after reading both your first and second blog post about Kant/Plato I can see that you've spent a lot of time discussing and thinking about what the key concepts of both texts are. I agree with you, that the concept of God's point of view might seem a little odd at first. For us it's impossible to have a view untainted by history, language and gender. Wouldn't you agree with me, that in that case, a scientific objectivity is just a dream?
Comparing your two blogs I think you did a good job to pick up where you left off and to explain more in detail what Kant was referring to. I also find it interesting how Kant says, that we can only see the world structured through categories and not differently. Still, I think that Kant wanted to climb down from God's point of view and not to elevate. If I recall this correctly, this is basically what the Critique of Pure Reason is about; that is to say to change the way we see things and to revolutionize metaphysics.
As you mentioned, Kant's ideal of objectivity is accomplished through categories and forms of intuition. But even then it's not possible to reach God's objectivity, because we can never exclude all our history, knowledge and language etc. So is scientific objectivity then even possible? Here, I find your playground example very helpful, as we didn't discuss this in my seminar. All in all, great post!
http://dm2572rberggre.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-after.html?showComment=1442411800256Hi,
I see that the seminar helped you understand both texts much better, when I compare your pre and post blog. What made me understand the a priori /posteriori concept better was the sentence "All bachelors are unmarried", which is an a priori synthetic judgement, because the word bachelor itself already states the marital status. But I also like the E.T. reference!
http://u1ifqcuc.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-theory-of-knowledge-and-theory.html?showComment=1442413183072#c6555735112273807936
Hi,
Great structure of the reflection, that made it pleasant to read your point of view. You're making a good point asking yourself if our knowledge is limited. But as far as I understood, Kant is only discussing the basic forms of categories (e.g. space and time) and not higher levels as in gender for example. Do you know what I mean?
http://mediatechnologyatkth.blogspot.se/2015/09/reflection-what-ilearnt-during-week-37.html?showComment=1442417232087#c4232010561849193147Hi,
Unfortunately we didn't have the time to discuss the Plato text in our seminar, so it was interesting to read more about what you discussed about, referring to new technologies and our perception. We also discussed the God's point of view, and how this is an impossible thing to achieve and the question how objectivity can exist under these circumstances. Overall, great posts!
http://thewind-egg.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-reflection-to-be-honest.html?showComment=1442417917164#c8275822832426164306Hi,
I liked your approach in the pre-blog to make sense out of the a priori / posteriori concepts. I agree with you, that discussing these topics within groups helps a lot, because you suddenly see so much more than you did before. Even though you don't have much background regarding philosophy, I think you did a great job to understand the literature better through taking notes and reflecting. Still, I also would have liked to see more examples of specific discussion points.
http://bjornsblogggg.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-1-post-reflection.html?showComment=1442418764709Hi,
I liked that you mentioned the "thing itself" in your pre blog, which is one of the most famous concepts of Kant. It's the fact that we can't really say anything for sure about objects around us, because our minds can only see what interpret into the object first. I also like how you tried to bring Plato and Kant together in your post blog. Great job!
http://thetheoryabouteverything.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-theme-1-reflection.html?showComment=1442419443318Hej Oscar,
I really liked your reflection on how a priori knowledge is a deductive conclusion, hence it's based on logic, while posteriori knowledge is a inductive conclusion, based on experience. Now that we will probably talk more about methods in media technology and ways to construct hypotheses, this is good to keep in mind. Furthermore I liked how detailed you discussed the concepts in comparison to the pre blog.
http://oscarlimback.blogspot.se/2015/09/after-thelecture-and-seminary-last-week.html?showComment=1442420623429 TWOHi there,
you sum up what we all have been thinking. Seems like we all had somewhat of an epiphany during class. I like how you compare your first and second blog post on theme 2 and reflect on what you've learned so far and what mistakes you have made. I also totally missed the dialectical concepts and that Benjamin never really answered the possibility of a third option for the concepts, but rather just mentioned it.
Lastly, nice quote. ;)
http://dont-panic-forty-two.blogspot.se/2015/09/in-retrospect-theme-2.html?showComment=1442999169811#c7861681557535013427Hej,
I like how you picked up the concepts of last week's questions and discussed them in more detail and more examples. As you mentioned the evolution of cameras (substructure) can lead to a change in aesthetics (superstructure). I think it's interesting to see how Benjamin thought it was revolutionary to bring ordinary people in front of the camera, whilst Adorno and Horkheimer pleaded for the opposite.
I liked your reference to media technology, as editing etc still has an important influence on how we perceive things.
http://oscarlimback.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-critical-media-studies-after.html?showComment=1443000828926Hi,
Good summary of the key concepts of the seminar. As to your question about Adorno & Horkheimer's thoughts on enlightenment and mass media:
You are right that the portrayal of young female secretaries and old male bosses are just a reflection of the social situation in the US in the 1940's.
And I guess this was their point, that there was no enlightenment at all. People were blinded by the American consumerism. Instead of showing what could be, mass media clinged to the status quo and thus created a deception, that there's no going beyond this social scenario. So the question here is, why is society oppressed by superficial commercialization, if they in fact have enlightened foundations?
http://mashasthoughts123.blogspot.se/2015/09/seminar-2-reflection.html?showComment=1443001904034#c7613062296675902196Hej Anton!
Nicely structured reflection!
I agree with you on Benjamin's point of view regarding the revolutionary potential of culture/art as it can raise awareness of things we might not see in the first place. One good example given was how horses were portrayed during the 17th century (legs up), while we finally realized through the medium of film/photography, that in fact horses always have on foot on the ground.
I'd like to add to your summary of Adorno & Horkheimer that they not only were "pessimistic" and said that "media does not have any revolutionary potential" but also that this was a deception and a suppression through consumerism rather than an enlightened state of mind and therefore has no revolutionary potential. Overall good job!
http://duckyduckyducky.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-seminar-3.html?showComment=1443002974542#c7147579796923560725Hi,
I just read your preblog and I got to say, you put a lot of thought into this. I liked your comparison to the Muslim conquest of the Iberian Peninsula in the 8th century and its effects on how art was seen. I like in your postblog how you connect all the concepts we discussed in the seminar and outline them with even more examples. Good job!
http://dm2572byen.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-critical-media-studies_20.html?showComment=1443004776028Hi Josefine,
First of all, great reflection. I agree with you that the history background made a lot of things clearer. I will also take this into consideration for the next time. I really liked your groups's example for nominalism and realism. In my semin ar we only talked about Plato's cage example. Good job!
http://platotheplatypus.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-reflection.html?showComment=1443019213807#c2211346581222183245Hi,
I agree with you that Adorno & Horkheimer don't see any revolutionary potential in culture/art. You say, you don't agree with them regarding media not to be a liberating power. Of course, nowadays media can be a channel for us to express or thoughts, but in this case you need to consider the historical circumstances. When Adorno & Horkheimer wrote "Dialectic of Enlightenment" back in 1944 they had completely different circumstances in mass media. Back then, mass media would not display potentials, but only the status quo.
http://blog4course99.blogspot.se/2015/09/reflection-on-theme-2.html?showComment=1443010034303Hi,
Great summary. I got confused myself with the concepts of revolutionary potential between Benjamin and A & H. I'm aware that the latter referred to the American consumerism and therefore did not see any potential, because mass media was more like a deception and presentation of the status quo than a vision. But Benjamin on the other hand argued, that ordinary people finally get dignified in culture/art, meaning there is a revolutionary potential.
I have therefore trouble to compare these two, because for Adorno and Horkheimer, it is not about the fact, that people are finally being shown in mass media, but that it's a repeating pattern of how they are shown, while Benjamin is emphasizing, that not only the "royals" (e.g.) are dignified in media, but also normal people. For me that sounds like two different stories. Do you know what I mean?
http://vadfinnsegentligen.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-reflection.html?showComment=1443018270942#c3455285407193934525Hi,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I really liked your reflection, it summed up all the main concepts of this week's topic. I like how you pointed out, that Benjamin emphasized that there isn't better or worse art, especially in the context of national socialism, where Hitler erased Jewish art. Benjoamin shows that the aesthetic model of German national art was only a paradigm, and that people didn't have to live like that.
http://tamfmtol.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-post-critical-media-studies.html?showComment=1443023221250#c8850916608650603053Hi Corinna,
you have written a great reflection after your preblog. I enjoyed reading it. It's good that you point out that nominalism was a way of Fascism to keep the status quo. They only stated the obvious, only registered what is or in this case argued that Germans are better than Jews, instead of showing what could have been- this is why nominalism is such an important concept in the text. Therefore you on the right track bringing up Human Rights as a new vision. Great job!
http://mediatechnologybycorinna.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-2-critical-media-studies_21.html?showComment=1443023705166#c8233724689597209024THREE Hi,
I liked how you explained the concept of theories being regarded as true with a real example, Newton's law of motion. I think the best way to truly understand all these abstract ideas and concepts is by breaking it down on a level, that is understandable for all of those, who don't have any particular experience in theoretical frameworks.
I really liked the paper you chose on second screening in the context of political participation. This seems like a topic that will be researched thoroughly in the future.
All in all, great job!
http://alexisdm2572.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-post-seminar.html#comment-formHi Emil,
Reading you pre- and postblog shows that you have grasped all the important concepts around what theory is and what theory is not. You deliver a great summary of what we have discussed in the seminar with Leif and show that there are various kinds of theories (e.g. scientific, philosophical..). I would have liked to read a little bit more about the various types of research, as in hermeneutics or artistic research. But I liked your reference from applied research to KTH. Good job!
http://thetheoryabouteverything.blogspot.se/2015/09/post-theme-3-theory-and-research.html?showComment=1443688526447
Hi,
I really liked your reflection, especially because you incorporated so many new examples that I haven't heard in my seminar group. However, I find it quite difficult to distinguish between what your own thoughts are, and what John Wacker has written, as you don't reference to his work in your reflection itself.
I suggest that you specify your sources for the next time. Other than that, I liked how you clearly made a huge progress from your preblog on this topic to this reflection. Great job!
http://cliodile.blogspot.se/2015/09/after-theme-3-research-and-theory.html?showComment=1443689158294 Hello,
I liked how you reflected on statements you wrote in your preblog, thus completing the circle of learning and understanding. I agree with you, that theories cannot be verified completely, but that they are rather regarded as true instead. Or in your words "commonly accepted". In our group we discussed also that truth is relative and that we can find it through falsification. Would you agree with that?
http://u1vfukfo.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-post-posting-research-and-theory.html?showComment=1443689774126#c8883245581449632218Hi Elvira,
I just read your preblog and your critical examination on your chosen journal article. You said that "the students got a $5 credit for filling out the survey, which I think can have had a negative affect on the result. It may have led to students only answering the survey just to get the 5 dollars.
In the paper they use a regression analysis-method, which I think can have been a problem for the result."
Giving incentives for participants is quite common, so I'm not sure if this would have had a negative effect on the answers given. Of course, some might not have been totally intrinsically motivated to fill out the survey, but that is a problem that we have in any study, incentive given or not. I would have liked to know more about why you think, that a regression analysis might have caused problems for the result?
In your reflection you show that you have given this topic a thought and really tried to grasp the concepts of the different types of theories. I also had trouble in understanding them. I like how you directly quoted what Leif Dahlberg said about what theory is. Great reflection!
http://dm2572elvira.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-research-and-theory-post-seminar.html?showComment=1443691439978#c5427275597265555585Hi Arvid,
I really liked your critical reflection of your chosen journal article by Kuo and Chang, and I totally agree with you that statistical data from Google Analytics is not enough to make any assumptions. As you stated, data without a theory is useless, because you need the theoretical framework to make sense out of it. All in all, good job!
http://theoatmeth.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-post-seminar.html?showComment=1443693042393#c1696876218698492684Hi Marcus,
I can see that you've taken your time to comment and analyze your chosen journal article for this week. I like that you took your time to reflect on the whole process of finding the article in the first place and how you then had more fun reading it, because it was a topic you enjoy personally.
I would have liked to read more about conclusions you've drawn from this week's lecture, e.g. what types of research are there, what's the difference between a hypothesis and a theory etc. But nevertheless I loved your really personal point of view how the lecture/seminar was. Good reflection!
http://vadfinnsegentligen.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-reflection.html?showComment=1443693583264#c4750030609318977654Hi Julian,
You have written a compact summary of this week's topic and included important key concepts like the difference between theory and hypothesis and how they come together. I would have liked to read more about you personal view on the selection of your paper and critical reflection here and in your preblog.
I like your illustrational approach to describe concepts.
http://aris-totall-loss.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-in-retrospect.html?showComment=1443695039365#c3199126191507376023
Hi Oscar,
I think you did a great summary of this week's theme. You cover different theory types (scientific/philosophical), get into detail into what research can do and emphasize that truth is indeed relative. Needless to say, that truth can therefore only be found through falsification, as you point out under the term paradigm shift. I liked your choice of research paper for the preblog, it seems to be a very current topic nowadays.
All in all, great job!
http://oscarlimback.blogspot.se/2015/09/theme-3-research-and-theory-after.html?showComment=1443695684734FOUR Hi Denise,
I think you wrote a good summary of this week's topic. As I also have some pre-knowledge about methods in empirical research, I thought it was easier to discuss in the seminar this time. I like your distinction between objective vs. subjective and agree that it's not possible to be completely objective, but there are some ways to reduce subjectiveness in research in qualitative research, which is considered to be "less" objective somehow.
All in all, good job!
http://denise-theoryandmethod.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-quantitative-research-22.html?showComment=1444032953973#c7544772508243146536Hi,
judging from your preblog and your summary of last week's topic it's evident that you have extensive knowledge on empirical methods. I have also already conducted my own empirical research for my bachelor studies and therefore I found it interesting to hear about other students theses during the seminar. Since I originally studied media and communication science, I hoped to hear more about what the media technology students have done for their theses. I liked the journal article you chose, since I have worked within the field of CMC.
http://u1x5o721.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflections.html?showComment=1444124554761#c9040746747205415594Hi Oscar,
I enjoyed reading about your chosen article on your preblog, since it involved twitter and a rather complex set of analyzing the collected data. I haven't read anything like this yet, but I think you did a pretty good job to sum it up. Your reflection is well structured and your wording makes it easy to follow. I liked that you brought up "wicked problems". A friend of mine studied political science and had tons of problems analyzing her data set, because of all the variables. Good job!
http://oscarlimback.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-quantitative-research-after.html?showComment=1444125299406
Hi Ellinor,
I totally agree with you on that a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods will give you the breadth in order to be able to generalize the results, as well as the depth in order to understand in detail why people do/think/feel the way they do. As you probably discussed, it might be considered as two separate studies. I think that, for a bachelor or master student it might be too time consuming to do both methods in the thesis, as we don't have so much time. I, for one, had only six weeks to prepare, conduct and write my study and thesis. But if the resources are available, I think this is the way to go. Good reflection!
http://butlikewhyisit.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflection.html?showComment=1444125921136#c4008787424814734615Hi Ellin,
I really liked how you explained the important difference between questionnaires distributed to a lot of people and interviews which are conducted within a small group of participants. I totally agree with you that pre-defined answers might exclude certain point of views, which aren't considered during the survey question compilation.
If it is absolutely not possible to conduct in-depth interviews,one can always add an "free space -answer", where the participant can write his/her own answer. Another way is to test and pilot the survey with a broad variety of people who can then give feedback and point out missing options.
http://elindm2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflection.html?showComment=1444127563401Hi,
you deliver a great reflection of this week's seminar and discuss all important key concepts in quantitative and qualitative methods. I specifically liked your take on how researchers can use these methods and when it's best to combine them. I agree with you, that the pre-blog wasn't too challenging, since we already have some background knowledge on empirical research.
http://lard-have-mercy.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-theme-4-quantitative-research.html?showComment=1444131769826#c8720955118185458999Hi Paul,
I really enjoyed reading your reflection, since it summed up everything important about empirical studies. I also enjoyed reading your pre-blog and the selection of the paper about twitter and trending topics. Your conclusion shows, that you have, combined with your previous knowledge on this topic, put a lot of thought in it and that you understand the key concepts. I also found it interesting to hear in detail about the study conducted by Ilias and his fellow researcher, since it gave us the opportunity to ask questions directly to the researcher himself.
http://paullinderoth.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-quantitative-research-after.html?showComment=1444132250559Hi,
You sum up all important concepts of this week's topic.
Still, I have to disagree to some extent. You say, that data from qualitative research is subjective. I do not think so. The qualitative collection of data might be prone to more subjectiveness than quantitative methods are, but there are ways for researchers to fight against it and to reduce the subjectiveness in the study.
One example is the test- coders in a transcriptive conversation analysis. Their work ensures that the most objective result can be achieved.
Other than that, good work!
http://sannanodm2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflection.html?showComment=1444132891765#c1500845272750400629Hi Amanda,
I liked the journal article you picked for this week's theme, since it's such a current topic. Iphone (or smartphone) usage has an tremendous impact on us, and the lack of it might be even worse (hence negative psychological and physiological effects). It always seems to be a problem, that only students are used as participants. On the other hand it's just the cheapest and fastest way to get participants.
Your reflection sums up what we discussed in our seminar, covering limitations, pro's and con's and so forth.
Good job!
http://amlinden.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-reflections.html?showComment=1444133344488Hi,
we also discussed the testing of scales within social sciences in order to make sure that reliability, validity and objectivity are guaranteed. Since I studied something mediapsychology related it's interesting to read, that in media technology it's okay to create new questionnaires yourself. I guess it's okay, in order to cover the descriptive statistic data, but might be problematic if it's about more scientific topics.
Your reflection sums up all important points, such as differences between quantitative and qualitative methods and what the advantages/disadvantages are.
Great work!
http://capitalmyboy.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-4-post-theme-post.html?showComment=1444134355521#c5913337936139548451FIVEHej Ellinor,
I really enjoyed reading your reflection and was happy to see that you read additional material on this topic. Dan Norman's explanation of how we project our own rationalizations and belief upon others was really helpful to grasp it more in detail. I liked how you then referred back to the a priori arguments. As for the second lecture- I also understood that prototypes can gain knowledge. But first a design has to shape these prototypes, which then look for answers and provoke new knowledge.
http://butlikewhyisit.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflection.html?showComment=1444922760776#c4719749232938277416Hi,
First of all, I think you did a great job in answering the questions in your pre blog.
Although I have to disagree with you on your statement that ”since this kind of research [qualitative] is closely linked to humanistic research which is often too complex to answer with quantitative methods. [..]”
I wouldn’t say that humanistic research excludes quantitative methods, there are more than enough topics that can be covered with quantitative methods.
Other than that your reflection on Haibo’s lecture is short, but covers mainly all key concepts.
It would have been nice to read a little more about the concept of idea, which was the main topic in the lecture.
https://tmmkappa.wordpress.com/2015/10/11/theme-5-post-reflection-2/comment-page-1/#comment-24Hi,
I really liked your reflection, as it summed up all important key points of this weeks lectures. I had the same problem with the second lecture. I don't think that I totally understood everything Anders was talking about- this may be due to the bad audio quality (I didn't hear what he said sometimes) or because of the lack of slides and structure. Still, I understood that design helps shaping prototypes that help to gain knowledge. So basically everything is connected to each other and cannot function without one another.
http://lard-have-mercy.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-theme-5-design-research.html#comment-form
Hey,
I enjoyed reading your reflection. It was a great summary of Haibo's and Lundström's key concepts in both lectures. Your comparison of focusing on the "real problem" and the subsequent result of finding a solution that has a long lasting impact on how we use technology was great. I also read an interview with Tina Seeling, who teaches classes on creativity and innovation at Stanford University School of Engineering who said that you have to "refocus the questions to change our lenses". I guess that is somewhat coherent with some inventions, such as the microwave oven - here it was all about "How can I efficiently heat up food - without a real stove?" Overall, good job
http://meglia.blogspot.se/2015/10/post-theme-5.html?showComment=1444995009610#c5095975397969300290
Hi,
I loved how you brought in additional literature in order to explain prototypes better. I think Barros and Melo's explanation helped me to grasp the meaning of prototypes even better now. As Lundström mentioned in his lecture, prototypes are shaped by research and can help to gain new knowledge or to provoke new ideas. Additional to that your quote states that they can bring abstract ideas to a concrete level.
Good work!
http://mashasthoughts123.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflection.html?showComment=1444996027115#c8028720827921946298 Hi,
Reading your pre blog and reflection I think you did a great job on reflecting on the topic. I agree with you on your definition of prototypes and that they are used to gain knowledge. In another blog entry I also read a definition that stated that prototypes are also good for bringing abstract ideas to a concrete level, what do you think about this approach?
Great work.
http://ixxzw.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-after.html?showComment=1444996807398#c7690498486103756983Hej Björn!
Your reflection and your pre blog are of excellent quality. It's a great summary of the two topics we discussed this week. I liked reading about how you reflected back to our first lecture on Kant's a priori knowledge and how it still seems to be a bit confusing to you, how math can be a priori knowledge. As far I understood it, he claims math to be an a priori synthetic judgement, because they are universal and necessary. Overall, you brought together all necessary key concepts in your reflection.
http://bjornsblogggg.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-post-reflection.html?showComment=1444998459732 Hi,
this is a well-written summary of both lectures from this week. I specifically liked how you referred back to your pre blog post and mentioned that your previous understanding of what empirical data is (in the article we had to read), does not conform with Anders Lundström's definition, as he said it was the whole process instead of only simple observations. It shows, that you are actively reflecting on what you have learned between your pre blog and the actual lecture. Good work!
http://elindm2572.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflection.html?showComment=1445183484347Hi,
I also think that the Johnny English example shows, that redefining the problem can lead to a new approach of solving it. Sometimes everything seems awfully clear, but if one would refocus the question new ideas might emerge. That's why it's always helpful to have several people involved in projects in order to ensure that more than one definition of the problem is brought up. I think you've done a good job summarizing the two lectures. I agree that the last lecture was somewhat confusing, though. All in all, great work.
http://mediafluttery.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflection.html?showComment=1445184075699#c7657247481422759063
Hi,
Good reflection, especially on the first lecture. I agree with you that interviews are useless, if they are just collected as they are and not further "processed". So it's important to analyze them and then articulate the results in reports. The sole interpretation is worth more than anything else, and drives the research forward. I also found it interesting, that apparently the "process" was the empirical data in Lundströms' paper. Coming from a strict statistical setting, I am not used to this type of "method".
http://dm2572lisa.blogspot.se/2015/10/theme-5-reflection-post.html?showComment=1445184528626#c4685121317366644645
Sure you can do quantitative methods with only one person - that example you gave shows it's possible. But there's always one important thing to keep in mind. Usually when you have data collected through quantitative methods you have at least more than 30 people participating in the study. This is important to have, since you minimize the risk of missing important groups in your study.
So having a study with only one person is not recommendable, because there's no way of knowing if everyone would respond the same to the treatment you tried on that person. In this case, you cannot generalize the results or make any conclusions, because you didn't have the chance to compare them to other participants.
I heard in the seminar that some had difficulties to find 'real' case studies. It wasn't easy finding one, I ended up searching the term case study in the library register and lastly found a study that included the searched term in the title, so I could be sure it really is one. I agree with your definition of what makes a case study, though I might add that it's interesting to see that they don't have any hypotheses. That is because there's not enough knowledge in the first place to come up with any, so case studies surely have a different approach of gaining knowledge than the previous studies we have read.
short, but you pick up some interesting points. I agree with you that case studies take a look at certain scenarios or situations and therefore are a lot more specific than all other studies we have discussed so far. Case studies are also cyclical and don't include hypotheses, since there's not enough information to form any. The aim is to build theory, which is certainly not easy, when researchers have to start to work within an unknown field. There's not one sole path to success and answers in this case.
I really liked your reflection as it not only summarized what we discussed in the seminars, but you also went a little bit deeper with the Fayerabend and Kuhn example. It's really good that you looked it up and found more input on what Fayerabend's views on methods were. I found it really interesting to read more about that there might not be a good way to produce knowledge. That fits my description of case studies in my reflections, that researchers mostly start somewhere, without really knowing anything about the field and just work their way through it (in contrast to the strict structure of other methodologies). Great reflection!
I'm not so sure about how case studies are very efficient. As far as I have understood, the cyclical process and the 'anything goes'-approach (referring to Feyerabend) seems a little unstructured and therefore might take some more time than a straightforward statistical analysis would. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "if we do a questionnaire, the answer of which can be divided into different levels without asking question".
Questionnaires can both be used within quantitative and qualitative methods, the difference being of how deep you can go within asking the questions. A quantitative survey is mostly standardized with pre-formulated questions, while a qualitative interview offers the possibility of responding directly to the answer given by the participant. Is that what you meant?
Good reflection. We also discussed that a case study is investigating a specific situation within a timeframe, just as you stated in your pre-blog. I would like to add, that case study research aims to build theories, which is a fairly complicated process since the subject of research is mostly in a new field, that hasn't been explored yet. Ilias described this process with the words of Feyerabend, who stated that 'anything goes', in other words, the whole process is unstructured and there's no way of saying for sure where the researcher lastly will end up.
I really liked your reflection, since it summed up all the main key concepts. Comparing your pre-blog and reflection, I can see that your understanding of what case study research is has improved. I also enjoyed reading about the journal article you chose for the pre-blog, which discussed internet addiction. Since it was written in 2000, I can't help but wonder, what results a replicate study in 2015 would find. Overall, I think you have a good understanding of what a case study is and you did a really good job!
