I'm going to give it a go...;) I mean, how much worse can it be than a time-motion study of knee replacements including all players using various surgical methods for the purpose of creating new instrumentation? I'm a glutton for punishment...
Your suggestions are great! On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 7:02 PM, Christine Boese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Christine, > > Yup, that sort of tagging is just like more formal methods of content > analysis, such as like socio-linguists use. You might pick up one of those > small paperback Sage publications that run through an overview of content > analysis methods, just so you are rigorous in your tags and how you assign > them, or perhaps look to multiple raters/coders/taggers and establish a > baseline of inter-rater reliability. > > See, the trouble with winging it is you could spend a lot of time on a > taggin/coding schema, and you might discover (or worse, not discover and be > oblivious) to the fact that your schema is giving you bad data, which then > becomes bad conclusions. That would be a nightmare. > > So you'd want a really STRONG pilot project, and lots and lots of feedback > to make sure the method will yield both reliable and useful results. Hone > the method out, THEN turn it into your hamburger grinder and see what kind > of burgers you get. > > And then trot your great new method out at the next IxDA conference and > tell us all about it, so we can try it too, and replicate it, and further > test the usefulness of the results! > > I don't say this to put you off by the amount of work entailed. Following > vigorous and careful research methods may seem like a huge mountain to > climb, but it can also be creative, interesting, and really valuable. I'm > hoping you do it! We could use some fresh and innovative methods. > > Chris > > > On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 2:40 PM, christine chastain < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Thanks for your thoughtful input, Chris! Being a designer and >> ethnographer, I think what I have in my head is actually tagging behaviors, >> interactions, even materiality in video or other self-reported data and then >> coming up with a way to code those that would show patterns over time. So >> imagine taking all visual materials from a time-motion study, for example, >> and tagging all behaviors, interactions and things, feeding that into some >> magical formula that would allow you to cross tab and identify patterns from >> which you could then produce a lifestyle narrative. So awesome...time >> consuming but could be amazing. And you could still have "other" qualitative >> input overlayed onto that. >> >> >> On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Christine Boese < >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Generally (and forgive me if you are already familiar with these methods) >>> the way to go is with methods of content analysis such as sociolinguists >>> use. I always used to think part of the beauty of Q-sort methods is that >>> they have wonderful open-ended approaches, yet the data can be crunched. >>> >>> But this is an area where invention and inventiveness could really push >>> on boundaries of what is possible. The problem is, most researchers tend to >>> have either a quantitative or qualitative bias. Multi-modal stuff is >>> interesting, tho! Triangulate! >>> >>> >>> >> > ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
