fredag 30 september 2016

Theme 4: Second blog post

This week, the seminar was canceled therefore it’s just possible to reflect on the lecture and the knowledge process during the week.

In the lecture we discussed about quantitative researches, usually when you choose a quantitative research method you want to understand complex phenomena. During the week I improved my knowledge and understanding when and why to use a quantitative method. When using a quantitative method the researcher wants to explore with basis of previously knowledge how things are and then justify the reason for being so. The overall goal is to advance knowledge in the field, knowledge production! The selected strategy for a study will guide the researcher in the development of the study and ensure to answer the formulated problem. The paper of Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality started out from existing theories about body ownership, they used prior theoretical knowledge to predict if change in body illusion will occur and if there is any relationships among the variables. With the statistical data that was collected they obtained a result that could conform or reject hypothesis (that the form of the body would impact behavior). When choosing a hypothetical method the researchers should start with previously theoretical knowledge, then formulate hypotheses and test them. If the result is true it should be supported from the theoretical framework. (Dresch et al, 2015)

We also discussed about different techniques for gathering data and analysis with focus on questionnaires and statistical measurement. My chosen paper Podcast a technology for all, used questionnaires to gather data and Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality used statistical measurement to analyze data. It was good to refresh my knowledge, (from previous courses) about research methods and data gathering. I understand that is important to communicate with other researchers to acquire knowledge production. Therefor it’s important to consider how the research is relate to others, for example how Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality is related to Putting Yourself! in the Skin of a Black Avatar Reduces Implicit Racial Bias. 

Reflecting on the reading process and knowledge that we have gained throughout the different themes its all come back to knowledge production. Even Socrates, Kant, Benjamin, Adorno & Horkheimer talks about knowledge production but in a more complex context than in the two last themes. We started out with a broader perspective to a more detailed view, as this week's theme

Reference list: 
Dresch Aline & Valle Antunes, José (2015). Design Science Research: A Method for Science and Technology Advancement. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing 
kl. 7 kommentarer:

Theme 5: Design research

What is the 'empirical data' in these two papers?
The first paper, Finding Design Qualities in a Tangible Programming Space, aim to study tangible as resource for action and collaboration and not only as data representation. An experimental research design allows the researcher to create understanding from data as the analysis goes on. The empirical data was based on analysis of staged activities for children using design prototypes. From this staged activities the researcher analyzed patterns and artifacts development. The analytical work was based on recorded material. Data was (in general) produced trough development process that engaged children in use of technology. After collecting data and analyzes the researcher were able to formulate a hypothesis. 

The second paper, differentiated driving ranges, explored problems related to “guess-o-meter”, this study aimed to reach a better understanding of alternative ways of displaying driving range to inform drivers of cause and effect. Data consisted of; state-of-the-art analysis, interviews and mathematical calculations. With help of this data they developed a prototype to expand technology through an iterative design exploration. The iterative exploration helped them to understand the problem better and to find recommendation for displaying driving range. In this study they started with observation about human need and continued to find a technical approached to solve this need. 

Both paper’s data was constructed around human activity, the first paper was more activity based (action between members was important to the studied context), the second was more about design exploration. However they both use more a design-oriented approach. The knowledge that was produced from the processes was the result, the contribution, which is also characteristic for design-oriented research. (Dresch et al 2015) The researchers from the studies create understanding during exploration and through constantly comparing data with data and with theory. They gain knowledge throughout the process already before all data was collected. 

Can practical design work in itself be considered a 'knowledge contribution'?
One of the main purposes with design research is to produce or develop new or existing systems. To develop knowledge or solve problem that can be used of professionals and increase relevance for research result is knowledge contribution. (Dresch et al, 2015) The overall goal in differentiated driving ranges was to explore and solve key aspects that had caused confusion between drivers. Lundsröm formulated a concept that aimed to make it easier for drivers do grasp the relation between cause and effect. The work can bee considered as knowledge contribution because they provide complementary knowledge to science, they used existed theories and real experienced problem into solving problems. The intention was to explore and inspire to change existent system in cars to the better. Knowledge from this study can be reusable for other studies or to develop technology therefor it can be considers as knowledge contribution. 

Are there any differences in design intentions within a research project, compared to design in general? 
I believe no matter which research method you use, your overall goal is in somehow to produce knowledge or knowledge contributions. In a research you want to answer why your result matter and how you can implicate your study into future work. The aim of a research is to build scientific knowledge and that knowledge should be reusable! Design in general does not need to figure out or explain the world as it is, design should create and develop new things but is no need for this knowledge to be reusable (Olson, Kellogg 2014. S. 69).

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? ‘
The research method should be descript in a detailed way so another research could replicated the process; the structure of the method should allow other to replicate and provide transparency.  If different researchers replicate the study over times its gives more confidence to permit generalization of the result across different fields. (Dresch et al, 2015) In HCI however replication is usually less valued then in natural science for example. (Olson, Kellogg 2014).  Another researcher could replicated the methods of the two paper that we read, but they could not identical replicated the iterative development, or the exploration of the studies. Children would probably not interact in a identical way if replicating the study, and because of design-oriented research is build up on a compression on data with data, and data with theory the study would supposedly take another form. But it should be possible to replicate the research metgod to ensure consistently. 

Are there any important differences with design driven research compared to other research practices?
There are some important differences with design-oriented research compered to other research practices.  First they are usually used in different areas, design-oriented research are often used within technology such as medicine, engineering and HCI. (Dresch et al, 2015) Its different strategies, science use theories to understand observation of the world, and observation to test extend theory. Design is about changing how the world works trough innovations. It’s a process towards new and better things, usually by combining things we already know into larger complex things that do not exist, therefore design-oriented research always need to communicate with other researchers. Research-oriented is more about understanding of the world. So to conclude; the goal with design-oriented research is to solve problem compared with research-oriented design (which is a more a traditional research discipline) that aim to describe, explain and predict. In general science is about what exist and design is to create new. (Dresch et al, 2015)

Reference list: 
Dresch Aline & Valle Antunes, José (2015). Design Science Research: A Method for Science and Technology Advancement. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing 
Olson, Judith & Kellogg, Wendy (2012). Ways of Knowing in HCI. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing
kl. Inga kommentarer:

måndag 26 september 2016

Theme 2: Comments

I have commented on 10 blogs: 

kl. Inga kommentarer:

Theme 3: Second blog post

Theme 3, was all about what theory is and is not. At first (in my first blog post) I reflected more about what theory is not, rather than what theory is. After the lecture and seminar I changed my mindset. To understand what theory is not helped me to grasp what theory is, however its more important and useful to understand what theory is. A theoretical framework is the structure that can support or hold a theory (that starts as a hypothesis) of a research study. Without the theoretical framework you cannot describe the theory that explains why the research exist. For example if I aim to study a company, its not enough to have knowledge about methodology we also need knowledge in that specific field, we need theories for explanations.  The theoretical framework connects the research to existing knowledge. Theoretical framework is also the basis for formulating hypothesis and decision of research method. 

Before theme 3, I was thinking opposite; I was focusing on the details however theory looking at the pictures. Theory is not details it’s an abstract entity that aim to identify abstract objects and their relation to each other.  As our teacher told us it’s important to not just reproduce what we already know. Without knowledge production we will not develop methods or reach new theories. Interaction of different researches will give new feedback to science. New findings and knowledge will also help other researcher and institutes to develop research and theories. Theory does not belong to any individual it’s a collective interpretation of experiences and observations. Knowledge production was a new concept for me.  This week’s theme helped me to understand how to analyze scientific theories, which I believe is important for our future studies and thesis. It’s also important to problematize and question science and scientific methods. All knowledge that we obtain is NOT science. 

While we where discussing in my group at the seminar I also understood my selected research paper better. The paper obtain theory for explaining and predicting, they predict in the paper how studios can predict sales momentum for a new movie, for example they predict that star power, VFX and number of openings screen can increase revenues. They predict relationships between the different variables, but they also explain/describe why. With star power and VFX, studios send signals that it’s an expensive movie which usually attract audiences. The lecture and seminar about theory made it clear how complex theory is. 
kl. 7 kommentarer:

fredag 23 september 2016

Theme 4: Quantitative research

Podcast a technology for all. 

This study examines the potential of podcast as a social inclusive technology for non-traditional students. The study took place at a large University of Technology in South Africa and operated for 2 years. Population consisted of 696 students, whereof 434 completed the study. The aim of the research was to see if podcast works as social inclusive technology. A quantitative research method was used. The theoretical framework and research questions determines which research method should be used. Which data and where to collect data are also based of the research question (Bryman & Bell s. 26, 2010). To perform a survey study on a university that offers lower study fees than other university was important in order to be able to answer the research questions and to measure what this study claim to measure. A university with lower fees is more likely to have a higher number of non-traditional students which is necessary to be able to study if podcasts are social inclusive. To observe the phenomena (demographic use of podcasting, experience of podcasting, and podcast as a learning tool) they used questionnaires as observations technique. Their study fits well within a survey research design, because they use a large sample (434 students), the study conducted over 2 years (a specific time period), and they examine more than one variable. For example they looked at use of podcasts in relation with demographics (gender, age and English or Afrikaan as home language) but also which devices students access podcasts with and uses of podcasts in different courses. For this use surveys are a god choice 

With a quantitative method its is possible to find correlations between variables, in this case, if there were any relationship between technological adoption and demographics, course context and course design. With selected quantitative method they obtain correlations but not an understanding for the context. When you test several variables is possible to observe patterns, which they did. They could state that if podcasts was well integrated in the course ALL students did engage. With a qualitative research design on the other hand it would be possible to describe why concepts differ. As mentioned above the intention of this study was to examine if podcasts can been seen as a social inclusive technology (not how or why), therefore I think their research design fits very well for their aim. They have no intention to explain why. However a qualitative research could have added some good description for observed data. The construction of the study (data was collected from a large sample) enabling conclusions and generalize of their findings on a bigger population. However of 696 students only 434 students completed the survey and the average response rate was 64%. Therefor I believe they could have done some improvement with their questionaries’ and implementation. If they hade none open questions in the end, shorter or less complicated question maybe more student would have completed the survey. It’s not uncommon to have a bigger loss of respondents when using survey than with use of structured interviews, for example. So structured interviews could be used to improve their study. 

References: 
Bryma A, Bell.E. 2005. Företagsekonomiska forskningsmetoder. Upplaga 1:2. Liber AB 

Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality: The Body Shapes the Way We Play 
Using a quantitative method in this study could cause problem, the researcher would be more involved in the participants and likely to have difficulties with being objective, also the participants would more likely behave as expected. An advantage could be that fewer participants are need and its possible to explore the context and discuses the meaning of the relationships between body ownership and behavior. It would be interesting to now more about the participant’s mindsets of being some else. Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality is an interesting research although I believe a bigger sample of the population is needed, 36 people divided in two groups are to few to make any generalization of. 

The procedure of the research was good; the participants were given both an information sheet and explained to theme verbally, which decrease the chance to lose participants with read- and write difficulties. A quantitative method, allows the researchers to measure and analyze data. In this case they measured and analyzed the movements from the motion capture suit. Through a statistical analyze they could translated the experiment into number. 

The researcher argues that it was not a difference in the result with respect to age, but I can’t find how old the participants were. I think an additional study identifying if result differ according to age would be interesting. Should it be possible to make same conclusion if the participants were children, or old people +80? Do they have the same preconceptions? The study does not tell us about the population or selected sample “Initially 38 participants were recruited from the university campus”, with this information it’s hard to judge if the sample is representative or not.

The way the study portrait dark skin and light skin stereotypes could bee problematical. It’s some danger with doing this study, it can potential increase serotypes and expectations, which can cause dominant ideologies to prevail. However this study could also illuminate stereotypes.

kl. Inga kommentarer:

måndag 19 september 2016

Theme 1: Comments


I commented on following blogs:





   




kl. Inga kommentarer:

Theme 2: Second blog post


The lecture and the seminar about Benjamin and Adorno & Horkheimer was very helpful. Through the lecture I got a much better understanding of the context, the lecture was not just about the two texts, it was also about the author’s philosophy and the environment that influenced them. 

    “Dialect of enlightenment” was written during World War II, in California. Adorno & Horkheimer were fascinated about the California consumer culture therefor they aimed to develop an understanding about problems in capitalist societies. They understood culture in modern society in two ways; as ideology, the need to legitimate various form of social and political action and as commercialism, art has become an object for sale. People did not rule the cultural industry anymore it was ruled by profit. What was going on with the society? The media industry had become a giant and it was a creature of capitalism. Mass production producing products that are consistent and renewable which tends to suppress any kind of creative or expressive form of art, and it liberating people from the potential of thinking. Adorno & Horkheimer were also concerned that mass production refusing diversity. They talk about the content of the whole system, how the market is interesting in one thing: money and people are shaped by this system. Adorno questioning how we can be as blind in capitalism, why are people not interesting in knowledge? They care more about being rich, having a nice house and car. He was very concerned about the social passivity. 

Before the lecture I was focusing on the details of dialect of enlightenment, after I had a better perspective of the author’s philosophy. Now I understand the background and time when the work was created better, which is important for its context. At the first blog post I reflected about the work as different parts (dialect, enlightenment, myth etc.) not as an entirety, but now (as I wrote above), I have the capability to analyze Adorno & Horkheimer’s work into a perceptive of their time and thoughts. I can grasp their thinking better. The connections and differences between Adorno & Horkheimer and Benjamin’s works become much more clear. Adorno & Horkheimer refer the cultural industry as standardization of products. Capitalism makes money of what used to be culture, art become commercialized. Benjamin on the other hand claims that what’s new for art is the possibility of mechanical reproduction. When reproducing art we will miss the present in space and time, and the object loses its aura. But for Benjamin the mechanical reproduction of art also democratizes culture, it makes it available for everyone. Before it was only rich people that had access to art. Benjamin tries to inform the people where we are going in our society. Adorno & Horkheimer on the other hand have no purpose to prevent a solution, they post critic against things that did not work.
kl. 6 kommentarer:

fredag 16 september 2016

Theme 3: Research and theory

What theory is and is not!

When you write your thesis make sure that you don’t just list a number of references, variables, diagrams or hypotheses. A thesis should be anchored in a theory, a contextual framework that situates your study within a field of study. Simply giving a list of references to an existing theory without using it to frame your hypothesis you’re falling short of proper use of theory. 

When presenting data, for example using diagrams or charts, you need to logically explanation how the data is related to your selected theory. Data is separate from theory, theory explains why something is observed and data is what is observed. Hypotheses should explain what you expected to appear, your theory explains why. However maybe the most important point, try to find a balance between method and theory. Don’t focus too much on the empirical side of your thesis. 

In the end no single study can prove or disprove a theory. A scientific theory can be an impetus, a reason to study a question in a new way. The hypothesis, your chosen variables, your method will all be affected by your theoretical framework, but they are all separate.


Critical Push: Strategies for Creating Momentum in the Motion Picture Industry.  
I think this was an interesting empirical study, however in my estimation the article seems to lack focus; it’s doesn’t primarily address it’s main hypothesis. The authors also make assumptions without empirical evidence. They don’t have proper support for the conclusions they reach. This paper has a weak theory and method however it has some relevance for its field. 

The main hypothesis in this paper contains of how film studios can create a “sales momentum” (process that generate positive consumer awareness) and how information about product quality play an important role in the hypercompetitive dynamics of the motion picture industry. To manage the film industry’s volatility and uncertainty studios have developed strategies for production, marketing and distribution. This paper analyzes how studios incorporate the anticipated response from critics into their strategy and how studios attempt to deal with uncertainty in a hypercompetitive environment.  

This is a qualitative study of the film industry and consists of 409 future films, and covers all movies released between 1991-1992 in the U.S. Selected theories are within in an economic approach and the study reflects the philosophy of positivism. Hypotheses are generated from existing theories and the researchers search for causal relationships. The study starts with theory framing and then the theory is tested; they go from the general (broad perspective) to the specific therefore they use a deductive approach. Several hypotheses are tested however they don’t connect their theory to their data in a satisfactory way, so from my viewpoint the data doesn’t measure what it was intended to measure. 

The theory part is not very well formalized, which makes it difficult (from my perspective) to understand their research. The first presented theory is about the strategic role of information. Buyers very often have less information than sellers, to overcome this problem firms spend lots of resources in signaling and persuasion. Studios invest in attributes that send strong positive signals about quality as star power, visual effects etc. Those components are likely to attract audiences. Next presented theory is about how to create a momentum in an uncertain industry. Studios use different strategies to gain revenues. Prolonging the theatrical run would be a successful development of momentum. 

The theory type for this research would be Theory for Explaining and Predicting. There are some illustrated causal relationships between the variables. They predict a causal relationship between sales momentum and number of screens of the opening weekend (change in one variable is caused by the other). However these relationships aren’t logically explained within the study. This paper attempts to alter our understanding of how things are but also what will be and how they correspond. They have to organize their discussions because at the moment my impression is that the manuscript does not “contain theory”. The presented theory has further limitation, it’s very broad so it’s hard do apply within the very specific field that is the film industry and their study is built on theory testing. I am convinced that a greater focus on industry-specific theory would be much more beneficial. However the weakness of the selected theories, which means the study lacks stringency, is in a sense also a strength as the broad theory enables the authors to draw links to various study fields. 


Journal of management: Publishing theoretical and empirical articles that have high impact on the field of management. They provide implications useful for the further development of research within business strategy, entrepreneurship and research method etc. Journal of Management have an Impact Factor of 6.051, and is Ranked: 4 out of 192 in Management, 3 out of 120 in Business. 
kl. Inga kommentarer:

måndag 12 september 2016

Theme 1: Second blog post

I have contributed to the class in several different ways. At the seminar I was sharing and taking part in the discussions. I tried to ask key questions that lead to revealing discussions in our seminar group; Kant believes that human beings are free, what is his argument for his claim? And so on. I tried to not be afraid to fail, everyone can get information and things wrong, and it is ok! Learning from my mistake can actually help me to gain knowledge, and help me to remember it correct to next time. I paid attention at the lecture and to the person speaking in order to acquire more knowledge about philosophical thoughts. I also tried to have an open mind, that everyone has a viewpoint.

I expanded my knowledge both from discussing with my classmates and the lecture itself. For instance, I understood the two stages of knowledge better; the first stage of knowledge is the organization of senses by applying to them the forms of perception, space and time. The second stage of knowledge is the organization of perceptions by applying to them the forms of conception, categories of thought. I also received a deeper understanding of the quote “Perception without conception is blind, conception without perceptions is empty”. Perception and conception always work together, it’s a necessary correlation between abstract thought (thinking) and concrete reality (sensor input), neither can stand alone. After reading Kant and Plato, and all the discussions, it went so far that I started to think about Kant’s questions even outside school. Is it even possible to know what's really real?

I have developed my knowledge through reading the text several times, some sentence (especially in preface to the second edition) I read over and over again, and then again, in order to actually understand. But the text is quite difficult. I don’t think it is possible to skim through Kant’s text, details of argument matters, because Kant very often appeals to them. I also have to accept that I would not understand everything. To help myself understand Kant better I started out with reading an introduction guide before approaching the text, I think it’s important to understand the period of time when the work was created. I also believe it’s important to read critically, question everything you read, and believe nothing till is clearly proven.

After reading the text, I organized and structured my thoughts and new knowledge. I also considered knowledge I already have and how I could use it in order to understand Plato and Kant better. For instance in my previous theory and method class I read the book; Chalmers, what is this thing called science? I used the knowledge that I got from Chalmers, and applied into this course. I used KTH library and the school search engine to search for information and new sources. I compared Plato’s and Kant’s text, with other books, I used books as; The Midwife of Platonism Text and Subtext in Plato's Theaetetus, What does it all mean? A very short introduction to Philosophy etc.

Writing the blog post was like explaining it for myself, it helped me to understand the text better.



Reference list Theme 1, blog post 1&2:

Ambjörnsson, Ronny (1997). Männsikors undran. Stockholm: Natur och Kultur.

Bergström, Lars (1992). Värdeteori .Stockholm: Thales.

Nagel, Thomas (1987). What does it all mean? A very short introduction to Philosophy. New York: Oxford University press.
kl. 3 kommentarer: