Theme 4: Quantitative Research

The assignment for this week is a more open one than previous weeks. This time I am going to choose a research paper that is using quantitative methods in a good way and reflect on its use of research methods, Then I am going to read a paper written by guest lecturer Olle Bälter and reflect on the key points and what the text taught me. Two discussion questions follows the second text:

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

2. Which are the benefits and limitations of using qualitative methods?

--- --- --- ---

The paper that I have chosen is called Measuring Mobile Phone Use: Self-Report Versus Log Data and was written by Jeffrey Boase in 2013. It examines the validity of self-report data to a log-based report system when it comes to the usage of cell phones. The method consisted of a questionaire allowing users to self-report their phone habits over the chosen period of time. This was then compared to data collected from the telecom operators and the writers of the report could analyze the reports made by the users to see how they percepted their own usage habits.

The writers admit to having some limitations with their research and list the geographical and cultural context of Norway (where the research took place) may not be representative for other societies. This is however a problem that most all studies suffer from; it is difficult to achieve a generaliziing result that is representative for any crowd other than the actual one being researched. It was mentioned that people who avoid such studies would possibly answer the survey differently from people who participate. Taking this a small step further, I can also imagine that people like to be percived as something they neccessarily are not and that they therefore "tweak" their answers to make themselves appear more sophisticated.

I found this paper interesting since I took part in a study regarding phone habits that some fellow classmates of mine did for their bachelor's thesis. I had to estimate the amount of time I spent with my cell phone and if I remember correctly it did not match the actual time very well. My own case is proof enough to me that self-reporting may not be as accurate as log-reporting, but I think that the combination that this report used is a good way to get a general perception of the usage.

The paper by Olle Bälter (et al) investigates a potential relationship between stress, physical health and Upper Respiratory Tract Infection, URTI. URTI includes diseases such as the flu and having a cold and it is one of the most common diseases in several countries. As a basis of the reserch quantitative online questionnaires were used where test persons belonging in the target group submitted information, since a previous study made by the authors had shown pleasing results using the same method.

1. Using quantitative methods, such as questionnaires, allows the researcher to collect a lot of data in a short period of time. The method also makes it easy for the test person since the questions often wants yes/no answers or just a brief commentary. A negative aspect of quantitative methods is that it is difficult to get any insight in the target group and the results will perhaps be generic.

2. Qualitative methods are beneficial because they provide inclusive data and the researcher gets to go in depth during, for example, an interview and ask questions that a form could not ask. Another good thing about qualitative methods is the fact that the answers are real and not some sort of average of the target group. However, a drawback from using these methods is that the result will be valid only for the specific case that provided the data and may not properly represent the complete research.

Theme 3: Research and Theory - Reflection

After attending the seminar this week I realize that my assumption regarding the type of theory was not exactly correct. Lecturer Leif Dahlberg explained the different types during the seminar which was helpful for trying to define the theory in a certain text. I looked back on the text I read about Khan Academy and now I would say that the theory of the text consists of a combination of the five types defined by Gregor. During the seminar this concept was something that came into discussion and Dahlberg argued that theories seldom are pure but rather a combination of several types. Worth mentioning, though, is that the five theories presented by Gregor aims to be extentions of each other; type II, explanation, is for example a continuation of type I, analysis, as analysis is one part of explanation as a whole.

This theme was a little more difficult than the previous two, but to me it had more relevant content and I feel like the things I have learned will be useful in future courses. One thing that stuck to me was the argument that studies are controlled by their theories and that the more developed a theory is, the easier it becomes to do a valuable study. This is very interesting and from experience I would have to agree with the statement. My best reports have been the ones where I have put much time and thought into the early stages, such as theory, of the process. I would say that theory can be seen as the foundation and prep work of a study, and if you don't have a proper foundation you cannot get a steady house.

Theme 3: Research and Theory

The assessment for this theme consists of three parts. First I am going to find and write a short description of a journal that is relevant for media technology research. Then I am going to select a research paper, write a short summary of the paper and provide a critical examination of it. Thirdly I'm going to read two articles, "The Nature of Theory in Information Systems" by Shirley Gregor and "What Theory is Not" by Robert I. Sutton. The final part of the assessment consists of answering the following questions based on the literature above:

1. Briefly explain to a first year university student what theory is, and what theory is not.

2. Describe the major theory or theories that are used in your selected paper. Which theory type (see Table 2 in Gregor) can the theory or theories be characterized as?

3. Which are the benefits and limitations of using the selected theory or theories?

Journal and paper:

My chosen journal is Computers in Human Behavior. The title insinuates that the journal is focusing on HCI, Human-computer interaction, and its description on Elsevier.com confirms this presumption to a certain extent. The journal discusses the computer as a medium for expression and communication rather than its technical specs. Themes of the journal are such as computer usage in psychiatry as well as psychological impacts of computer usage. The journal has an impact factor of 2.489 which is one of the higher factors of the journals that were suggested on the course web page. 

From this journal I found a paper called "ALAS-KA: A learning analytics extension for better understanding the learning process in the Khan Academy platform" written in 2014. The paper is written by José A. Ruipérez-Valientea (et al.) and it examines an extention tool for the popular learning platform Khan Academy. The tool, called ALAS-KA, was developed by the authors of the paper and is an addition to the already existing Analytics support offered by Khan Academy. The authors present new ways to visualize learning curves and knowledge improvements but one thing that I'm missing is a proper hypothesis or research question. The aim of the paper is to present the add-on tool and I feel that the main concepts are all very well defined which is very important in order to make the reader understand what the paper is presenting.

My thoughts on the questions:

1. In order to explain what theory is, let's start by defining what theory is not. According to Sutton, references, data, diagrams, hypotheses or a list of variables are not examples of theory, despite frequently being used as it by authors. It's not enough to list existing theories by using references, you have to examine them and present their logic. The theory should provide explanations, predictions and prescriptions.

2. According to Gregor theory can be divided into five types of categories depending on how thorough and well-developed they are. In my selected paper the theory is that the existing learning analytics of Khan Academy can be improved with more graphics and improved in-depth analysis. The paper provides explanation of the newly visualisation with the help of a MOOC and predicts that there are benefits with using such an analysis tool. This would go under the fourth type: Explanation and Prediction (EP).

3. Some benefits of using this theory are that the research becomes plausible and more in-depth and the theory opens up for a well-structured paper or essay. However, the research can become too advanced, making it difficult to get any conclution or understanding of the text, thus sometimes the first categories of theory may be more suitable.

Theme 2: Critical Media Studies - Reflection

The theme of this week was similar to the first one in the sense that we were, in both of them, discussing philosophical texts that were questioning the way we picture the world. During the lecture Henrik Åhman stated the rethorical question about how one were to handle the crisis of the enlightenment nad stated three possibilities: American capitalism, German nationalism and Russian communism. He also talked about the authors' history and about what their lives looked like which was very interesting and gave me a bettter understanding of their motives and outlooks. I found the life of Walter Benjamin and his thoughts on facism contra culture and art to be particularily interesting and I found it curious that he turned into Marxism quite late in his life.

I think that the seminar setup improved in time for the second seminar. The first time the lecturer did a good job of explaining the subject and how one can see things from different perspectives, but the seminar did not invite the students to discussing themselves. This time we were put in groups of three or four, where we would discuss a set of questions handed out to us. I think discussing with someone who is on the same level as yoursself is very helpful, because you get to see things from a different perspective without being exhausted from trying to understand a more complicated "language".

The questions we discussed led us into modern society in several ways. The connection between politics and ideologies of  the early 1900s, and those of today, tells us that we need to know our history in order to not make the same mistake twice. Yet those mistakes seem to repeat themselves over and over again.

Theme 1: Theory of knowledge and theory of science - Reflection

The first theme of the course threw me right into the web of philosophy and I have to admit that the texts, especially Kant's preface, were difficult to read and understand fully. Plato's text was more understandable as it was made up of a dialogue between people which I find easier to understand than long texts with less context.

I was given two questions that related to the texts and these questions helped me to understand more what I was reading. I feel like they gave me guidance and after I finished my first blog post I thought I had a fair understanding of the subject. However the lecture given later on proved otherwise. Lecturer Johan Eriksson gave an introduction to the subject before starting to analyze the texts by Kant and Plato. He talked about analytic (a priori) and synthetic judgements and then continued to discuss the possibility of a combination of the two opposites. I am still not sure if there is such a thing that represents synthetic a priori knowledge, but Kant tried to ponder about this by using Copernicus as an example, as I mentioned briefly in my previous post for this theme. In order to understand this we must free our minds from what is considered the truth.

During the seminar Eriksson did most of the talking and only a few of us students even participated at all in the discussions. I think that the way the seminar was setup didn't invite to a lot of discussion and the seminar leader seemed happy to further explain the concepts and the thoughts of the philosophers but I feel that he should have pushed us into talking, or at least asking questions, a bit more. However I do think that it is a bit disrespectful to not say one word during the whole seminar, because even if you don't understand much of the subject there is an excellent guide with us that can help explaining any issues. We are, after all, here to learn.

Theme 2: Critical Media Studies

The second theme revolves around two chapters from the book "Dialectic of Enlightenment" by Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno and the essay "The Work of Art in the Age of Technical Reproductivity" by Walter Benjamin. This blog post will discuss the following questions:

1. Dialectic of Enlightenment

a. What is "Enlightenment"?

b. What is "dialectic"?

c. What is "nominalism" and why is it an important concept in the text?

d. What is the meaning and function of "myth" in Adorno and Horkheimer's argument?

2. The Work of Art in the Age of Technical Reproductivity

a. In the beginning of the essay, Benjamin talks about the relation between "superstructure" and "substructure" in the capitalist order of production. What do the concepts "superstructure" and "substructure" mean in this context and what is the point of analyzing cultural production from a Marxist perspective?

b. Does culture have revolutionary potentials (according to Benjamin)? If so, describe these potentials. Does Benjamin's perspective differ from the perspective of Adorno & Horkheimer in this regard?

c. Benjamin discusses how people perceive the world through the senses and argues that this perception can be both naturally and historically determined. What does this mean? Give some examples of historically determined perception (from Benjamin's essay and/or other contexts).

d. What does Benjamin mean by the term "aura"? Are there different kinds of aura in natural objects compared to art objects?

Here are my thoughts on the questions:

1 a. Horkheimer and Adorno begins their first chapter by telling the reader that enlightenment is "the advance of thought" and that its purpose is to uncover the world with its mysteries and enchantments. This can be compared to Socrates' discussion about knowledge as perception and how Protagoras said that man is the measure of all things. Our thoughts are colored by perception and it is the combination of the two that leads us to knowledge, wisdom and enlightenment.

b. Going back, once again, to Socrates and Theaetetus' discussions; their form of argument can be seen as dialectic. When different opinions on a matter have surfaced the two (or more) parties listen to each other in order to essentially find the truth together.

c. Nominalism is a theory which claims that universal objects exists only in theory and that only individual objects are real. This can be understood as so that the grouping of things can only exist in people's minds and are only a way of describing the actual individual objects. Nominalism relates to enlightenment as both terms encourages realism and the dismissal of myths.

d. Generally, a myth is a story that indicates true events but which takes place in a scenery that contains illusions and fictious creatures. The writers of The Dialectic of Enlightenment describes myth as false clarity and argues that it is "distinguished by its familiarity and its exemption from the work of concepts". 

2 a. In Marxist theory the term superstructure is a way of describing the culture, ideas and the power structure of a society while substructure can be translated into the bureaucracy that the superstructure is built upon. Benjamin talks about how it takes a long time to transform a superstructure which complicates the possibilities to analyze the change. He continues to say that the tools and concepts that are introduced from such analysis are “useless for the purposes of Fascism” but further insinuates that they may be of great value to those of Marxism and socialism.

b. Considering what I mentioned above in 2 a. Benjamin gives the impression that culture does indeed have revolutionary potential. The film industry is a great example of this. The film gives humans the possibility to express themselves and to portray and represent a certain environment with the help of a camera. The film shows the viewer a seemingly objective and straight-forward view of the world. This, in combination with mass distribution, turns the film medium into a powerful weapon of possible deception.

c. The human perception can be determined in not only a natural sense but in a historical sense as well. The author argues that perception changes over periods of history and that historical events and circomstances changes the way we relate to objects, social customs and manners. Benjamin talks about the shift of the art industry during the fifth century but there are numerous historical events that points towards the same conclusion. The attitude towards different minorities and ethnicities is an example from modern time. Not too long ago groups such as homosexuals or colored people (mostly in the U.S) were treated differently from other people when it came to rights or acceptance. During the middle of the last century, however, the black population started to stand up and thanks to individuals such as Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks, being black is not something a lot of people consider negative anymore. Pride festivals all over the world have helped in making the same change of attitude towards gay people as well.

d. Benjamin tells the reader that the aura of an object can be compared to the contours of said object but that it is also a bit more than that. Depending on the distance to the object (in time, space or culture) we see different elements of the aura. A quote in the essay mentions how all great artists such as Beethoven, Rembrandt and Shakespeare will be pictured in films and that those events can be seen as kinds of resurrections. What Benjamin wants to bring forward is that these resurrections as well as reproductions of famous paintings cannot depict the true aura of the original object. It is only the original art, or artist, that holds an aura.

Theme 1: Theory of knowledge and theory of science

For the first theme I have recieved two texts, Plato's Theaetetus and the preface to Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, each with an associated question as follows:

1. In the preface to the second edition of "Critique of Pure Reason" (page B xvi) Kant says: "Thus far it has been assumed that all our cognition must conform to objects. On that presupposition, however, all our attempts to establish something about them a priori, by means of concepts through which our cognition would be expanded, have come to nothing. Let us, therefore, try to find out by experiment whether we shall not make better progress in the problems of metaphysics if we assume that objects must conform to our cognition." How are we to understand this?

2. At the end of the discussion of the definition "Knowledge is perception", Socrates argues that we do not see and hear "with" the eyes and the ears, but "through" the eyes and the ears. How are we to understand this? And in what way is it correct to say that Socrates argument is directed towards what we in modern terms call "empiricism"?

Here are my thoughts on the questions:

1. In the preface to “Critique of Pure Reason” Kant talks about the secure course of science and the relevance of logic and reason within cognitions. In order to be a science the cognition must have some reason within itself, something that can be recognized a priori. Math and physics are theoretical cognitions where math is entirely pure (although it was not as easy for math as it was for logic, which only deals with reason itself, to be widely accepted). According to Kant, metaphysics has not been favored to enter upon the secure course of a science because reason always get stuck within it somehow or another.

When the question of whether we must have the objects conform to our cognition rather than having the cognition conform to objects is raised I am given the impression that the author wanted to revolutionize the way the people of his time looked at and defined science. I think that Kant wanted to change the perspective of science in the same way that Copernicus tried to figure out why the starry sky seemed to move. Copernicus at first assumed that the earth was the center of the universe but he made no progress in explaining the celestial movements with that perspective. He then had the stars stand still while the earth turned and thus found a way to understand how the solar system worked.

2. In Plato’s Theaetetus we meet Socrates who is in search of a bright man to help him figure out the definition of knowledge. He is introduced to the young Theaetetus and their dialogue is what most of the text consists of. Socrates wants to challenge the young boy’s mind by referring to a priori facts and then comparing them to the original problem in his argumentation. For example, he compares himself with his midwife mother and explains that being a teacher is like helping young minds with giving birth to their thoughts and therefore he, Socrates, is much like a midwife himself. He wants Theaetetus to think further than the question to find an answer, much in the same sense of which Kant argues about logic and reason.

Empiricism is about testing and using experience in order to prove a theory and not only rely on a priori reasoning. When Socrates urges Theaetetus to, at first, look at a simple version of the problem and then to try thinking outside the box I would say that he uses a form of philosophical or theoretical empiricism.

Hello world!

Hi and welcome,

My name is Anna Maria and I will be writing this blog during the fall of 2014. The blog is going to be my learning portfolio for the course DM2572 Theory and Method for Media Technology, which consists of six different themes.

Hopefully this will be an interesting read!

//Anna Maria