Theme 6: Qualitative and case study research

For this week I chose to examine the paper Improving Health in Low-Income Communities With Group Texting written by Amy L. Gonzales. The paper was published in 2015 in Journal of Communication. Before answering the proposed questions I would like to give a short summary of the article. The title of the article is quite self-describing but the aim of Gonzales research is to investigate whether group texting can improve people’s health and the neighborhood ties in low-income communities. The paper presents an intervention which was described as “a program that allows people to text other people in their neighborhood when they have a question, need help, see a problem, and so forth. The texts would be group-texts. That is, every time you send a text, everyone in your group would get it and every time anyone else sends a text, everyone in the group would get it.” Gonzales hypothesis was that “Participants in a neighborhood texting intervention will report greater increases in neighborhood cohesion than participants in a non-texting control condition”. 

Which qualitative method or methods are used in the paper? Which are the benefits and limitations of using these methods?
Gonzales used two different qualitative methods in this article, semi-structured in-depths interviews and an experimental test of texting intervention. The interviews were conducted with 33 people and lasted for about 1-2 hours. The participants were asked to describe their current texting behaviors as well as giving initial feedback and input on the intervention. One of the benefits of using this method is the opportunity to collect depletive answers from the participants and, by that, gaining a deeper understanding in why people think or feel in a specific way. Another benefit in this particular case was that the researcher could collect valuable input och feedback for the following experiment. A limitation with this method is that it is more time-consuming to collect the data (in contrast to, for example, a questionnaire) since you have to be actively present in every interview and spend some extra time afterwards transcript and process what has been said. Another challenge can be to ask the right questions, for example a leading question can affect the interviewee’s answer and thus the result. 

The second qualitative method, the experimental test of texting intervention, included two public housing developments and lasted for 3 months. The participants were told to be a part of the direct conversation in the digital environment together with its neighborhood. All participants received a text twice a month from experimenters encouraging them to check in with their group. The intention of the experimentally test was to examine its effectiveness. A benefit of observing an experiment like this is that you actually get to see how it works in reality, even though it is somewhat moderated. A limitation worth mentioning is that the experiment only included two housing developments which I think is too few to draw any general conclusions. Also, the participants received $60 for participating in the experiment which might have affected how much they contributed. It is possible that some of the participants participated only for the money and would not have done it without the compensation. 

What did you learn about qualitative methods from reading the paper?
I learned that using complementary qualitative methods is a good way when doing these kinds of research. By conducting semi-structured interviews and including questions connected to the development of the following experiment as wells as leaving space for input and feedback, will make the implementation easier. 

Which are the main methodological problems of the study? How could the use of the qualitative method or methods have been improved?
I think the main methodological problem with this study was the number of participants. 33 interviewees in the semi-structured interviews and two participating housing development in the experimental test is a rather small number to draw any general conclusions. An improvement could have been to include a bigger set of participants in order to present more accurate data. However, I do not think the main aim of this study was to draw any general conclusions but rather to see tendencies within this research area. 

_________________________________________________________________________________

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

A case study could be described as a research strategy that seeks a deeper knowledge about the examined topic. What characterize a case study is the in-depth examination and research which is often done by focusing on one or a few cases. The results are more thoroughly and detailed in comparison to the results gained from a quantitative method such as a questionnaire. However, case studies often include combinations of qualitative and quantitative methods such as archives, interviews, questionnaires and observations. 

Use the "Process of Building Theory from Case Study Research" (Eisenhardt, summarized in Table 1) to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of your selected paper.

For this task I selected the paper The social strategy cone: Towards a framework for evaluating social media strategies by Robin Effing. The article was published in International Journal of Information Management, with an impact factor of 2.692. The aim of the article was to develop and present a framework for the analysis of social media strategies, using insights from a systematic literature review as well as case studies. When analyzing the article using Eisenhardt’s table I went through the eight steps that is presented. In the following part I am going to present the strengths and the weaknesses that I found. 

As for the strengths, the first step “Getting started” is about defining a research question that helps keeping focus on the efforts, which I think Effing succeeds with. The main research question, “How can we evaluate the comprehensiveness of social media strategies in practice?”, is well defined and keeps the line of argument through the article. According to Eisenhardt, a number between four and ten cases usually is a good number when conducting a case study research. Effing manage to select nine good and relevant cases and analyzing the data as a within-case analysis which I think is a strength. A third strength with Effing’s article is the comparison with similar literature. Effing begins by doing a systematic literature review and uses them as good reference sources for his presented framework, together with the insights from the case studies (which also relies on the literature).  

A weakness is the lack of comparison with conflicting literature. In this article, Effing is prone to only use articles that supports his presented framework. Another noticeable things is that Effing only uses qualitative methods. In Eisenhardt’s table it is recommended to combine qualitative and quantitative data. However, I would argue that in this case, only using qualitative methods was not a weakness since Effing thoroughly explained why he used the selected methods.


Gonzales L., A. (2015). Improving Health in Low-Income Communities With Group Texting. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.focus.lib.kth.se/doi/10.1111/jcom.12195/full [2016-09-28]

Effing, R. (2016). The social strategy cone: Towards a framework for evaluating social media strategies. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com.focus.lib.kth.se/science/article/pii/S0268401215000778 [2016-10-05]

Post Reflection: Theme 4

The theme for this week has been Quantitative Research and we were told to select a media technology research paper that is using a quantitative method, as well as reading the article IEEE VR 2012 - Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality. One of the task was to mention which quantitative method that was being used in the paper we selected and I would like to change one of my answers. In my paper the authors used an online survey and an online experiment. I categorized both of them as quantitative methods, and I would still categorize the online survey as a quantitative method. However, I have to re-think whether the online experiment is a quantitative or qualitative method. During the lecture we talked about how quantitative methods depend on numerical measurements which may come from asking participants using questionnaires, measuring using electronic equipment and observation under controlled conditions. The last mentioned method was the one that got me thinking whether the online experiment in my selected paper is categorized as a quantitative or a qualitative method. According to Illias, the controlled conditions implies that you manipulate an independent variable, or many and observe how dependent variables vary as a result. He exemplified by using a rather fun example, the independent variable, in a study where you examine the effects on a human of a particular drug, is how much of the particular drug the person has been taken. The dependent variable is how high the person gets after taken the drug. Anyway, back to the online experiment, the aim of the experiment was not the measurements but rather the observation of how the participants interacted with a corporate social responsibility (CSR) campaign on social media. Building on this I would say that the online experiment is a qualitative method rather than a quantitative.

Unfortunately, the seminar was cancelled but I think the lecture gave a clear view of quantitative methods. I appreciated that Illias reserved some time going through his and his colleagues study Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality and how they used quantitative methods since exemplifying with real and concrete examples often simplifies the understanding of the concepts.

Theme 3: Comments

I commented on the following blogs:

http://u1h4muxc.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-32-reflection.html

http://u1h02pv3.blogspot.se/2016/09/reflection-on-theme-3-research-and.html

http://u11873yx.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-3-research-and-theory-second-post.html

http://u1j8du7c.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-32.html?m=0

http://u10o7oqf.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-3-part-2-reflections.html

Theme 5: Design Research

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

Empirical data can be understood as the information and knowledge that is being acquired by means of experimentation, observation or experience.

The empirical data in the paper written by Fernaeus and Tholander was gathered by using a prototype in which they collected qualitative data. By observing and documenting how people from their target group, in this case kids, interacted with the prototype, the authors could draw conclusions based on the qualitative data that was collected. The empirical data in the paper written by Lundström was also gathered by developing and analyzing a prototype, as well as collecting data by interviews and testing the available electric cars on the market.

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

According to Lundström, a design oriented research process is an effective method of generating knowledge since the process of developing, testing and analyzing the proof-of-concept leads to discovering and realizing different unknown factors. I think a practical design work is a good way to visualize a problem as well as a possible solution which I think can lead to a deeper understanding of it since it becomes more “real”. A deeper understanding of a problem or solution very much helps when facing different problems or questions. I also think by visualizing the problem, and solution for that matter, often emphasizes new perspectives of a project which can result in new information and knowledge.

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

Yes, I would argue that there are quite many differences in design intentions within a research project compared to design in general. Design within a research project is a tool for gaining knowledge about a specific topic or issue that is being investigated. Visualize a problem is a possible use for design within this field. It could also be about gaining knowledge about a certain design process with the intention to improve it. When talking about design in general, for example designing a new product or service, I would say that there is more focus on the functionality and optimizing the product or service rather than the process. In contrast to design within a research project where the aim is to gain knowledge and insights about an issue, design in general is more about the development of a product. The aesthetics and functionality is emphasized.

Is research in tech domains such as these ever replicable? How may we account for aspects such as time/historical setting, skills of the designers, available tools, etc?

I think research in tech domains is replicable, to some extent. However, what is important to take into account when talking about the field of technology is that technology develops continuously as we speak with a great speed. Therefore, especially the aspects of time and historical setting is of great importance within tech domains. You could of course replicate the same research after a period of time, but the outcome might vary due to the technology development. New and more efficient ways for compiling research is daily presented and with them also the conditions. It is therefore important to bear in mind the time and historical setting for the research, i.e. under which conditions the research was compiled. To sum up, the ever-growing development in the technology field will affect the possibility to replicate research in such domains.

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

Compared to other research practices, the main intention of design driven research is to understand and improve a specific process or design practice in itself rather than gaining a deeper knowledge about a specific issue within a certain domain which often is the focus of other research practices. Another difference is that the method used within a design driven research is usually qualitative since it often includes some form of user observation to collect the required empirical data. Other research practices are not as restricted to use qualitative methods but could instead choose to use quantitative methods in order to collect data that is relevant for the study.

Post Reflection: Theme 3

The theme for this week has been Research and Theory with the assignment to read The Nature of Theory in Information Systems by Shirley Gregor as well as What Theory is Not written by Robert I. Sutton and Barry M. Staw. Furthermore, we selected a research paper that was relevant for media technology research and studied its theoretical framing and the theory/theories used in the paper. When writing the first blogpost for this theme I gave the explanation that theory is the answer to why phenomenon happen. I still agree with this definition of what theory is but would like to add a few things since I have gained a little bit more deeper understanding of the concept theory after the lecture and seminar. During the seminar we all agreed that theory provides an explanatory framework for an observation, and that framework can either be verified or falsified. In my group we talked about how a theory is true until it is proven wrong. For example, a theory states that all bears are either black or brown. The theory is true until someone discover the white bear which makes the previous theory false. The new theory is instead, all bears are either black, brown or white. This example goes in line with the previous mentioned definition that theory provides an explanatory framework for an observation. However, a theory does not need a new observation to conform as a theory. It can also be a new frame of thought, that is, using the same data but with a new outcome. I directly connect this to our previous reading about Copernicus and how he proved the theory that the sun revolved around the earth wrong and instead proved that the it is the earth that revolve around the sun. Leif Dahlberg mentioned during the lecture that theory is also about making generalizations, which is another argument that theory does not need a new observation to conform as a theory. For example if you see a lot of trees, a forest, in a picture, you assume that there is more trees outside the borders of the picture.

An interesting discussion we had during the seminar was the difference between a hypotheses and a theory.  At first we had a hard time making the distinction between the two in their definitions but ended up in a somewhat clear distinction. Hypotheses are assumptions, i.e. unverified claims. Hypotheses are proposed theories or theories that are not proven or verified. From the hypothesis you build a theory by, for example, making observations or experiments. By that you could say that theories are confirmed or proved hypotheses. In other words, you form a hypothesis, try it, and if it proves successful you have formed a theory. However, as with the example with the bears, the theory can at any time be reconsidered or rejected if it happens to be proven wrong. I would say that theories never can be definitive verified.

I really enjoyed this theme because theory is something we have worked with continuously during our study, in one way or another. I can only speak for myself but I have never really thought about what theory actually means. Before this week I would have categorized data as theory but now I know that that is not the case, theory is much more advanced than that.

Theme 2: Comments

I commented on the following blogs:

http://u1wdx0i7.blogspot.se/2016/09/post-theme2-forpreparation-of-this.html#comment-form

https://u1mv5a16.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2-second-blog-post.html#comment-form

http://u1kq1ay0.blogspot.se/2016/09/second-blogpost-theme-2-critical-media.html#comment-form

http://u1cq6h0z.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2reflection-on-critical-media.html

http://u1ci4ejx.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2-reflection.html#comment-form

Theme 4: Quantitative research

How Negative Becomes Less Negative”: Understanding the Effects of Comment Valence and Response Sidedness in Social Media

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

I chose the article “How Negative Becomes Less Negative”: Understanding the Effects of Comment Valence and Response Sidedness in Social Media by Hyejoon Rim and Doori Song. The article presents a study that explores the influence of the public’s negative comments regarding a corporate social responsibility (CSR) campaign in social media and how to best respond to them. The quantitative research methods that were used in this article was an online survey as well as an online experiment with a total of 124 participants. When the participants had answered the online survey they were randomly assigned one of four experimental conditions; positive comments on a CSR-campaign by Coca-Cola in social media, negative comments on the CSR-campaign, a one-sided response from the responsible company (i.e. a response that emphasize the company’s sincere motives for investing resources for the sake of the society) and, lastly, a two-sided response from the responsible company (i.e. a response that acknowledge the company’s return on investments, such as publicity and profits by supporting the community). The experiment was however a stimuli and not an actual real case. A benefit of using online surveys as a research method is that the collected data is easy to compare and analyze, as well as the opportunity to collect much data in a short amount of time. One of the limitations, however, is the lack of a deeper understanding in why the participants answered in a particular way. The lack of follow-up and open-ended questions is also a limitation with this method.

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

One important methodological problem with this study, according to me, was that the participants were assigned a specific condition in which they were about to complete the experiment. Therefore the participant entered a role where they were either all positive or all negative. In reality it is rarely that black or white, comments are more often mixed and range from positive and negative. There is also different degrees of positivity and negativity which I think should have been taken into consideration in this study. I think it would have been better to let the participants decide themselves if they perceived the campaign in a positive or negative way. Or perhaps, maybe a qualitative method would have been better to use in this study, for example by interviewing people who actually have commented on a real CSR-campaign in social media, as well as interviewing the responsible company.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality:The Body Shapes the Way We Play

3. Which are the benefits and limitations of using quantitative methods?

One of the benefits of using quantitative methods in a study is that you can collect a large amount of data for statistical use. The collected data are often easy to measure and analyze, as well as the easiness to compare and categorize the answers among the participants. The end result of studies using quantitative methods is often developed models and theories based on the results. However, a limitation of using quantitative methods is the lack of including “the bigger picture” and the context of the study. A deeper understanding of the subject that was studied, for example secondary data and the participants followed-up comments on their answers, is hard to present in numbers and diagrams. Another limitation worth mentioning is the large sample of the population that needs to be studied in order to deliver as accurate result as possible. Quantitative methods are often used when the aim is to study questions of what, when and who.

4. Which are the benefits and limitations of using qualitative methods?
One of the benefits of using qualitative methods is that it is easier to include the context of the study as well as gaining a deeper understanding in why people think or feel in a specific way, for example by using followed-up questions. However, it is more difficult to compare the results among the participants and it is more time-consuming to collect large amount of data which limits the accuracy of the result. A challenge could also be that people might interpret the same question in different ways. Qualitative methods are often used when the aim is to study questions of how and why.

Rim, H. & Song, D. (2016) How Negative Becomes Less Negative”: Understanding the Effects of Comment Valence and Response Sidedness in Social Media. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.focus.lib.kth.se/doi/10.1111/jcom.12205/full