Theme #4: Quantitative research

My selected paper

As for the last seminar I chose the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (Impact factor of 1.778) since I found it to highly appropriate for Media Technology with it's in-depth analysis of modern communication mediums like social media and the likes. For this theme though I wanted a more quantitative research paper since the last one about the use of internet and social media in homeless youth doesn't seem to fit that nice. However, I found (in the same journal) a paper about Channeling Science Information Seekers' Attention? A Content Analysis of Top-Ranked vs. Lower-Ranked Sites in Google.

In this research, the authors wanted to analyze the search results in google when searching for "nanotechnology" and if these top results vs. the lower-ranking results differed in terms of "theme". In this paper they concluded that top-ranked results tended to show the technical-, environmental-, and risk-related aspects of nanotechnology whereas lower-ranked results feature totally different themes on the same subject.

Which quantitative method or methods are used in the paper? Which are the benefits and limitations of using these methods?

By sampling search results (links to web pages)  for a total of 60 weeks, ultimately resulting in 9,120 parent links and 224,987 child links. The methods used to quantify their data was a self-developed program that basically gathered the URL, the domain adress, date of retrieval which automatically entered into an Excel spreadsheet. In the spreadsheet the results was sorted according to the sequence of appearance in the search results on Google. From this point, their program then mined the first ten results and further analysed the actual site and captured its profile (theme) and the contents of all the hyperlinks that were associated with that specific page (the child links).

In the end, the content from the body tags of a page was extracted of keywords based on 10 categories covering the different aspects of nanotechnology. This way, it was easy to determine the theme of a specific page.

The benefits of using this type of analysis is that the results is quite accurate. You can take a bunch of sites and perform a keyword-aided search on each of these websites content and quite easily get the most prominent theme (based on predefined categories). Therefore this method yields good results on these types of analyses.

One of the limitations of this method is that the categories was predefined, based on assumptions of what themes that are prevalent in this field. For a more generic application, the categories can't be "hardcoded".

What did you learn about quantitative methods from reading the paper?

In this specific paper I learned about one of many ways of analysis big amounts of data and how to do this quite effectively. The method used in this research, I think, is highly specific for this application. In another setting where the results is not from a specific field of research, maybe the data that is to be analyzed is harder to predict, ultimately making it hard to use and draw conclusions from.

Which are the main methodological problems of the study? How could the use of the quantitative method or methods have been improved?

One of the main problems in this study is the actual implementation of the computer-assisted sampling. The authors clearly stated that, although the sampling worked well in the end, they had a lot of bugs that they had to fix during the data gathering-process. One of the bugs was so severe that they actually lost 2 whole months of data. That is really bad. For this method to be preferable (even if I really don't see an alternative to computer-assisted sampling with this massive amount of links to scan) it has to well implemented and tested before an actual study can take place.

They also stated that their software would need to be independent of which search engine is being used since much more conclusions can be drawn if compared to other search engines result of the same topic is to be done.

Paper by Olle Bälter and colleagues

This paper is about how to potentially reduce Upper Respiratory Tract Infection (URTI). The research is based on the fact that this is case for the main part of why people seek primary care in many countries, and therefore, a need for this type of study is highly relevant (in opinion). The research were performed by investigating the relationship between physical activity level, perceived stress and cases of self-reported URTI. 1509 people (men and women) participated in this study, a web questionnaire was also carried out.

Which are the benefits and limitations of using quantitative methods?

In my opinion, the main benefit of using this type of method (population-based) you can quite easily get a good sample of the population without having to assess "that many" people in the study. In this research a total of 1509 people were participating, aged 20-60 yr (men and women). The limitations of using a population-based study is that it may not be appropriate for certain types of research where the population mean is actually skewed compared to the mean of a specific group of people (maybe more relevant to the research).Which are the benefits and limitations of using qualitative methods?

By using a qualitative research it is easier to get a more in-depth look and the spectrum of data that can be gathered is much more diverse. The limitations of a qualitative method is that it is hard to do with a lot of data/participants since it would be too time consuming and/or pricy. In many cases, practically impossible if you would like to do 1hr interviews with each participant.

References:

1. Fondell, E., Lagerros, Y. T., Sundberg, C. J., Lekander, M., Bälter, O., Rothman, K., & Bälter, K. (2010). Physical activity, stress, and self-reported upper respiratory tract infection. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 43(2), 272-279.
2. Li, N., Anderson, A. A., Brossard, D. and Scheufele, D. A. (2013), Channeling Science Information Seekers' Attention? A Content Analysis of Top-Ranked vs. Lower-Ranked Sites in Google. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12043

Theme #3 - Post-reflections

Today I got the chance to elaborate on my chosen paper from the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. We came to the conclusion that my paper was the most interesting and I still believe the subject of internet and social media use among youth is both modern and interesting to talk about. The study was done in 2009 and a lot have happened on both these plattforms in just three years, I imagine that the results of a possible research done now would yield quite interesting figures and it would be nice to compare them both.

During my seminar session we continued on trying to be critical about the research that had been done. We (me and the two people discussing my paper) believed that, for this research to be more accurate, it had to be done in a different way. In the paper they stated that 194 people voluntarily participated in the study and each and everyone of these people were interviewed in order for them to gather all the answers they needed. The also said that these sessions took roughly about an hour, that is a lot of time. Disregarding the amount of time needed to carry out this study we contemplated about different ways of gathering the data. One way which the paper stated would be a lot more effective is if each participant would get a notebook/diary of some sort to actually jot down when they are using social media and/or use internet in some way. This would, in our opinion, dramatically increase the accuracy of the data since one could argue that trying to remember when, how, and for how long you're using these mediums is quite hard to estimate time-wise.

To further analyze the need for a different way of gathering data for the study we found quite interesting numbers when it comes to different habits online. These were some of the data gathered (note: more than one answer could be given, hence the percentage):

• ~ 64% checked their e-mail
• ~ 57% Checked Facebook
• ~ 27% Youtube-watching etc
• ~ 27% Checked for jobs
• ~ 13% Looked for housing

One thing that we did note was that it seemed quite rare to actually look for a job and find a house to live in. Instead you use these medium to either communicate with others or to amuse yourself. These could, in fact be the case amongst this group people. But keep in mind that it can also be the result of poorly remembered habits of said group. Maybe the only remembered checking their email and using Facebook since that could be considered a more pleasing experience than looking for a job. This could affect the data gathered in the end. 

That being said, these were just some of the concerns we raised about the article, but then again, this particular study is fairly new (if we are to believe the authors) so further studies on the subject has to continue on the work. There is room for improvement.

All in all I think the seminar helped me to further develop my critical thinking when reading academic papers, which is nice!

Theme #3 - Research and theory

Journal findings and critical examination
Selected research journal: Journal of Communication (International Communication Association)
Impact factor: 2.011 (ISSN: 1460-2466)

This journal covers the aspects of communication theory, culture and critique as well as computer-mediated communication (HCI). Just to give an example on what type of articles this journal covers:

• The relation between televions exposure and theory of mind among preschoolers
• Technology use as a status cue: the influences of mundane and novel technologies on knowledge assessments in organizations

In regards to a specific paper I found this great article from Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (Impact factor 1.778) about Internet and Social Media Use as a Resource Among Homeless Youth (Published 9th of October 2013). The main purpose of this paper is to shed light on the use of social media in homeless youth. The papers findings is essentially that the use of internet and social media in homeless youth is widely used by the homeless youths in the United States. This stands in contrast to the posed hypothesis, stating that "The relative lack of resources facing homeless youth might suggest that homeless youth would have low levels of internet use". 

Although this statement is somewhat acceptable to me as grounds for this paper if find It quite vague since the assumption is that "lack of resources" in homeless youth means "low levels of Internet use". I don't really see the connection since there is always a driving factor in homeless people, be it to get food and shelter, but it might as well be to have a functioning phone so you can communicate with your loved ones. You can't deny the possibility of this being a very high priority. You can't underestimate the potential desperation in homeless people when it comes to "get what you need". 

Despite this, I still find the authors arguments to align with the research and since there aren't that many papers on the subject (as stated by the authors), they are kind of breaking new grounds here. The data supporting their findings are carried out in a pleasing manner and gives, for example, a clear view of the demographic which accounts for the data of internet use among the homeless. Even if the data seems to be valid, the amount of homeless people questioned to give life to this paper aren't really that many, which gives the result some factor of uncertainty.

Questions regarding theory

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

Well, according to Gregor, theory is basically how something should be done in practice. When it comes to physical theory it might suggest how we can explain, and maybe later on, view our world. For example the theories of laws that our planet abides by can help us get a deeper understanding of the world we live in. Theory can also be seen as a statement that can be proven right or wrong, it can be tested. So in summary, information is what theory is based on and for a theory to actually be a theory it has to propose something about the connections and relations about things in our universe.

1. 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?

In my selected paper about the use if internet and social media in homeless youth in the US I found that the research rarely extends beyond analysis and description. This doesn't really come as a surprise since the research on this specific topic in general is quite rare. In this case it is about mapping the behavior of a specific group of people and ultimately answering a question. Therefore the major type of theory in this paper is Analysis theory.  For it to be an Explanation theory which is not that far away, the paper needs to focus more on questions such as why and when. Something which isn't prevalent in this research.

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

I would say that there is a benefit in following the "guidelines" of a writing in a Analysis theory type of theme. The research is not really that advanced in terms of mathematical or physical equations and the findings aren't really that "speculative" in the sense that it has to be supported by heavy arguments. It is what is is. This means that the paper is easy to understand and quite light on its feet. The findings and information presented in the paper can be read without a very specific context to understood. The limitations though in having this type of theory is that it lacks further, more in-depth look at the underlying causes of it's findings. For example, why is this specific demographic more represented in the findings of internet and/or social media use? When did this shift happen? These questions aren't brought up in the paper and for it to be relevant, the type of theory being carried out has to be more of a Explanation or Explanation and prediction (EP) type of theme. But the paper would also as a result of that be more intense and maybe not so easy to follow without the right context. That is my opinion.

Theme #2 - Post-reflections

This week I was able to attend the seminar, which was great since it gave me some perspective on the text that I read by Horkheimer and Adorno. We first discussed in groups about what we thought was rememberable from the text and what caught our attention. Since I really like the part about mass culture as mass deception I reflected on this within my group. We came to realize that you can actually make many connotations to mass deception (in some way) when talking about the introduction of new mediums.

If we take the personal computer as a start. For example in the new movie "Jobs", essentially about Steve Jobs and how he came to introduce the first, modern, computer for the masses. You can actually see this as something that, at first, didn't really resonate with the market at the time. What do you really want a "Personal computer" for? Who should use it? There were no market and they essentially had to create it themselves, "this product is for You", by converting one person at a time to a customer of this PC, they actually introduced their commitment to this new medium, and in the long run, their dependance on this medium.

If you sell a PC to a person highly dependent on  economic calculations in his daily work, the computer can now do that with ease, instead of using pen and paper. By getting rid of the pen and paper way of working he/she is now dependent on someone else to do his/her work. This is also the reality today in an even more computer dependent society. If you don't have a computer you're part of a really small group who really can't communicate that good with the rest of the world. If you want to, you need to be a part of the group that owns a PC. The same thing can be said in more broad terms if you talk about the "connected" society of today. If you are not connected, you are probably in some way dependent on someone who is. An example was brought up in the seminar to give an example of this. For example old people who are more seldom connected than the younger generation, they are, for example more dependent on this generation to help them with banking tasks since these can often exclusively be made with an online connection.

To connect to mass deception, one can argue that the "deception" in this case is the fact that some big organ has decided that "this is the way we do things now, if you want to be a part of it, this is what you need to do". This can, in my opinion, be interpreted in a way that society did work before this new medium, but someone changed the rules and now demand us to by this product x to continue with this activity. So in a way the deception is to make us believe we really need to do this in order for our lives to work in perfect harmony, but in reality, it is just so that this "organ" can make more money off of us.

This is of course my personal reflection and certainly not the point of view for everyone. But I don believe that Horkheimer and Adorno somewhat gave the impression that mass deception is something to be seen as big player who can control the behavior and needs of the mass. If and how this is done is somewhat subjective to your opinions on said "big player".

Theme #2 - Pre-reflections

Theme #2 pre-reflections

What is Enlightenment?

Enlightenment, broadly speaking, is a shift in human values. Before the enlightenment much of what was not known to man was often seen a mysterious and of certain power. With the enlightenment these mysterious and unknown things eventually became known, and with that, a growth in power from the people themselves arose.

Science had a great part in the enlightenment in the sense that we started to critically observe things in our universe, the unknown was now something unanswered, rather than mysterious. Or as ”the father of experimental philosophy” Bacon puts it: ”the mind, conquering superstition, is to rule over disenchanted nature”. Disenchanted meaning a world free of unsolvable matters (my interpretation).

What is the meaning and function of “myth” in Adorno and Horkheimer’s argument?

The concept of myth is used to show that, despite us not living in dark world where myths regulate our beliefs anymore, they still have similarities to our modern way of scientific thinking. Much like how myths were used as a framework for our beliefs, stating what is to believe and not, so does thoughts and beliefs based on science and enlightenment work too. We create our own system within the new laws of science, much like we based our laws on mythical beliefs and facts. So in some sense, the enlightenment originates from the myth, but based on other criteria.

The meaning of myth in this chapter is, in my opinion, to distinguish thoughts and beliefs enlightenment to make a greater distinction between the two ways we base our judgements on.

What are the “old” and “new” media that are discussed in the Dialectic of Enlightenment?

Adorno talks about culture industry being “graphically expressed” in radio and films. The old media would refer to the old way of spreading a message, the printed news being one of them. The “new” on the other hand would be both the radio and especially the tv since it hadn’t been around for that long at the time of writing. Adorno also say that these new ways of producing media is based on the ideology to “legitimize the trash” it ultimately want us to consume.

What is meant by “culture industry”?

Culture industry is what Adorno saw as the ”not so bright” future of the enlightenment. Culture is described as something infectious whose sole ideology is to legitimize trash that can generate revenue for the ”industry”. The industry refers to the illusion of a benevolent part of the society that make lives better for the people in general. In reality though, Adorno sees them as the ones with the raw power. Puppeteering the people, controlling their needs. There is a quote in this chapter that puts his thoughts quite concrete: ”Something is provided for everyone so that no one can escape”.

So, for me, Adorno sees the culture industry as mass deception, as a way to exploit the fact that we had an enlightenment. By knowing how people work in the most fundamental way, we can introduce the ”illusion” of free will, given the the ”will” is based on options solely provided by the industry. Even though we might not agree with the industry, we will ultimately comply with these conditions in lack of other choices.

What is the relationship between mass media and “mass deception”, according to Adorno and Horkheimer?

Since the mass media is so finely tuned to the receivers it leaves nothing more to want. It answers more questions than it gives. Leaving us questionless and indifferent to what we were recently exposed to. If we go to a movie in the cinema, we leave feeling contempt, rather that hungry for questions reaching far beyond the plot of the movie. This is somewhat a deception: us, thinking we have what we need. The result is that we only feel that we need is what is being delivered to us, which is Not, as it happens to be, chosen by us. To further underline the relationship between mass deception and mass media is a quote from the text: “...the power of the culture industry lies in its unity with fabricated need...” which basically incapsulate the idea Not to give its audience a wide spectrum of option, rather just a handful. This is, in my opinion, to deceive.

Please identify one or two concepts/terms that you find particularly interesting. Motivate your choice.

I found the concept of myth to be quite entertaining to read about. For me at least, I didn’t have the same connotation of what the relation between myth and enlightenment might be. In my world, myth was often thought to be something that was unnatural al belonged in storybooks, but I came to realize that myth, in this context is referred to as knowledge which is based on relations to which one yet don’t grasp. If we can’t conceive the underlying concept of things, it may as well be mythical in the way it works or functions. When we actually question and criticize somethings existence and learn about it, the myth evaporates and become real. The curtains arise and we have our enlightenment.

Theme #1 - Post-reflections

Since last week I haven’t had the opportunity to get a live lecture on the theme, which frankly is quite sad since I think the whole concept of sense-data was quite fascinating. Although it kind of boggles your mind when you try to think of it.

To get a better grip on sense-data I tried to sum up what my peers, as a whole, thought about this concept. I came to the conclusion that they all, in some sense (pun intended), got a pretty firm grip on its definition as well.

Although I feel somewhat enlighten by the way Russel makes you think in different ways, question an objects existence, or if you really ”know” something about it at all, It kind of makes me wonder "why still use a text which is over 100 years old"?. Aren’t there any philosophers left? I want to believe that there still are some critical thinkers out there who can question the very world we inhabit. But in modern society, I don’t find the act of ”questioning things” that normative anymore. Maybe it have gotten taboo?

I tried to find more recent sources of philosophers on this subject but have yet to find any that talks about the concept of sense-data and true knowledge from this milennia. But I believe that there are some interpretations that helped me get another point of view on what the term sense-data really, one of them being from a paper named ”Sense-data” written in 1953 by G.E. Moore. He talks about an imaginative scenario where one would compare two squares and whether they are the same square or not. Moore concludes that depending on what you describe about the square (e.g. the bounding lines of the square, the length of each side etc) you can at least say that the two squares is the same in quality - they are qualitatively identical. But if the sides of the two squares they are not numerically the same, obviously. Although I find this quite apparent, I kind of helps that you at least can talk about the similarities between two objects who somewhat share an attribute. In this case, its shape. I believe this helps me to better understand that sense-data is very dependent on ones subjective observation. It is a relative term.

Moore even goes to lengths to say that no sense-data perceived by someone is the same as for someone else. It is identical to your spatial relation to that object. For example, if you observe the color of an apple hanging from a tree. The shiny red apple you see glimmering is a unique sense-data perceived by you. Anyone else watching the same tree cannot perceive the apple the same way you do, it is dependent on your viewing angle, your height and so on. I would like to quote Moore to explain this further: ”The sense-given field of vision of each of us, at any

moment, constitutes a private space of that person's own;—no two

points in any two of these spaces, can be related to one another in any

of the ways in which two points in any one of them are related.”

References:

G.E. Moore ”Sense-data - Some Main Problems of Philosophy”, 1953, London

http://selfpace.uconn.edu/class/percep/MooreSenseData.pdf

Theme #1 - Pre-reflections

What does Russell mean by "sense data" and why does he introduce this notion?

Sense data is a part of what Russel refers to as things that we as humans register as a sensation. Something that really immerse your senses. For example colors, smells and sound. Those are all three clear and distinct, and different things that are typical for our sense of sight, smell and hearing. Russel clearly points out though that the color (i.e. green) is not a sensation in itself, but a part of the sense-data that is clearly associated with the physical object with that specific attribute.

If I were to give my meaning of sense-data, it is something that can be connected as an attribute to a physical object, giving it some kind of "life", at least in our mind, beyond its apparent name. Sense-data stands in great contrast to the physical objects, or matter as Russel likes to call them. The sense-data makes us become aware of the physical object, but it does not mean that we know the object is there, we just get a sense of it being there. We merely feel its appearance. The objects actual existence is debatable. Russel introduces sense-data to make the point that an objects existence is relative, since the only way for us to believe we know a physical object truly exist is if we can experience the truth about its sense-data.

What is the meaning of the terms "proposition" and "statement of fact"? How does propositions and statement of facts differ from other kinds of verbal expressions?
A proposition is a statement of something that have a possibility of being true. Russel uses the term proposition as a way to differentiate how we relate to different objects. You can propose something that may or may not be true, based on either acquaintance with the object or something that Russel calls "knowledge by description". This is also somewhat what makes it differ from other "verbal expressions" since it says something about truth, or non-truth for that matter, of an object.

So for example if I make a statement saying that "my house have round windows" I know it as a fact of truth. I can say the following about my house "the house with round windows". This is what Russel refers to as "the so-and-so", the the is the imminent truth about what I am describing. It is based on acquaintance. If I on the other hand just have heard about a house with round windows, it is knowledge by description. My "so-and-so" description is now not a truth, it could be, but I'm not acquainted with it so I referred to it as "a so-and-so". It is not a definite description, it's ambiguous.

Russel also underline that for a proposal containing descriptions to be analysed it has to be composed fully of constituents that which we are acquainted with.

In chapter 5 ("Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge by Description") Russell introduces the notion "definite description". What does this notion mean?
A definite description according to Russel is something that can be derived to a specific object. Even if we are not acquainted with it. The description used in chapter 5 to illustrate this was "the man with the iron mask". This description, in contrast to just "a man", is a definite description since it describes "the so-and-so". Even if I personally didn't know who the man with the iron mask was, I know that there is only "one" true man with an iron mask. And I know that Russels idea of the man with the iron mask refers to the same man, a singular and unique entity.

In chapter 13 ("Knowledge, Error and Probable Opinion") and in chapter 14 ("The Limits of Philosophical Knowledge") Russell attacks traditional problems in theory of knowledge (epistemology). What are the main points in Russell's presentation?
Russel first explains that knowledge could be defined as "true belief". Although this becomes problematic when your belief is based on wrong facts. So there have to be a more strict definition than just your beliefs since your beliefs can be based on fallacious process of reasoning.

If we would take the modern way of looking at the definition, not that much (in my opinion) efforts is put in to criticizing the way you base your knowledge on. This being said, Russel clearly wants to make a more fine grained definition of what true knowledge actually is. To approach this, Russel explains different version of what one might think is knowledge. Derivative knowledge are knowledge that are somewhat self-evident and easy for others to accept as a truth. One other type of knowledge that is different from something that are self-evident truths are the intuitive knowledge which has a more gradual degree of trustworthiness. If it turns out that the intuitive knowledge you have is not to be declared as self-evident, it is a probable opinion.

In contrast to this, Russell talks about the concept of philosophical knowledge which are in his words based on a more "metaphysical reasoning". Russell criticize this point of reasoning since it entails that your acquaintance with something does not mean that you have the knowledge of its relations, which this type of thinking is based on.