Theme 6: Qualitative and case study research

Research paper: Morality and ethics behind the screen: Young people’s perspectives on digital life

I have read the research paper Morality and ethics behind the screen: Young people’s perspectives on digital life that was published in the September 2013 issue of New Media & Society. The study is conducted by Andrea Flores and Carrie James, to draw attention to the moral and ethical issues in a time period of where emerging research illuminates how youth engage with digital media. There were 61 young people aged 15 to 25 participating in the study, who frequently engage in activities such as blogging, social networking, gaming, content creation, participation in online forums or knowledge communities.

The qualitative method used in the paper to explore the research questions is a qualitative interview. The method procedure was divided into two interviews. The first one focused on the participants’ online experiences and perceptions. The second one involved hypothetical dilemmas about online situations. All interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed. A coding scheme comprised of ‘ethic’ codes was developed, where the codes derived from the initial research questions and conceptual framework of ways of thinking. The coding scheme also included ‘emic’ codes, or codes based on themes that emerged directly from the stories and perspectives shared by the participants. For example, the participants’ emotional investment in their online activities surfaced as an important theme and thus became a basis for a code. By coding several transcripts for all codes, comparing coding, and resolving disagreements through discussion and refinement of code definitions, obtained reliability to the study. The final coding was in NVivo, a qualitative software program. A so-called shadow coder reviewed selected transcripts to ensure that reliability was maintained.

The benefits of using this method is that you gather a in-depth understanding of human behavior and the reasons that govern such behavior. What I have learn about qualitative methods by reading this paper is that they investigate why and how, not only what, where and when. The qualitative study produces a lot of information on the particular case studied, that can be used to seek empirical support for research hypotheses. One thing that could be seen as a limitation using this method, because of the low number of participants, is that general conclusions drawn are only propositions.

When to conduct a qualitative research I believe that a common methodological problem arise when to pose questions in order to measure feelings and attitudes that could be considered controversial. In an interview situation the interviewer as well as the respondent is ‘playing a role’ that all involved are aware of. It is often a straining situation that probably affects the conversation in some way. Especially if the issue discussed is somewhat controversial the respondent might respond ‘as it should be’. The design of a qualitative study, the interview and the questions posed must be planned carefully to create a situation in which the respondent in the highest degree can answer the questions truthfully. Also, the transcription of the interview must be carried out in a way that increases the validity and reliability of the study.

What is a case study?

A case study is a research strategy that combines data collection methods such as interviews, questionnaires, archives and observations. Moreover, a case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a phenomenon within its real-life context. A case study employs an embedded design, which means multiple levels of analysis is carried out within a single study. The focus is on understanding the dynamics present within single settings. The aim that a case study serves to accomplish may differ. For example, it can provide description, test a theory or generate theory. Case studies should not be confused with qualitative research, since the evidence may be a combination of both quantitative and qualitative evidence. A case study typically strengthens grounding of theory by triangulation of evidence. It is sometimes mistaken for the case method, which is not the same. Instead, a case method is a teaching approach that consists in presenting students with a case, putting them in the role of a decision maker facing a problem.

Research paper: Mode, Medium, and Genre: A Case Study of Decisions in New-Media Design

I have read the research paper Mode, Medium, and Genre: A Case Study of Decisions in New-Media Design that was published in the January 2008 issue of Business and Technical Communication. This study is conducted to investigate the relationship between genre theory and new media theories from a designer's perspective. As common in the field of media technology this research uses a case study, because it investigates settings and situation that has already entry into force.

One strength of the paper is that there are a lot of literature that brings to light the internal validity. It introduces the reader to the field by focusing on theoretical useful cases, which lay a ground to the research study conducted. Also, there is an overlap of the data collection and the analysis, which increases the theoretical level and sharpens the construct definitions. On the contrary, the paper is not likewise successful in comparing conflicting literature in order to sharpen the generalizability and reduce the risk of subjectivity.

Concerning the crafting of instruments and protocols there are two investigators carrying out this investigation. One of them is the observer and the other one is the practitioner, and both of them have different backgrounds in the field of media and communication. By doing so, it might contribute to a synergistic view of the evidence that might strengthen the grounding of theory. What they believe is that they provides a more robust account of the design process than could have maintained with a strict researcher-subject division. On the one hand, I question the fact that the observer and the practitioner of the study are related. Maybe if they carry out a study with a common purpose and might affect each other, I am not sure their course of action is advantageously for the study. On the other hand, this approach could also reduce the inference in communications, given that they hold different positions in the study and also are comfortable with each other. If so, this situation might bring up and identify different perspectives, which is a good thing as the evidence is seen thru multiple lenses.

The investigators have used multiple data collecting methods (field-observations, interview-discussions, and artifact collection). A strength with such a triangulation of evidence is the increased validity and the reliability. The analysis of the data is of the sort that is called 'within-case analysis'. In some extent, it searches for evidence of “why” behind relationships that the literature suggests. The theory is linked to the findings and there is a iterative tabulation of evidence for some of the constructs in the study, although not for every one of them. Therefore, the study succeed in some extent to shape hypotheses by confirming, extending and sharpening the theory. Finally, I believe the investigation ties it all together and reach closure.

References:

• Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
• Graham, S. Scott & Whalen, Brandon. (2008). Mode, Medium, and Genre: A Case Study of Decisions in New-Media Design. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 22(1); 65-91.
• Flores, Andrea. (2012). Morality and ethics behind the screen: Young people’s perspectives on digital life. New Media & Society, 15(6): 834-852.