, it can still contain errors which you can’t detect due to them occurring only in rare cases.
- How can design research be communicated/presented?
I am not sure if I answer the question correctly, however I believe it can be done through example a paper in a journal in the field of research which can be used as reference for further research. I think it can also be done through the development of a final product and making the product heard of.
“Finding design qualities in a tangible programming space” & “Differentiated Driving Range: Exploring a Solution to the Problems with the “Guess-O-Meter in Electric Cars”
- What is the 'empirical data' in these two papers?
I believe it is the observation of the activities and prototypes in the paper “Finding design qualities in a tangible programming space” ([2],p.448).
In the paper “Differentiated Driving Range: Exploring a Solution to the Problems with the “Guess-O-Meter in Electric Cars” [3] I believe the keyword was “explore” where did they did some analysis on the current state of driving range and the tools, then proceeded with a concept which they tested ([3],p.2). The ‘empirical data’ here I think is the whole observation of these processes.
- Can practical design work in itself be considered a 'knowledge contribution'?
Perhaps in the designing process, you stumble upon issues in the process which you try to overcome and thereby learn from.
- Are there any differences in design intentions within a research project, compared to design in general?
In the research project I think that you are more focused on just achieving what is needed for the analysis, you might not want to overwork the design as its purpose was not to reach an end user but for evaluation only. Thus, in the end it may only be for the researcher to test out or for participants who understands the purpose of a prototype.
- Is research in tech domains such as these ever replicable? How may we account for aspects such as time/historical setting, skills of the designers, available tools, etc?
As far as tech domain goes, I think it can be replicable however there could be very little value to it. The reason I believe so is that technology can change quite rapidly. For example, the paper “Turn Your Mobile Into the Ball: Rendering Live Football Game Using Vibration.” [5] uses a mobile phone in the research which is not equivalent to today's smart phone. Because of the way we interact with the mobile phone today and the capacities it have, might have lead to different research approach in the paper.
- Are there any important differences with design driven research compared to other research practices?
I think a major difference is the practical approach in a design driven research. You further make improvements in the design [1] which for example can evolve into a product later.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_research
[2] Fernaeus Y., Tholander J. (2006). “Finding design qualities in a tangible programming space”.
[3] Lundström A. (2014). “Differentiated Driving Range: Exploring a Solution to the Problems with the “Guess-O-Meter in Electric Cars”.
[4] http://cs.brown.edu/courses/uxisp/slides/prototyping.pptx Brown University - User Experience, Independent Study Project. Retrieved October 2015.
[5] Réhman, S., Sun, J., Liu, L., & Li, H. (2008). Turn Your Mobile Into the Ball: Rendering Live Football Game Using Vibration. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 10(6), 1022-1033
måndag 28 september 2015
Theme 3 - Reflections
I participated in the lecture and the seminar this week. I discussed in the divided seminar group in the seminar where we talked generally about the definition of theory. One thing we talked about was whether and how philosophical and scientific theories are related.
I spent some time finding relevant journals and papers. I did not feel like I had to struggle that much to find the relevant answers to the themes questions this week, maybe because of how the paper was structured. Even though the questions for the blog this week in large was to understand literature and paper and draw conclusions, I felt that it was also more practical and that parts of it was to find the right answers in the paper by using the literature as manual.
I think the important issue of the week was to understand theory as a whole. I think one could think of it as, even though there might be different theory definitions depending on different fields, they are still connected to the whole subject of theory. But it might be that it can be extended/adjusted to fit the problem of the particular field.
For example, in the field of research, and when it comes to research papers, one could categorize the theories used in them according to different theory types (such as explained in “The Nature of Theory in Information Systems”), and these fits the field of research better than the philosophy field.
I spent some time finding relevant journals and papers. I did not feel like I had to struggle that much to find the relevant answers to the themes questions this week, maybe because of how the paper was structured. Even though the questions for the blog this week in large was to understand literature and paper and draw conclusions, I felt that it was also more practical and that parts of it was to find the right answers in the paper by using the literature as manual.
I think the important issue of the week was to understand theory as a whole. I think one could think of it as, even though there might be different theory definitions depending on different fields, they are still connected to the whole subject of theory. But it might be that it can be extended/adjusted to fit the problem of the particular field.
For example, in the field of research, and when it comes to research papers, one could categorize the theories used in them according to different theory types (such as explained in “The Nature of Theory in Information Systems”), and these fits the field of research better than the philosophy field.
fredag 25 september 2015
Theme 4
I think the paper “Noise in an intensive care unit” used quantitative methods in two cases.
They made a staff survey and gathered information about how the staff felt about the noise in an intensive care unit ([1], “Introduction”). I think the survey was a good to start with to see whether the noise problem is experienced as a problem and to what extent. The limitation may be that it is hard to determine the cause of the noise through a survey.
They also measured the sound pressure in different locations in the unit and analysed sound pressure levels of important medical devices ([1], “Description of measurements”). In this case, it is possible to see what causes the noise. The limitation may be that it doesn’t measure whether a person experiences it as a problem.
My conclusion of this is that I think the methods complemented each other.
One improvement to the survey could be to include more participants (though they did make references to similar studies which showed similar results) as it can be more accurate, and also it can be beneficial if used in the analyze and comparison with the sound pressure measurements (which may not be possible with the external studies). I could not think of any further improvements in the sound pressure measurements.
Which are the benefits and limitations of using quantitative methods?
Data can be collected efficiently and compared. Limitations can be that it doesn’t answer the question ‘why’ and that answers in a question of a survey for example can be limited, and does not always present the exact feeling/response of a participant ([2], p. 1).
Which are the benefits and limitations of using qualitative methods?
Can be used to answer the question ‘why’. Limitations may be that there can be few participants in a study and that the study may take some time due to for example data collecting and interview time where quantitative method have an advantage ([2], p. 1).
References
[1]
Noise in an intensive care unit
Salandin, Andrea and Arnold, Jörg and Kornadt, Oliver, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130, 3754-3760 (2011), DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.3655884
[2]
ACET, Inc. (2013).
Selecting an evaluation: Qualitative,
quantitative, and mixed method approaches.
Minneapolis, MN.
måndag 21 september 2015
Theme 2 - Reflections
My contribution to Theme 2 the past week have been primarily in the seminar. We tried to solve out questions in the discussion group, and I contribute with some of my answers and received as well some clarification on my questions. Some questions were difficult for us, so we were in need of help in the open discussion in the seminar.
As preparation, I focused on answering the questions for the seminar and used the theme literature and wikipedia. I looked at the questions, using literature as the source of reading and looked up words in wikipedia when I did not understand parts of the text.
While the previous theme was primarily philosophical, I felt this theme was a combination of philosophy and historical facts. I think finding the connection between the philosophical thoughts and the cultural and political situation in the countries or parts of the world the authors were living in was the key concept in this theme.
Words that I saw clarification in as a result of the seminar/lecture:
Aura was perhaps the most difficult term for me to understand this seminar, and as I understood it now, it has to do with the authentic work (of art for example) which is surrounded by an aura, however once you do a reproduction of it, the aura fades away. For example, when you have a piece of art in a museum, as it is the original, it gets a special kind of attention or value. But once you make a reproduction of it, no matter of what quality, it loses its aura.
Nominalism, as I understood from the lecture and seminar, one could compare this to the leaves on a tree, where none of them are considered them same, but unique. A blue pen can be considered different from a red pen, even though they share the same name.
As preparation, I focused on answering the questions for the seminar and used the theme literature and wikipedia. I looked at the questions, using literature as the source of reading and looked up words in wikipedia when I did not understand parts of the text.
While the previous theme was primarily philosophical, I felt this theme was a combination of philosophy and historical facts. I think finding the connection between the philosophical thoughts and the cultural and political situation in the countries or parts of the world the authors were living in was the key concept in this theme.
Words that I saw clarification in as a result of the seminar/lecture:
Aura was perhaps the most difficult term for me to understand this seminar, and as I understood it now, it has to do with the authentic work (of art for example) which is surrounded by an aura, however once you do a reproduction of it, the aura fades away. For example, when you have a piece of art in a museum, as it is the original, it gets a special kind of attention or value. But once you make a reproduction of it, no matter of what quality, it loses its aura.
Nominalism, as I understood from the lecture and seminar, one could compare this to the leaves on a tree, where none of them are considered them same, but unique. A blue pen can be considered different from a red pen, even though they share the same name.
fredag 18 september 2015
Theme 3
Journal: International Journal of Computer Vision
A popular journal which publishes journals in the growing field of Computer vision. Covers math, applications and the connection between computer and the human eye. The journal have a broad content in the field. [1]
Paper: Smart Grid Technologies: Communication Technologies and Standards
(journal: Industrial Informatics, IEEE Transactions on [6])
A research paper presenting the current state of the smart grid, a new, more efficient and reliable infrastructure compared to the current power grid. It focuses on providing an understanding on the current state of technologies in the field, and also on what is happening in the current research.
The paper goes through the current power grid and why it needs an upgrade, and the smart grid technologies with advantages, disadvantages and requirements [3]. Facts, backed up with references are represented along with figure and tables. The paper is quite easy to read for the common reader (some tech things in the later part of the paper can get tricky). The paper is also divided into chapters that make sense in the way they are arranged.
Question 1: What theories are and what they are not
According to the published paper “What Theory Is Not”, it is easier to claim what theory is not, rather what it is. In short, 1.references, 2. data 3. lists of variables or constructs (theory must bind them together) 4. diagrams or figures - are not theories. However, the authors agree that the answer to Why? can be a theory. ([4], pages 371-377)
Question 2: Major theory and which theory type
The major theory I would say, is the establishment of an understanding on the current state of the smart grid. Therefore, I believe the theory type to be Explanation ([5], pages 619-620).
Question 3: Benefits and limitations of using the selected theory or theories?
The Explanation theory can be used to promote further research in the field for the interested ([5], page 619). In the abstract, the authors of the paper mentions this, “… provoke interest among the the research community…” ([3], page 529). In the conclusion, the authors also invites to future work and suggests a number of topics to complete the overview on Smart Grid Technologies ([3], page 537).
The limitation of the theory is that it doesn’t have propositions and predictions. ([5], page 620)
References
[1]
http://www.springer.com/computer/image+processing/journal/11263 Retrieved 2015 sep.
[3]
Gungor, V.C.; Sahin, D.; Kocak, T.; Ergut, S.; Buccella, C.; Cecati, C.; Hancke, G.P., "Smart Grid Technologies: Communication Technologies and Standards," in Industrial Informatics, IEEE Transactions on , vol.7, no.4, pp.529-539, Nov. 2011
[4]
Sutton, R. I. & Staw, B. M. (1995). What Theory is Not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371-384.
[5]
Gregor, S. (2006). The Nature of Theory in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611-642.
[6]
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?punumber=9424 Retrieved 2015 sep.
A popular journal which publishes journals in the growing field of Computer vision. Covers math, applications and the connection between computer and the human eye. The journal have a broad content in the field. [1]
Paper: Smart Grid Technologies: Communication Technologies and Standards
(journal: Industrial Informatics, IEEE Transactions on [6])
A research paper presenting the current state of the smart grid, a new, more efficient and reliable infrastructure compared to the current power grid. It focuses on providing an understanding on the current state of technologies in the field, and also on what is happening in the current research.
The paper goes through the current power grid and why it needs an upgrade, and the smart grid technologies with advantages, disadvantages and requirements [3]. Facts, backed up with references are represented along with figure and tables. The paper is quite easy to read for the common reader (some tech things in the later part of the paper can get tricky). The paper is also divided into chapters that make sense in the way they are arranged.
Question 1: What theories are and what they are not
According to the published paper “What Theory Is Not”, it is easier to claim what theory is not, rather what it is. In short, 1.references, 2. data 3. lists of variables or constructs (theory must bind them together) 4. diagrams or figures - are not theories. However, the authors agree that the answer to Why? can be a theory. ([4], pages 371-377)
Question 2: Major theory and which theory type
The major theory I would say, is the establishment of an understanding on the current state of the smart grid. Therefore, I believe the theory type to be Explanation ([5], pages 619-620).
Question 3: Benefits and limitations of using the selected theory or theories?
The Explanation theory can be used to promote further research in the field for the interested ([5], page 619). In the abstract, the authors of the paper mentions this, “… provoke interest among the the research community…” ([3], page 529). In the conclusion, the authors also invites to future work and suggests a number of topics to complete the overview on Smart Grid Technologies ([3], page 537).
The limitation of the theory is that it doesn’t have propositions and predictions. ([5], page 620)
References
[1]
http://www.springer.com/computer/image+processing/journal/11263 Retrieved 2015 sep.
[3]
Gungor, V.C.; Sahin, D.; Kocak, T.; Ergut, S.; Buccella, C.; Cecati, C.; Hancke, G.P., "Smart Grid Technologies: Communication Technologies and Standards," in Industrial Informatics, IEEE Transactions on , vol.7, no.4, pp.529-539, Nov. 2011
[4]
Sutton, R. I. & Staw, B. M. (1995). What Theory is Not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371-384.
[5]
Gregor, S. (2006). The Nature of Theory in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611-642.
[6]
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?punumber=9424 Retrieved 2015 sep.
söndag 13 september 2015
Theme 1 - Reflections
With the difficulties I had with the reading of Theme 1’s text, I was glad to get some clarification on the lecture and the seminar. For example, we concluded in our group in the seminar, after discussing on various things, that previous knowledge leads us to conclusions about future knowledge. I was also relieved to know that there were others who also needed clarification on the subjects discussed. One of the things I did as preparation was to write down questions that popped up in my head during the lecture. In the preparation for the theme, I used wiki’s and encyclopaedias when I did not understand a concept in the text.
Many thoughts and concepts in Kant’s thoughts were clarified. For example:
"Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind.” (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason), although I think this phrase was put out a bit different on the lecture, at least the beginning of it. It was something like, “Conception without perception is empty, perception without conception is blind”, which actually at least for me was easier to understand. Because you can’t see anything without previous knowledge about what you see, in my understanding. And if you have knowledge about something, but never can perceive it, that knowledge would be ‘empty’ because it can’t anyway be seen.
This quote can be compared with the part from Plato’s Theaetetus, that we see ‘through’ the eyes and ears, not ‘with’. Because, it would not enough to see ‘with’ the eyes, and comprehend. But you also need the knowledge about it, which the mind possess.
The main question which to be raised (and I think which Kant was asking), was whether we can see the world objectively, or if we see through faculties. And, yes, it is possible according to Kant, we can have a objective view of the world, by objective knowledge, referring to the Kant’s categories. The categories are necessary for the intuition to come about.
Many thoughts and concepts in Kant’s thoughts were clarified. For example:
"Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind.” (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason), although I think this phrase was put out a bit different on the lecture, at least the beginning of it. It was something like, “Conception without perception is empty, perception without conception is blind”, which actually at least for me was easier to understand. Because you can’t see anything without previous knowledge about what you see, in my understanding. And if you have knowledge about something, but never can perceive it, that knowledge would be ‘empty’ because it can’t anyway be seen.
This quote can be compared with the part from Plato’s Theaetetus, that we see ‘through’ the eyes and ears, not ‘with’. Because, it would not enough to see ‘with’ the eyes, and comprehend. But you also need the knowledge about it, which the mind possess.
The main question which to be raised (and I think which Kant was asking), was whether we can see the world objectively, or if we see through faculties. And, yes, it is possible according to Kant, we can have a objective view of the world, by objective knowledge, referring to the Kant’s categories. The categories are necessary for the intuition to come about.
fredag 11 september 2015
Theme 2
Dialectic of Enlightenment
Enlightenment seems to me, from what I read in the chapter “The concept of Enlightenment”, be related to putting mythologies aside, and putting focus on reasoning which takes a great importance through knowledge.
I had problems understanding dialectic from the text, and had to look up the word instead. As I understand it, dialectic is a way of debating and using truth and reasoning as much as possible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic
Nominalism should be the denial of abstract things, or the denial of universals. However, I did not quite understand what universals really are, it seems that they are similar to the abstract but in the way of describing things or properties of things.
https://sv.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Universalia&redirect=no
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nominalism-metaphysics/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalism
I was unable to find the direct connection of “Nominalism” in the text, so my hopes is that it will get more clear on the lecture/seminar.
As I understood from the text, myths can be used to explain things and explain the past through collecting and recording of happenings or things.
The Work of Art in the Age of Technical Reproductivity
My understanding is that the substructure is the foundation or the base of a function in the society and the superstructure is another function atop the substructure which are to be affected by the substructure. It seems if I understand correctly, be useful in the “politics of art”. In the text, production is mentioned, as conditions have slowly changed due to preceding cultural changes.
https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bas_och_%C3%B6verbyggnad
Benjamin mentions that film, even though he did not believe it had a revolutionary merit, did not deny that it had the possibility to “… promote revolutionary criticism of social conditions…” (part X). In the “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception" part by Adorno & Horkheimer’s, something not too different from the first part of previous sentence is mentioned, where the opinion is that culture have “…contributed to the subduing of revolutionary…”.
My thoughts regarding how to determine naturally and historically perceptions of the world, is that it might be regarding how you organise and record your impressions at the time, which depends on what options you had, as it got easier by time to get the right tools to record the perceptions of the culture. From the text is an example, where a pair of scholars were limited to observe the hallmarks of 5th century but that alone seemed not suffice to explain the social changes at that time.
Understanding the term “aura” was probably the most difficult part for me on this exercise. Perhaps it has to do with appreciation of art objects at the time and that it gets harder to appreciate as time goes past, but I look forward to get a more in-depth understanding of this on the seminar/lecture.
Enlightenment seems to me, from what I read in the chapter “The concept of Enlightenment”, be related to putting mythologies aside, and putting focus on reasoning which takes a great importance through knowledge.
I had problems understanding dialectic from the text, and had to look up the word instead. As I understand it, dialectic is a way of debating and using truth and reasoning as much as possible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic
Nominalism should be the denial of abstract things, or the denial of universals. However, I did not quite understand what universals really are, it seems that they are similar to the abstract but in the way of describing things or properties of things.
https://sv.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Universalia&redirect=no
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nominalism-metaphysics/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalism
I was unable to find the direct connection of “Nominalism” in the text, so my hopes is that it will get more clear on the lecture/seminar.
As I understood from the text, myths can be used to explain things and explain the past through collecting and recording of happenings or things.
The Work of Art in the Age of Technical Reproductivity
My understanding is that the substructure is the foundation or the base of a function in the society and the superstructure is another function atop the substructure which are to be affected by the substructure. It seems if I understand correctly, be useful in the “politics of art”. In the text, production is mentioned, as conditions have slowly changed due to preceding cultural changes.
https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bas_och_%C3%B6verbyggnad
Benjamin mentions that film, even though he did not believe it had a revolutionary merit, did not deny that it had the possibility to “… promote revolutionary criticism of social conditions…” (part X). In the “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception" part by Adorno & Horkheimer’s, something not too different from the first part of previous sentence is mentioned, where the opinion is that culture have “…contributed to the subduing of revolutionary…”.
My thoughts regarding how to determine naturally and historically perceptions of the world, is that it might be regarding how you organise and record your impressions at the time, which depends on what options you had, as it got easier by time to get the right tools to record the perceptions of the culture. From the text is an example, where a pair of scholars were limited to observe the hallmarks of 5th century but that alone seemed not suffice to explain the social changes at that time.
Understanding the term “aura” was probably the most difficult part for me on this exercise. Perhaps it has to do with appreciation of art objects at the time and that it gets harder to appreciate as time goes past, but I look forward to get a more in-depth understanding of this on the seminar/lecture.
söndag 6 september 2015
Theme 1
In the preface of
“Critique of Pure Reason”, at page B XVI, I interpret that part
as that in order to think in the way of metaphysics, and not the
traditional way as science goes, one would have to approach it quite
the different way. If I understand correctly, instead of perceiving
objects through cognition in the traditional way in order to find out
something about them, somehow be aware of the object with
help of intuition, which should be impossible as far as science and I
guess reality goes because you would need to know the object before
you can interpret it through your senses (unless some experience have
been gained through cognition prior to that, where one could use the
intuition to determine the object). The text continues with a further
reasoning on a possible way to do that, where I lose myself a bit in
the text, but as I try to understand, one should turn things around. The author refers to Copernicus and how he turned things around in the explanation of celestial motions, and while I did understand that, I could not figure out the same way with intuition and objects. I do not think I understand this thouroghly, why I
look forward to the seminar.
As for the text part where
Socrates and Theaetetus are discussing the difference between
perceiving through and with senses, my intrepretation is that the
senses are merely tools where the mind is the centre and connector of
the perceived. But it also appears that mind itself can perceive
things by its own, such as how you differentiate things. I looked up
the word empiricsm in an encyclopedia (more precisely Wikipedia), and
while I am not entirely sure, the similarities seems to be in the way
that we collect information through our senses and thus do not base our
conclusions on theorys and the like. However, the difference might be
that the mind in which Theaetetus mentioned, is doing perceptions by
its own (and I wonder whether that could be intrepreted as theorys),
and that does not seem to belong in empiriscm.
Some keywords I looked
up/paid some extra attention to while reading: A priori, Metaphysics
and Empiriscm.
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)