Final reflection

This course has taken us a long way through the theories and methods in the media technology field. From the definitions of what knowledge is in the first place to means and methods for how we can empirically produce new knowledge. Even though I had a quite broad experience with research methods and their actual execution beforehand, I gained a lot of new insights and some deeper understanding of the research methods I was familiar with and even new ones, such as design research. I personally felt that the format of this course succeeded in supporting the learning experience by making us first deal with topics on our own, then get external input from a lecturer and then let us discuss it with our fellow students. The learnings I took away from the course will be for the long term, I think. 

The first research method we dealt with was quantitative research. Quantitative research is guided by pre-existing assumptions which the researcher wants to quantify through research. This is opposed to qualitative research, which is much broader and less assuming and instead based on interpretation because it "allows you to examine people's experience in detail" (cf. Hennink, Hutter & Bailey, Qualitative Research Methods). This also means that a researcher using qualitative methods needs to be more understanding and flexible when he or she conducts a study with, for example, interviews, focus groups or content analysis. Execution of qualitative methods is extremely important, otherwise results turn out poorly (cf. Methodology Matters: Qualitative Research Methods). Quantitative research, on the other hand, requires a more detailed preparation beforehand and, even though the execution still has to follow the rules, it is not as crucial. As we have encountered in our seminars on both quantitative and qualitative research methods and as I have also started my reflection here, the definition of one of the research methods usually ends in juxtaposing it with the other one. However, as I have argued several times in earlier blog posts, the best research results come out of studies which combine different methods. 

Mixing research methods opens up entirely new possibilities to generate new knowledge (cf. A Momentous Development in Mixed Methods Research). Let us take an example. In my bachelor's thesis, I wanted to make predictions about how the role of a Chief Marketing Officer will develop in the future. For this, I conducted empirical qualitative research in the form of personal in-depth interviews with some CMOs. Although this helped me to generate relevant data and insights, in a bigger study it would have been a reasonable and helpful next step to quantify the insights with standardised questionnaires with a larger sample of CMOs. Also other researches I have conducted could have profited from the model of beginning with qualitative research and following it up with quantitative research. Nonetheless, there are studies in which this order is inverted. In Ilias' example of "Drumming in Immersive Reality", they, for example, first conducted a quantitative experiment and followed it up with qualitative interviews to ensure the validity of their study. This research, however, also merely aimed at an existence prove, which is actually quite common with experiments. They are mainly implemented to test specific hypotheses (cf. Social Research Methods). 

Another research approach which I had no experience with before the course is design research. The design process itself with its continuous iterations which include adjustments and improvements can be seen as a research in itself. However, this is also often combined with other research methods. In Anders Lundström's example of the electric car dashboard, for example, he first conducted qualitative interviews with users and some sort of content analysis in online forums in his state of the art research. A next logical step after this design process leading to a prototype could have been a qualitative user study of people actually testing the new dashboard, followed by a larger quantitative study to ensure its usability. To me personally, it seems that finalising a research with a quantification of the data in order to validate them in a larger scale, seems to be a very valuable approach. Another example would be the case study about Occupy Wall Street which I wrote about in an earlier blog post. In this study, the researches established a Twitter user typology of participants of the protest by conducting qualitative interviews. This, however, only generates an assumption or theory about a typology which is not validated to be generalisable. A quantitative follow-up study could have helped to establish a certified user typology. Combining research methods is relevant throughout different formats of research (cf. Integrating Case Study and Survey Research Methods: An Example in Information Systems).

Tu sum it up, different research methods complement and complete each other. When planning and executing a study, the researcher should not be too focused on deciding which path of research to follow, but which pieces of each path to combine with each other. This will help to discover the relevant results that were aimed for. Or as Sandelowski put it, the "complexity of human phenomena mandates more complex research designs" than just sticking to one particular method (cf. Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Sampling, Data Collection, and Analysis Techniques in Mixed-Method Studies). 
This has also been my major learning from this Theory and Method for Media Technology course. We have to be flexible with our research approaches if we really want to find the true result to our research question. 

Collected comments

Theme 6 - Qualitative and case study research

1. Hej,
   You mention in your reflection that you had a better understanding of case studies after the seminar and that your answer in the post before the seminar was not sufficient. I think, however, that your explanation to a first year student in the first blog post was good, too. You already mentioned that case studies aim at formulating theories with the use of either quantitative or qualitative methods. I personally only fully understood that after our seminar. 
   You also wrote that it's not surprising that in-depth research is not as generalisable as less deep ones. I agree with you, but I still think it is important to remind ourselves of this, especially when reading research papers and critically reflecting on them!  http://pargman420.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-seminar-reflection-6.html?showComment=1444947520409
2. Hej,
   You make a very important point by mentioning that the researcher's subjective perspective influences the study, especially the analysis part. This is something that I have also read several times in other students' blogs throughout the different weeks and also something that I have learned during the seminar. 
   However, you do not have to distinguish between case study and qualitative research. The two are not mutually exclusive in any way. Case study research is just a research format which then, depending on the nature of the study, implements quantitative or qualitative methods. I hope I could clarify this for you! http://stinazwahlen.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-seminar-theme-6-qualitative-and.html?showComment=1444948168654
3. Hej,
   I have to say that I also found it a bit difficult to find a good case study to use for the pre-seminar blog post, but everybody in my discussion group managed to find one. This also made our discussion more interesting than it would have been if we had all had the same case study provided. 
   I really enjoy about this course that everybody is coming from different backgrounds. I, for example, have studied a more social science oriented bachelor's degree and have therefore very different research experience from you and also many other students, according to what I have read in their blogs. This is something we all could profit from during our discussions in the seminars, I feel. http://dm2572rberggre.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-after.html?showComment=1444949506079
4. Hej,
   I also liked the documentaries example from our seminar. In some way, you could probably still argue that documentaries can be seen as a type of case study research - though that would still not apply to all of them. I think that the argument of the subjective viewpoint of the filmmaker is not really valid as a criticism, because this is something that is also there in other research. In every study, the researcher presents results he or she thought to be relevant and interpreted them from a personal perspective. Before this course I thought that research provided neutral facts, but I learned that there is always subjectivity involved to some extent. So, now that I think about it again, we probably should have discussed the documentary question a bit further in the seminar!
   Other than that, I agree with you that the broad and open definition of research in general was a good way to end this course. Knowledge production cannot always follow standardised processes. That is a very important learning! http://mawnzblog.blogspot.se/2015/10/reflections-post-theme-6.html?showComment=1444949962655
5. Hej,
   Interesting question actually if qualitative research can be conducted with only one participant! I guess this would be a case study then? What did you say about it in the seminar? 
   It's good that you got so much out of the case study seminar! I also felt that I learned a lot and got the same impression on other blogs - I guess that shows that not many of us students have ever worked with case studies before, or maybe just not thought about it as intensively. http://fromplatotocasestudies.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflections.html?showComment=1445284948318
6. Hej,
   Interesting explanation you share here about how the number of participants does not distinguish whether a research is qualitative or quantitative. I think that is a mistake which is made quite often. However, I'm not so sure I agree with only one participant being enough for a quantitative study. Even if you give somebody medicine over a long period of time it feels to me that this would still be a qualitative study? It is definitely an insight for most of us that quantitative and qualitative research are more difficult to differentiate than we thought we knew before this course! http://elindm2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflections.html?showComment=1445285228187
7. Hej,
   It's interesting to compare what you wrote about case studies before and after the seminar. It seems that you really have gotten a better understanding now. You mention here that case studies follow an iterative process, I'm not exactly sure what you mean with that? In the case study I had chosen for this theme, for example, there was no iteration. Or do you mean that there can be iteration if the conditions are not the best in the beginning? http://thewind-egg.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflection.html?showComment=1445285877833
8. Hej,
   You give the answer about the differentiation between qualitative research and case study in your own blog post - the case study format can use either quantitative or qualitative methods. It's nice to compare how you wrote it before and after the seminar. 
   I had actually also already come up with the questions how one can use prototypes in case studies. Also taking Dovilé's comment into account, I think the building process of a prototype can be seen as a case study in itself. It gets adapted to new situations that no or very little previous knowledge exists about. We haven't discussed this in our seminar, unfortunately, but this is how I would understand it! http://mashasthoughts123.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflection.html?showComment=1445286390264
9. Hej,
   Your chosen qualitative research paper seems really interesting! Especially the combination of gathered data from the artists' motion, as well as from the interviews! 
   Your reflections after the seminar are also interesting. The distinction you make between case studies being a category and not a method is very good and from reading some others' reflections it actually seems that not everybody might have understood this. How do you mean that humanities and case studies have a lot in common? That a lot of case studies are used in the humanities? Because humanities are not a research category but a science. And I actually think that humanities often builds on qualitative research, but maybe not necessarily case studies? http://ninopmedia.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflection-this-theme-is-more.html?showComment=1445287035379
10. Hej,
    It would have been interesting to read more about the paper you had chosen and how it turned out to not be a case study as Eisenhardt defines it. My paper, for example, didn't follow those exact steps either but I still think that it was a case study. In your description it does not really become clear what their method was. 
    Good to hear, however, that you found this theme especially interesting. I also thought that we all learned a lot because not many seemed to have had previous experience with case studies. http://vadfinnsegentligen.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflection.html?showComment=1445287784273

Theme 5 - Design research 

1. Hej,
   It's good that you already write in your pre-blog that research can never really be replicable - I only understood that during the lecture last week. You however seem to have understood proof of concept in another way after the first lecture. It really is very important to keep your audience in mind! I would even go further and highlight how important the audience is in the entire research communication. http://alexisdm2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/for-this-weeks-theme-i-have.html?showComment=1444838983970
2. Hej,
   I'm not sure I really agree with you that prototypes in the industry are made to be used afterwards, what are you particularly referring to? I think the prototypes during research are never made to actually be used afterwards but just to test them and use the learnings from them in further development. 
   Nevertheless, I agree with you on your main take-away from the first lecture that the focus on the research question helps the entire research. During my bachelor's thesis this wasn't emphasised as much, actually. This also led to many people formulating the research question way too broad - if only we could have attended this seminar beforehand. http://reb2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-design-research_12.html?showComment=1444839619447
3. Hej,
   In your pre-lecture post you write that the empirical data in the tangible programming and the electric car research paper were based on the observation etc. I had though the same when I answered those question, and I have seen the same ”classical” approach to empirical data in other students’ blogs, too. It would therefore have helped you a lot if you could have come to the second lecture because he really clarified this misunderstanding and highlighted that the actual design process with its iterations and the researcher’s observation and improvements is part of the empirical data in this case, too. Hopefully I could help you to clarify this now! https://tmmkappa.wordpress.com/2015/10/11/theme-5-post-reflection-2/comment-page-1/#comment-23
4. Hej,
   Interesting discussion about the question if design research can be seen as knowledge contribution. I agree with you that it is hard to define "the work itself" and if that is already knowledge contribution. But, to me, the results and also the process and iterations of the study are important knowledge contribution! I am actually wondering why you did not refer to this question after the lecture again, because I feel that we addressed this in the lecture on Friday in terms of how much the interpretations and specific personal learnings of the researcher are generating and contributing knowledge. Otherwise, good reflection! http://stinazwahlen.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-theme-5-quantitative-research.html?showComment=1444840401964
5. Hej, 
   I like how you critically reflect on the necessity of mathematics in engineering problem research. I can also think of many research problems which do not involve mathematics at all. However, these probably do not classify as engineering problems then, right? Your example of managerial problems within Media Management, for example, are simply not engineering problems. Nonetheless, I think it's super important to critically reflect on what we learn in the lectures and to question what the lecturers teach us. What was your opinion on this after the second lecture? We did not talk about mathematics in particular, but I think we saw engineering problems that should be approached with prototypes and that did involve some mathematics, even though not in all cases particularly advanced mathematics (e.g. the tangible programming one). http://pargman420.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-seminar-reflection-5.html?showComment=1444842752516
6. Hej,
   Super interesting to read your further research on the topics - I also find it very helpful to check additional sources about concepts we mention in the lectures. Thanks for sharing with us! Especially the quote about prototyping bringing abstract discussions to a more concrete level is a very good explanation of it. Also your personal reflection and summary of the lecture, that a prototype is not the solution but a way to generate data to come up with a solution is very relevant in my opinion! I really enjoyed how the lecturer made this very clear, especially because I did not have any experience with design research through prototypes. http://mashasthoughts123.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflection.html?showComment=1444843102690
7. Hej, 
   Like most of us you highlighted the 90%/10% concept of focusing on formulating the research question. Your reflection, however, is the first one I have read that considers a student's viewpoint in this scenario. It is true that we often get the research question and just have to focus on the solution. Yet, Haibo Li also had the teacher/student example in the bear scenario, and a learning we should take away from that is maybe that we as students should take more responsibility and question given research problems. That could be good training for projects in which we have to formulate the research question ourselves anyways! http://thewind-egg.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflection.html?showComment=1444843524510
8. Hej,
   I can identify with you final conclusion about theme 5, that it at first seemed quite obvious and easy to understand but then after the lectures it turned out to be more complicated than expected. I felt the same and had previously just assumed that I knew what design research would be about but after the lectures I got a totally new understanding of it. This is very interesting that I reached that point even though we did not even have a seminar for this topic. However, the second lecturer involved us more in the lecture by asking questions and starting small discussions, which helped. You also seem to have learned from this and I have gotten the same impression in other blog posts! http://ixxzw.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-after.html?showComment=1444843795273
9. Hej,
   You seem to have had a same important learning this week as I did. Before the lecture you wrote that the empirical data in the studies was the data generated by experimenting and in your reflection you highlight that the process itself is the empirical data and that it provides answers. This is something that I also understood only after the second lecture. I, therefore, also agree with you that the more research-focused approach of the second lecture was better than the first lecture! http://remarkableathenianyouth.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-design-research-or-how-to-define.html?showComment=1444844015817
10. Hej,
    Interesting reflection on this theme. After having read many other blog posts now, it seems that everybody would have liked a seminar for this theme to reflect together on the learnings and compare different perspectives with fellow-students. I feel the same, but I actually had the feeling that the second lecture was a lot more interactive than our previous ones anyways. 
    What I find particularly interesting in your reflection is that you also highlighted marketing the research idea (and eventually the solution). I hadn't thought about this before the lecture but now I actually read a paper on that for the topic of week 6, so the learnings still get intertwined over the weeks. http://lard-have-mercy.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-theme-5-design-research.html?showComment=1444844600974

Theme 4 - Quantitative research

1. Hej,
   Interesting paper you read for this week's topic and I think it's a good point that they should have used the entire sample of observations they had if it was so easily available to them. In the seminar we also talked about the wicked problem and the example of the heavy metal listeners, but I had forgotten to put it into my reflection, so thanks for sharing again! http://gklo.blogspot.de/2015/09/theme-4-quantitative-methods-post.html?showComment=1443875932056
2. Hej,
   Concerning your criticism of the paper of Internet addiction you had read for this topic, I am not sure that I would agree with that. Also standardised big scale questionnaires can reveal deeper insights into behaviours such as addiction to something. Maybe a combined study of qualitative and quantitative methods had been a good choice, but I don't think that a solely qualitative method had necessarily led to better results. However, it seems that the seminar and the lecture gave you another understanding of the benefits of a quantitative study, too, so maybe you have changed your opinion on that? http://pargman420.blogspot.de/2015/09/post-seminar-reflection-4.html?showComment=1443876561563
3. Hej,
   You chose an interesting article for this topic, even though I have to admit that I don't have too much knowledge about this field. Which journal was the paper from? I think you forgot to mention that. Anyways, it's good that you got the feeling that this topic can be helpful in your studies, both from the content of the paper, as well as quantitative methods in general! Have you never used these methods in your previous studies? http://happyblogger7.blogspot.de/2015/09/theme-4-reflection.html?showComment=1443877163823
4. Hej,
   You chose a very interesting paper for this theme. And, as you also wrote in your reflection, it seems like you already knew a lot about quantitative research. You discuss the methodology in the eye-tracking study in detail and seem to have a good understanding of what you are talking about. I actually also knew quite a lot about quantitative research before this theme, but just like you, I also learned new things in the lecture, as for example how much more time than what I had anticipated a study preparation can take! http://capitalmyboy.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-post-theme-post.html?showComment=1444579105786
5. Hej,
   Good pre-post for this theme, I also liked your paper. I have also seen it on another student's blog, which is a good indication if the topic's relevance for our course!
   In your reflection, you write that quantitative research cannot add deeper understanding to research findings. I think I know where you are coming from in that argumentation, but I do not really agree. Also with quantitive studies you can discover new insights and motivations for different behaviour etc. It might also be that we define "deeper understanding" differently. http://amlinden.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflections.html?showComment=1444580061190
6. Hej,
   Your reflection was the first one that really got me thinking for this theme, interesting read! In the end of your post you mention that quantitative research can never be replicated due to external factors. This got me wondering how we can even say that quantitative research is so quantifiable. If we cannot even reproduce a research, we might not get the same results and might therefore generalise from different results on the same topic. Maybe this means that we have to be more critical about study results we read? I will take this discussion up again with some classmates! Thanks! http://thewind-egg.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflection.html?showComment=1444580760122
7. Hej,
   really good reflection of this theme, especially because of your examples and your detailed discussion. Well done! 
   When I started reading the reflection post, I directly wanted to argue against your distinction of qualitative research being subjective and quantitative research being objective, but you came to the conclusion yourself throughout the post. I think both of them can be very objective but there will always be a subjective layer in research, as well. I, for example, came to think about the second lecture on design research now because we learned there that the researcher always plays a critical role in a study and its outcome, because of the conduction of the study and the interpretation of the results! http://cliodile.blogspot.se/2015/10/after-theme-4-quantitative-research.html?showComment=1444581207104
8. Hej,
   It's interesting to follow your reflection process on your selected paper on Facebook friends after discussing it with a fellow classmate! What you mentioned in your reflection post about the sampling with only students is a valid point. I definitely agree with this criticism and have also seen this argument in other students' blog posts. It is always important for the researcher to decide on the right balance between finding a cheap and easily available group of participants and trying to be as objectively representative as possible. From my own experience, I know that convenience often plays a big role in sampling, especially after I have once conducted a research where we approached people in the street with a paper questionnaire. In order to be as neutral as possible, we decided to always ask every fifth person, to not only involve people in the study who looked nice and easy to approach. http://dm2572fan.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-theme-4.html?showComment=1444581815284
9. Hej,
   You chose a paper with a special research method because you had two different sources of data. That was more interesting to read than some other students' posts! 
   We also talked about the wicked problem in our seminar group, it's an interesting phenomenon!
   I also agree, like the previous commenters, that when you talk about quantitative research methods you automatically start talking about qualitative ones, as well. It felt like a natural course of discussion in the seminar and in the lecture. It think it is quite often that it becomes easier to understand something by comparing it with its counterpart! http://fromplatotocasestudies.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflections.html?showComment=1444583202239
10. Hej,
    I think you make a really valid point by saying that quantitative and qualitative research methods complement each other! We often decide between them and try to pick the one which is better suited to the research question, but a combination of both is often the best way to go!  http://dm2572byen.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-quantitative-research.html?showComment=1444583937580

Theme 3 - Research and theory

1. Hej,
   Interesting discussion about truth in connection with theory. My personal thought on it is that theories do not aim at being truths, but that they want to describe as true (or maybe just "valid") as possible at the point of time of their creation. So, that would also be my answer to your question if human beings are able to formulate true theories. It is, for me, more about describing to one's best knowledge. I am not even sure if anything can ever be totally true, not only theories.. http://duckyduckyducky.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-seminar-3_28.html?showComment=1443471400961
2. Hej,
   You chose an interesting paper for this topic. I also had a social media related one, but not with focus on youth, like yours had. 
   I also like your understanding of theory being "the question why". In your bird flying backwards example, you make it seem like all theory is built around something that has been observed and then needs to be answered, the "why". But can't there also be theories that are established before something is observed that supports them? http://remarkableathenianyouth.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-research-and-theory-or-what-maketh.html?showComment=1443471770959
3. Hej, 
   While reading your two posts for this theme, what stuck out for me was your final statement about how we apply a filter to reality which biases our research results. Sometimes we specifically want this, I think. Even qualitative research aims at collecting broad amounts of data but with a very specific focus - which you might call bias. Maybe I get it wrong from your post, but it sounds as if you think that would be a bad thing - I would not agree with that! http://dm2572byen.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-research-and-theory_27.html?showComment=1443472466177
4. Hej,
   Your research paper about the walking/sound experiment sounds really interesting! I think I'm actually going to follow up on it, I had not come across the journal in my research. 
   I also like that you not only discuss theory and truth, as most other people did, but also paradigms. We used the word in the seminar as if it was clear what it meant. But before discussing about theory, we also all thought we knew what that meant. So it's interesting to see that you define it as a way of thinking. Couldn't that also be a theory? Paradigms are also based on some research and facts as you name Newton and quantum physics as an example for paradigms. http://literaturestuffm.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-reflections-after-lecture-and.html?showComment=1443472783098
5. Hej,
   Very impressive choice of paper. Grid technology sounds like a cool topic from your summary, even though I do not know anything about it, I have to admit. As you write in your reflection, you also spent some time researching journals and papers - I actually had the same problem that I spent way too much time on that. I also agree on your reflection on the tasks for this topic, that they were more practical - did you still have the feeling that you learned something by answering them? From your answers in your post, it mainly seems like you looked for definitions in the papers we read, to be honest, without transferring those findings to your own previous knowledge. http://fromplatotocasestudies.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-reflections.html?showComment=1443473139287
6. Hej,
   The topic of children and Internet in your chosen paper seems interesting, but I unfortunately found it a bit difficult to follow your summary of the paper. 
   Nevertheless, your example of the pen maybe flying away the next time is very helpful! We cannot declare a theory to be completely true, but maybe there is no such thing as truth anyways. What I took away from the seminar in relation to this, is that we should avoid using "true" too easily in the scientific (or maybe any) context - maybe that can help you too! http://sannanodm2572.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-reflection.html?showComment=1443473600419
7. Hej,
   Your understanding of hypothesis as "answering a question at hand" is probably right for a lot of hypotheses. But what if I came up with a hypothesis about something new that does not need to be answered - couldn't that be a hypothesis, as well? 
   I actually had the feeling that I had gotten a pretty good understanding about theory and hypothesis, but reading so many different blog posts now actually starts to get me confused again.. http://theandme15.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-research-and-theory-part-2.html?showComment=1443473918319
8. Hej,
   The paper you read for this topic, about the CAPTCHA research, is actually the first one I came across now which gives me the impression that it could also be useful for us personally - interesting choice! What do you feel after reading it completely?
   Your comment about the seminar you were in actually helped me a lot in differentiating between theory and hypothesis! That a hypothesis can lead to a theory, but that a theory does not necessarily need to be built on a hypothesis, thanks for sharing that! In our seminar we had the example that a hypothesis is "the first puzzle piece" for a theory, but I hadn't understood before that this piece is not even required. http://ixxzw.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-after-seminar.html?showComment=1443474283972
9. Hej,
   I like that you write that the clear distinction between theory and hypothesis was an "aha" moment for you this week! I also thought so during the seminar - when I read some blogs I got confused again unfortunately, but the last blog I read helped me again. It said that a hypothesis CAN lead to a theory but that a theory does NOT NEET to be built on a hypothesis. Had you heard this before? But it's good that you think the new knowledge from this week might be useful in the future. Are you planning on going into research more? http://jonathansbs.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-post.html?showComment=1443474858831
10. Hej,
    Thanks for sharing the journal article about HCI - it sounds really interesting, I'm gonna read it as well I think! 
    I also think it's nice that you want to participate more in the next seminar, that's the right attitude ;-) From reading your reflection, however, it seems like you anyways benefited from the seminar and the especially the discussion. 
    I do not really get why you mention that scientific theory is formed from a specific viewpoint. Do you mean it in the way as we discussed in the seminar about Kant that we should be completely neutral? I think it helps that people have different points of view they can bring into their theoretical work, don't you agree? http://rickardsdm2572.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-post-seminar-reflections.html?showComment=1443475414545

Theme 2 - Critical media studies

1. Hej,
   Especially after reading your reflective post, I felt that it would be nice to read more of your personal opinion and learning than a summary of the lecture and the seminar. You do it a bit with the example of the myth/enlightenment quote, but for example when you talk about the seminar, you only tell what we did in the seminar but not how that changed your point of view or your understanding. It would be interesting to read more of that next week! :-) http://tamfmtol.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-critical-media-studies.html?showComment=1442851193079
2. Hej,
   I really appreciate that you take a step further with your blog posts. In the pre-post, you referred back to readings from the first week and you also already shared your experience with the week's reading material. Especially in your reflection post, it is super interesting to read your thoughts on mass media today - user generated content etc. is something that the theorists had not thought about yet and it's a new angle to the question of the value and purpose of art. http://dm2572rberggre.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-after.html?showComment=1442851572337
3. Hej.
   Just like you, I also feel that I do not understand everything correctly before the lecture and seminar. You named sub/superstructure as an example - I actually also understood the two concepts a bit differently before discussing them in detail in the seminar. It's especially interesting that you even name an example from today for that, the privacy development on the internet! http://dm2572lisa.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-refelection-post.html?showComment=1442851769371
4. Hej,
   It's great to see that you also felt that putting the texts into their historical context helped a lot with understanding them. It also seems like doing additional research about the authors and their specific surroundings helped you. I will definitely do it directly for the next topic! 
   Also the distinction between nominalism and realism was something that stuck with me during and after the seminar - interesting to see that it was the same for you! I feel that we learn a lot during this course, also by reading other's comment, like yours now! :-) http://u1ifqcuc.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2_83.html?showComment=1442852074420
5. Hej,
   Thanks for sharing the examples for nominalism/realism and the sub/superstructure again. What were your personal thoughts about these? 
   And, just for the future, it's "aura", just so you know it :-) http://rchcc.blogspot.se/2015/09/reflection-of-theme2.html?showComment=1442852712427
6. Hej,
   Your example from the seminar discussion about the aura of not only a painting but a film got me thinking. In my small group and then later on in the seminar group we only discussed the painting (Benjamin, too, discusses only the painting). What did you come up with then? That the aura of a film is connected to its first official screening maybe? That would be my first thought now - thanks for making me think about this other case of aura! http://bjornsblogggg.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-reflection.html?showComment=1442897390481
7. Hej,
   I like that you explained Plato's cave allegory again because maybe not every seminar group talked about it. It also got me thinking about Kant's categories for our perception again - what did you think about? I find it however astonishing that you found the texts for theme 2 harder to understand than the Kant and Plato texts from the first week, for me it was totally the other way around.
   I disagree with what you write about Adorno & Horkheimer's perception of the revolutionary potential of art. As I understood it, they do think that entertainment cinema has an impact on people's lives, but not necessarily a good one - it gives people the impression that they cannot change anything in their lives. So, it has a negative impact on them instead of supporting revolution. http://gklo.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-critical-media-studies-post.html?showComment=1442897867056
8. Hej,
   You seem to have had a good understanding of the two texts even before the seminar. It's interesting to read your examples for clarification - I was in another seminar and did not hear about the paintings in the Swedish university. I also appreciate that you clarified nominalism again in such detail. It seems that the lecturer helped you to get a better understanding of the concept, too! http://ninopmedia.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-reflections-0-false-18-pt-18-pt.html?showComment=1442923356256
9. Hej,
   it was sort of hard to follow your example from the paper for theme 3 which you used to clarify sub/superstructure. It would have been interesting to read about it in more detail and more understandably - I find we always learn the most if we connect the different learnings over the weeks. It seems to be the same case for you!  http://happyblogger7.blogspot.se/2015/09/reflections-of-theme-2.html?showComment=1442923515769
10. Hej,
    Interesting to read your post and your reflections! You connected a summary of the lecture/seminar with your personal examples (or from other online sources) and examples from the seminar, that probably helped you to understand it better and it's also helpful for the readers of your blog! http://alexisdm2572.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-seminar_21.html?showComment=1442923715337

Theme 1 - Theory of knowledge and theory of science

1. Hej,
   I really liked your pre-lecture post and your answers to the questions. Especially the example of water in its different states is a very interesting case to talk about cognition and objects influencing each other! It's a very hard concept to get your head around, but your water example really provided me with a new perspective! 
   For your "afterthoughts" post, I would have liked to see more of your personal learning journey and how you think about the texts and concepts after the lecture and seminar instead of mainly reading a summary of the lecture.
   Have fun in week two! http://mediatechmishmash.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and-theory_13.html?showComment=1442231672848
2. Hej,
   I especially liked reading your reflective post about last week's lecture and seminar. It seems that the discussion in the seminar group helped you understand Kant better - I felt the same. I was, however, in another seminar group, so it was very interesting to read about your "playground" metaphor you had in the seminar! http://meglia.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-theme-1.html?showComment=1442232798666
3. Hej, 
   I like that you looked at some other philosophers after the lecture, but I felt that you could have elaborated a bit more on how they relate to your insights on Plato. I also would have liked if you could have written more about your individual learnings from the lecture and the seminar - what did you understand better? Which new questions did you come up with? http://mediafluttery.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-sumtheory-of-knowledge-and.html?showComment=1442233047369
4. Hi,
   I liked your example of softness vs. hardness to clarify the experience problem in relation to Kant's text.
   And I really enjoyed reading your reflective post because I can really follow your thoughts through the week. Especially your discussion about truth was very interesting - the approach with asking everybody on the world and still not having an absolute truth because it is not an infinite amount of people (very mathematical reasoning!). Thanks for sharing your thoughts! http://gamlagreker.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflection.html?showComment=1442233455634
5. Hi!
   It's very interesting to read your reflections on the first week. I felt the same that the seminar and the lecture clarified a lot of the previously difficulties with understanding Plato and especially Kant! I also liked your statement that there are as many worlds as there are people - that is probably true. I think it's always so easy to just assume that people around us should see everything in the same way, but we are all individuals! http://butlikewhyisit.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflection.html?showComment=1442233715072
6. Hi,
   interesting read! What especially stuck out for me was the discussion you had in your seminar group about age and experience which comes with it limiting our perception. On the one hand you could argue that more knowledge helps you to understand more and take different perspectives, on the other hand it might be that our perception becomes limited through knowing "too much" already - really interesting thought and definitely food for discussion! http://theoandmeth.blogspot.se/2015/09/reflection-of-theme-1.html?showComment=1442235166483
7. Hi,
   interesting blog posts on the topic!
   From your pre-lecture post I liked the part about intuition and we still have to remember that it comes from cognition. I personally had a real struggle with the a priori/a posteriori concepts, as well!
   I would have liked to read more about specific examples of your discussion group in the seminar and what exactly became clearer for you. http://bjornsblogggg.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-post-reflection.html?showComment=1442235498248
8. Hi,
   What astonished me is that you found Kant an easier read than Plato - I experienced it totally the other way around. But I felt exactly like you after the lecture, I had a hard time understanding how a priori knowledge should exist without a posteriori knowledge! I was in another seminar group and we focused our discussion mainly on these two Kantian concepts, that helped me a lot! But I also find it interesting to read your reflections on the discussion about truth. http://remarkableathenianyouth.blogspot.se/2015/09/wrap-up-on-theory-of-knowledge-or-where.html?showComment=1442235752229
9. Hi Paul, 
   Thank you for sharing your thoughts - really interesting. What I liked in your "pre" blogpost was that you also explained the struggle you had with the texts and how you managed the exercise. 
   Your "post" blogpost summarised really well what you learned through the lecture and the seminar - it's also interesting to see how you linked it to what you learned about logic in your bachelor's degree! http://paullinderoth.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and-theory_14.html?showComment=1442240060760
10. Hi,
    Your thought "perception differs within person" is really interesting - we might not perceive things the same every time we look at them. This really got me starting to think!
    About your reflections, I like how you describe the problems you had before the lecture, but it would have been nice to read more about how you think about your question now. Did you find answers during the seminar? http://cliodile.blogspot.se/2015/09/after-theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and.html?showComment=1442240270645

Theme 6: Qualitative and case study research (comments)

1. http://pargman420.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-seminar-reflection-6.html?showComment=1444947520409
2. http://stinazwahlen.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-seminar-theme-6-qualitative-and.html?showComment=1444948168654
3. http://dm2572rberggre.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-after.html?showComment=1444949506079
4. http://mawnzblog.blogspot.se/2015/10/reflections-post-theme-6.html?showComment=1444949962655
5. http://fromplatotocasestudies.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflections.html?showComment=1445284948318
6. http://elindm2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflections.html?showComment=1445285228187
7. http://thewind-egg.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflection.html?showComment=1445285877833
8. http://mashasthoughts123.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflection.html?showComment=1445286390264
9. http://ninopmedia.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflection-this-theme-is-more.html?showComment=1445287035379
10. http://vadfinnsegentligen.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-6-reflection.html?showComment=1445287784273

Theme 6: Qualitative and case study research (after the seminar)

Unfortunately, there was no lecture during this week. I felt that the quality and the discussions of the seminar would have profited a lot from a lecture. We asked quite general questions about what exactly defines a case study etc. in the seminar which I felt should not have been the framework for it. 

Nonetheless, I got a more defined understanding of what a case study is and what it is not. First of all, something that I had not really understood before is that "it's not the method that makes it a case study" which Ilias explained for us. A case study can use either quantitative or qualitative methods, depending on its particular research question. A fellow student in my seminar made an important point when saying that a case study "constructs its methods while it's going on". No matter which method is applied, in a case study, research is always conducted in detail and intensively (cf. Swanborn SAGEpub).
What distinguishes a case study from other forms of research is that it always investigates something new, a case that has not been researched before. Based on this new research, theories can be formed, or at least started to be formed. An observation made in a case study can be researched further to formulate a generalised theory. I had actually not understood this correctly when I explained case studies to first year students in my pre-lecture blog post. Now, however, my understanding is that incidents that are unique, new or simply not researched yet are used in case studies with the aim of gaining insights into them and understand them. This can then lead to establishing a theory through further research but, unlike I though after reading the paper for this theme, a case study does not necessarily start with the aim of creating a theory about something. 

In our group discussion, we mainly exchanged which research papers we had chosen for this theme. This is always interesting to hear, although not even this discussion helped us to clearly define what a case study was before bringing it up with Ilias. 
After the smaller discussion, Ilias told us about Paul Feyerabend and his publication Against Method with the main argument that "anything goes" in research (cf. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). The Austrian philosopher wanted to argue against too rigid methods and definitions in science which limit researchers and scientists. I personally found this to be a very fitting end of this course's final seminar. I had a very good understanding of research methods in social sciences, based on courses and practical experiences from my bachelor's degree. There however, we had always stuck to very precise definitions and executions of these methods. In this respect, this course was eye-opening to me, especially the topics of design and case study research because I learned that research can be defined by the researcher him- or herself. To me, this seems very liberating with regard to upcoming research projects during the master's degree. 

Theme 5: Design research (comments)

1. http://alexisdm2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/for-this-weeks-theme-i-have.html?showComment=1444838983970
2. http://reb2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-design-research_12.html?showComment=1444839619447
3. https://tmmkappa.wordpress.com/2015/10/11/theme-5-post-reflection-2/comment-page-1/#comment-23
4. http://stinazwahlen.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-theme-5-quantitative-research.html?showComment=1444840401964
5. http://pargman420.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-seminar-reflection-5.html?showComment=1444842752516
6. http://mashasthoughts123.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflection.html?showComment=1444843102690
7. http://thewind-egg.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflection.html?showComment=1444843524510
8. http://ixxzw.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-after.html?showComment=1444843795273
9. http://remarkableathenianyouth.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-design-research-or-how-to-define.html?showComment=1444844015817
10. http://lard-have-mercy.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-theme-5-design-research.html?showComment=1444844600974

Theme 5: Design research (after the two lectures)

In this week's theme about design research, I learned a lot more than I had expected, to be honest. Frankly, I did not think there was so much to know about design research before, but that was only because I actually knew so little about it that I had no understanding about it. 

The research papers we read for this theme were already quite interesting because I had never read any design study before. It was, however, only the lectures that I fully understood what it really is about and how to do design research. From Haibo Li's lecture I mainly took away how important it is to dedicate time to the preparation and the precise phrasing of the research question to address the real problem which needs to be investigated. 90% of the time should go into this definition phase and the remaining 10% should be spent on solving the problem. He also introduced us to the five criteria Cisco used in their innovation competition to define the next big idea (cf. Harvard Business Review):

• Does it address a real pain point?
• Will it appeal to a big enough market? 
• Is the timing right?
• If we pursue the idea, will we be good at it?
• Can we exploit the opportunity for the long term, or would this market commoditize so quickly that we wouldn’t be able to stay profitable?

I think these criteria are quite important to keep in mind when conducting design research or when trying to come up with a new idea or solution in general. 

The other lecture by Anders Lundström was really eye-opening for me and my understanding of research as a broad field in general. I understood the purpose and nature of design research much better through his lecture. For example, in my pre-post I had a false understanding of what the empirical data was because I was thinking too much in the framework of traditional quantitative/qualitative research. Now I understand that design research is a completely different field and that it is not at all as developed as the other research fields but it is rather in its beginnings as a discipline. I looked for some more information about design research after the seminar and found the Swedish Design Research Journal which is a available for free and they have very interesting articles for those who also became more interested in this field!

Theme 4: Quantitative research (comments)

1. http://gklo.blogspot.de/2015/09/theme-4-quantitative-methods-post.html?showComment=1443875932056
2. http://pargman420.blogspot.de/2015/09/post-seminar-reflection-4.html?showComment=1443876561563
3. http://happyblogger7.blogspot.de/2015/09/theme-4-reflection.html?showComment=1443877163823
4. http://capitalmyboy.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-post-theme-post.html?showComment=1444579105786
5. http://amlinden.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflections.html?showComment=1444580061190
6. http://thewind-egg.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflection.html?showComment=1444580760122
7. http://cliodile.blogspot.se/2015/10/after-theme-4-quantitative-research.html?showComment=1444581207104
8. http://dm2572fan.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-theme-4.html?showComment=1444581815284
9. http://fromplatotocasestudies.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflections.html?showComment=1444583202239
10. http://dm2572byen.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-quantitative-research.html?showComment=1444583937580

Theme 6: Qualitative and case study research (before)

Select a media technology research paper that is using qualitative methods. The paper should have been published in a high quality journal, with an “impact factor” of 1.0 or above. The following are examples of questions to discuss in your blog posting:

• Which qualitative method or methods are used in the paper? Which are the benefits and limitations of using these methods?
• What did you learn about qualitative methods from reading the paper?
• Which are the main methodological problems of the study? How could the use of the qualitative method or methods have been improved?

For the qualitative research part of this week, I chose the paper "The 'credibility paradox' in China's science communication: Views from scientific practitioners", written by Joy Yueyue Zhang and published in Public Understanding of Science, which has an impact factor of 1.766 (cf. SAGE Journals).

In this paper, Zhang presented a small-scale qualitative study about science communication in China. She decided to investigate this subject because there are so far only studies about the results of science communication in China but not about the communicative process. Zhang did not aim at doing a representative study with a definitive result but instead provide a first research on the subject. She conducted in-depth interviews with 21 Chinese scientists who were all from environmental and biomedical sciences, two of the main scientific investment areas in China. The participants were deliberately chosen from these fields because they are more exposed to media and have therefore more relevant experience. The sampling was done with a combination of purposeful and snowballing sampling - universities were asked to appoint professors who were then asked to suggest other colleagues. 

I think that this research technique was very suitable for Zhang's purpose with the study. The qualitative interviews led to detailed insights but also let her discover the credibility paradox experienced by most participants. The credibility paradox describes the Chinese researchers' experience that their credibility in their research communication is higher when they chose informal contexts instead of officially scientific ones. Of course, a limitation of this study is that these findings might only be relevant for the limited group of researchers in the fields of environmental and biomedical sciences. However, since this was supposed to be an initial study, general representativeness was not the study's aim. 

As I had worked with qualitative research before, I did not learn too much about the methods from reading this paper. However, Zhang used the NVivo software to transcribe, code and analyse the interviews. I have never used this software before, so this could be interesting in future projects. 

The only methodological problem I can see with the study is the sampling of participants. Interviewees were recruited based on recommendations and only within a very limited field of study, this might have influenced the outcome of the study. Nonetheless, this study was similar to Ilias' study with the virtual reality drumming, as both of them only wanted to be a starting point for a new research field. 

Select a media technology research paper that is using the case study research method. The paper should have been published in a high quality journal, with an “impact factor” of 1.0 or above. Your tasks are the following:

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

A case study is a research which examines a specific case to draw general conclusions. A particular event, project or company, for example, can be observed and analysed in a natural or artificial situation. Based on this specific situation, the case study report can be written and can function as a reference for future similar cases. Case studies can also be the starting point of new theories developed based on the observations made.

• 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.

I chose "(Re)Tweeting in the service of protest: Digital composition and circulation in the Occupy Wall Street movement" by Joel Penney and Caroline Dadas, published in New Media & Society which has an impact factor of 2.007 (cf. SAGE journals). This case study of the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement investigates how protestors can use Twitter to network outside of the mainstream media context. 

In her paper on case study research, Eisenhardt defines an 8-step-process for successful theory building from case studies. In the following, I will analyse my chosen case study based on these steps. 

1. Getting Started
• Penney & Dadas start with an introduction into the OWS movement and the use of digital media in general, as well as how Twitter particularly got associated with the OWS movement.
2. Selecting Cases
• In this step, the OWS case study does not follow Eisenhardt's process of first defining a research question and then selecting a specific case. Penney & Dadas had a given phenomenon, the OWS movement, and decided to use it as a case study for Twitter user typology, so they inverted the initial phase. Yet, the sampling was very purposeful and not random, so it complied with Eisenhardt. 
3. Crafting Instruments and Protocols
• The researchers decided on qualitative in-depth interviews with Twitter users who frequently used the OWS hashtags (#OWS, #Occupy, #occupywallstreet, ...). They conducted 17 in-depth interviews, following Sullivan & Porter's (cf. Spinuzzi) principle of continuous researcher reflexivity and the postmodern methodology of sensitivity towards local conditions, i.e. the environment of Twitter.
4. Entering the Field
• In this step, Eisenhardt suggests an overlap of data collection and analysis, which was the case in Penney & Dadas' research - they started to analyse collected interview data in terms of their context and background. They did, however, not broaden their data collection method after their initial research design and sampling. 
5. Analysing Data
• With the detailed analysis of the interviews, the researchers could develop a typology of Twitter users in a protest situation. There were some individual insights, as well as common ones, such as intended audience of the Twitter users. 
6. Shaping Hypotheses
• The construction of the Twitter typology is the hypotheses phase in Eisenhardt's model. Even though this OWS case study did not aim at creating a theory in the sense of Eisenhardt, this can still be seen as the part where the theoretical framework for this topic was developed.  
7. Enfolding Literature
• Penney & Dadas do not discuss conflicting literature in great detail, but they continuously bring in theoretical work by others. The two authors broaden the context in which their analysis is conducted. Twitter as a platform in general is discussed with its limitations and potential restrictions. 
8. Reaching Closure
• In the final part of their case study, the researchers conclude that Twitter as a platform plays a particularly important role in protests such as OWS and that the users they describe in their typology multiply continuously. Penney & Dadas also discuss the limitations and risks Twitter as a service embodies and how they have to be taken into account in protest communication. 

All in all, Penney & Dadas do not follow Eisenhardt's definition of the case study process too much. This is mainly because of the different intentions of the model and their particular research. Penney & Dadas had a specific case of the Occupy Wall Street movement and wanted to analyse this, which is not the same as for Eisenhardt who developed the model to construct theories from case studies.