About quantitative research, I had several learning points from the lecture.
"Your results come out of an argument, not just measuring something." the lecturer said and this was food for thought. My impression prior to class was indeed measuring data as a core part of quantitative research, which is only on the surface of quantitative research. The argument is the skeleton and the measurement merely part of the body. So the “why” which I mentioned in the previous post on quantitative research is present in quantitative research as well.
To discuss the particular study about drumming in virtual reality further, my impression originally was that research methods were mixed, but during the lecture learned they were solely quantitative. Qualitative methods were used to control the sample, but it didn't contribute to the hypothesis and result therefore not considered - this was new to me.
In my initial post, I criticised several aspects of using an additional avatar. However, the avatar was chosen also to serve purpose as an audience to affect the person so it was a conscious and strategic decision. Considering that, I can better understand that choice.
Research question was: “Do people behave differently under a body ownership illusion? Does the body shape our behavior and illusion?”
Knowing this, the study did draw some new conclusions to answer this.
VR can be used to transform sense of place. The body shapes the way we play, and can also transform the self.
One thing I wondered was why specifically Caucasians were selected. The reason was simple; Caucasians were easy to recruit, no conscious choice was made selecting this group.
Asking whether or not the study could have been improved, the researcher would use the same hardware but better software and graphics card to speed up the process. Expensive equipment was used where it cost 2M SEK only for one small piece of equipment. Considering how much time has passed, surprisingly little had changed with VR technology.
A problem with research especially where technology is involved discussed was peer review. The process can take several years; way more extensive than expected. Quality and recency are both important factors to consider, therefore this ”bottleneck” is crucial to take into consideration when planning a study, especially within Media management and technology fields where changes happen quickly. This is something where potential solutions can be discussed for all type of research, perhaps to further be discussed in the topic of Research through Design.
Thank you for a very good reflection! I always enjoy your entries - they are well presented and it is obvious that you put a lot of reflection into them.
ReplyDeleteFor this week's theme, I was also confused (and a little bit upset, to be honest) about the sample and its ethnic homogeneity. Even with the given explaination of caucasians being easier to access, I believe that the sampe for the study was problematic. I think that great research has to go beyond what is accessible, beyond what it easy.
It would be interesting to read some of your reflections on the sample, now that you know the reason for its homogeneity!
Even after knowing that the sample was chosen on basis of being simple to recruit, one could argue that why did the researchers pay attention to their ethnicity (and other ethnicities within the study) unless they thought it was relevant? So yes, I still see a problem with it. I also agree with what you say, that great research shouldn't take the easy way out. Intent is important, and the sample should be selected with care. Those are personal opinions of course, but a good researcher should in my opinion always question why they make the choices they do.
DeleteThanks for the interesting reflection, I learned a lot from reading your post. It seems that you put a lot of efforts on explaining the quantitative methods, which give me insightful understanding on this approach on conducting the experiment.
ReplyDeleteYou made an interesting point on the research: why Caucasians specifically are chosen to participate in the experiment? I had the same doubt in the lecture as well. And you gave a reasonable explanation, it's easier to recruit. However, I think the result will be more valid if the researcher can get more participants from different nationalities.
Allo,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your reflection, yes lots of research are based on quantitative method because they base their research on numbers, data, information they can gather as much as possible in order to get a wider view of their study. Then they match their information between each other and try to understand what they mean. When trying to understand a problem, quantitative research offers a global point of view that his very good for understanding. We often say that we need to see the bigger picture.
Now that you mention caucasian only in the study is that it was in spain so this is mostly the biggest part of the population. But thinking the result would change completely based on the origin of people is a bit racist, don't you think ? Even though if the body ownership illusion makes us act as the gender we see already is ...
Good reflection though !
The reason for selecting Caucasians was given by the researcher, as I wrote; ease of access. On the other hand one could criticise why it was mentioned that they had this background unless they found that it mattered? As other commenters said, I think the homogenous sample could be a problem but one could of course not know that before testing.
DeleteEven though the majority of the population in Barcelona is Catalan Spanish, I don’t think it is a valid explanation for not including any minority groups in the study. In my opinion, the selection should represent the city’s inhabitants at large. As ten percent of Barcelona’s inhabitants are ethnical minorities, why not include this group? As a research all choices need to be conscious. I find your reflection regarding the bottleneck effect interesting! You raise good point, what we find to be hot stuff today, might be considered yesterdays news when our study is finally accessible to the public.
ReplyDeleteHello! You have the great ability to produce narrative text which snatches the reader with it – thank you for that! Not to mention the good reflecting on your learning, which is always honest and accurate. You brought up an interesting point even with the equipment that was used, and draw the connection between the rapidly changing media technologies and media landscape. I can also see the problem in the peer reviewing process and how it could be harmful in the fields of technology, since it's at constant movement and new innovations sometimes out shadow the purpose of old ones. Great job!
ReplyDeleteI think your reflection was very interesting to read, and something you write about that I as well found interesting is peer review. It was new to me and I had no idea it could take that long. I would ask if that really is a good thing, especially in the field of media and media technology, where things change so quickly. I remember we spoke about this during my BA, as we studied social media a lot, it was quite difficult finding good and relevant literature, as it would take so long to get anything published, by the time it was, things had already changed and a lot of the time it felt outdated.
ReplyDelete