Sis fri 1030 michael holmes
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Sis fri 1030 michael holmes

on

  • 242 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
242
Views on SlideShare
238
Embed Views
4

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

1 Embed 4

http://static.slidesharecdn.com 4

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • The problem in this logic is defining & validating entities & attributes and measuring them reliably
  • Lots of other ways of classifying search types - in as many as 10 types!
  • Especially important in thinking about WOM

Sis fri 1030 michael holmes Sis fri 1030 michael holmes Presentation Transcript

  • The importance of qualitative research: knowing what&why
    Michael Holmes
  • 2
  • Web analytics & consumer surveyswon’t drive reinvention
    3
    (quant vision)
  • Getting past assumptionsrequires non-assumptive research
    4
    (vision qual quant)
  • methodological oppositions
    Quantitative Qualitative
    Affordable Expensive
    Numeric Linguistic
    Ontological Phenomenological
    Objective Subjective
    Predictive Descriptive
    General Special
    Law of large numbers Law of the example
    Revealing simplicity Revealing complexity
    Confirmation Discovery
    A priori Emergent
    5
  • 6
    Do you think “Millennials don’t care about
    online privacy”?
    www.researchcmd.com/?p=1545
  • logics of explanation
    X
    Y
    Z
    variance
    things: entities & attributes
    process
    stories: events & sequences
    1 -> 2 -> 3 ...
    7
    c
    a
    d
    network
    flows: nodes & links
    b
    e
  • variance logic
    Automatic Classification of Web Queries
    Jansen, et al. (2008)
    note: 75% accuracy rate
    8
  • 9
  • process logic
    10
  • Google SearchStories
    11
  • network logic
    12
  • From demographic
    and psychographic
    to sociogramic
    13
  • Your logic binds & blinds you whatever your method
    14
  • qualitative methods
    traditional
    alternative
    brain scanning
    eye tracking
    e-diaries
    experience sampling
    auto-ethnography
    consumer photo essays
    consumer video essays
    UGC data mining
    discourse analysis
    environmental traces
    ideation groups
    ethnomethodology
    observation
    1st person diaries, journals, think-aloud protocols, etc.
    2nd person ethnography, naturalistic field studies, etc.
    interviews
    depth interviews
    focus groups
    15
  • evaluating qualitative research
    coherence
    internal validity -> credibility
    consensus
    reliability -> dependability
    objectivity -> confirmability
    instrumental utility
    external validity -> transferability
    16
  • some non-assumptive ideas about search types
    17
  • a common a priori classification
    Informational search: document target
    Navigational search: location target
    Transactional search: task target
    18
    But we always search
    “Because of…” or “In order to…”
  • vanity search
    19
  • Google him/her/me/them
    20
  • distracted search
    from redwing…
    …to redwing
    Photo © 2004 Bill Thomas Woodworking
    21
  • novice vs. expert search
    22
  • some user-centric search types
    Forgotten
    Failed
    Oops…NSFW
    Teleport/wormhole
    Conversation
    competitive
    confirmation
    Searching while…
    etc.
    23
  • Thank you
    send questions, comments, criticism & defibrillation expense requests to:
    Michael Holmes
    mholmes@bsu.edu
    24