Session 3 Research Methods - Data Analysis - Case Study Example

618 views
502 views

Published on

This is your third research methods lecture. This week we look at Symbol Surfing Project, its setup, purpose, method, data collection and analysis.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
618
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
20
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Session 3 Research Methods - Data Analysis - Case Study Example

  1. 1. New Media Research MethodsPart 1 – How researchmethods relate to theresearch questionPart 2- Qualitative andQuantitativePart 3 – Data collection andanalysis – Case StudyExamplePart 4 – Presentation andanalysis
  2. 2. Recap from last week• Qualitative and Quantitative ResearchMethods• Interviews and surveys• Types of questions• Designing questionnaires and interviews• Good practice
  3. 3. Project team: Nick Weldin, Karen BunningandGosia KwiatkowskaCase Study – Symbol Surfing ProjectFunded by Esmee Fairbairn Trust
  4. 4. Symbol Surfing Project - Background• Ubiquity of computertechnology and the WWW– access and participationproblems• Accessibility issues –keyboard/mouse• Match between theinterface and the individualcapacity of the user
  5. 5. Symbol Surfing Project - Background• The role of the user/therole of the supporter• Interactions:student/supporter;student/computer +supporter/interface/computer• Teacher initiating role toalign the student –operational engagement
  6. 6. Symbol Surfing Project - Background• Communication –symbols, signs, picturese.g. Makaton, Widgitsetc• Use user experience(using symbols) but fordifferent purpose –control the computer
  7. 7. Symbol Surfing Project - Background• Benefits – low cost, usingexisting skills, control, etc• Exploring the use of freelyavailable symbolrecognition software forPMLD community• Accessing and controllingcomputers by PMLD
  8. 8. Research questions• What are the ways in which individuals areable to use and engage with a simple symbolrecognition system to access media on acomputer?• What role is played by the supporter duringuser activity with this system?
  9. 9. Symbol Surfing Project - Method• Design – an action research, ethics, consent• Settings – specialised collage (2), secondarypart of special school (2), residential setting(1). Supporters all knew the participants andunderstood their communication e.g.gestures, facial expressions etc• Sample – five people with PMLD, age range 15– 28, difficult to engage, English – firstlanguage,
  10. 10. Symbol Surfing Project – DataCollection• Four visits, monthly intervals,• Symbol surfing software was installed• Two video cameras were used – one to capture thescreen and the other to capture the engagement
  11. 11. Symbol Surfing Project – DataCollection• Environment – familiar• Researchers role –marginal participants –guiding the supporter ifrequired• Field notes wererecorded• Length of the sessions –varied
  12. 12. Symbol Surfing Project – DataCollection• The formats : model, withdraw support, observe• Number of cards used – varied• Video footage – combined and displayed side byside• Sampling of video – 60 sec at 2 min intervals• Data transcribed through repeated viewings1 3 5 7 9 11 13 1517
  13. 13. Symbol Surfing Project – DataCollection• Transcriptions template – actions participant/supporter/ researcher• Actions:– vocal,– non vocal communication behaviours,– computer related actions,– contextual information
  14. 14. Symbol Surfing Project –Data Analysis• Coding framework – structural linguistics – tocapture user attempts at manipulating thesymbol tools, but also recording userresponses to the activity and the facilitationrole performed by the supporter• Initiating moves, response moves, pre-initiating moves and self expression
  15. 15. Symbol Surfing Project –Data Analysis• Refining the coding framework – viewingvideo and observing behaviours• Definition for each category with examples
  16. 16. Coding Framework Used
  17. 17. • Transcriptionsreviewed with thevideo footage• Code annotationsapplied to transcriptsSymbol Surfing Project –Data Analysis
  18. 18. Symbol Surfing Project –Data Analysis• Frequency of occurrence for each code pertrial was summarised in a prepared excelspreadsheet• An overall mean scores were calculated – toexplore user engagement across trials
  19. 19. Symbol Surfing Project - Reliability• Two researchers reviewing each transcriptsand assigning the code via a process ofconsensus, which informed the definition ofeach code.• Also independent coding on 10% of data –Cohen’s Kappa Coefficient
  20. 20. Symbol Surfing Project - Findings• Individual use of and engagement with symbolrecognition system• Levels of ‘self expression’• ‘Basic’ and ‘Functional actions’ with symbolsvaried – factors: alertness and physical demandsof manipulating the symbol, attention• Role of supporter during user activity- movetypes: ‘instruction’, ‘query’, ‘technical’, feedback’– facilitating engagement
  21. 21. The following slides are for you tolook at independently as they covermaterial covered by Tony and myselfin previous lectures.For next week please be ready todiscuss your research question andyour proposal.
  22. 22. Emotional Tools - Recap• Emotional Text Analysis – locating emotion inwhat users have to say• Facial Recognition – observing emotionalresponses to experiences• EEG – observing brainwaves (relaxed andattentive states)• GSR – skin conductance• Blending of the above with eye tracking
  23. 23. Emotional Analysis of The School PlanNicePleasantFunActiveNastyUnpleasantSadPassiveHigh ImageryLow ImagerySample 1Total words 27201Sentence Length 18.72Sentences 1453Periods 614Question Marks 466% Nice 2.06% Pleasant 4.38% Fun 7.80% Active 4.43% Nasty 1.74% Unpleasant 1.52% Sad 4.42% Passive 13.87% High Imagery 2.57% Low Imagery 39.27Emotional text recognition using Whissell’s Dictionary of Affective Language
  24. 24. Blair’s Speech on War in Iraq0510152025NicePleasantFunActiveNastyUnpleasantSadPassiveSeries1Nice 2.04Pleasant 3.53Fun 3.79Active 4.02Nasty 4.3Unpleasant 4.53Sad 4.53Passive 19.62
  25. 25. Analyzing User Feedback• What is your goal?– “I’m not sure. I am a little confused at this point as to what I amsupposed to be doing, It’s not obvious.”• What did you expect when you did that?– “I was hoping that if I clicked this icon I would be able to move to thehelp page, but I am surprised that didn’t work.”• Can you tell me what you were thinking?– “I’m not sure. I think I’m supposed to be moving through this sectionof the maze, but there is no help and I’m getting lost.”• How did you feel about that process?– “In a word confused. It looked good to begin with, but I am lost andfeel like giving up.”
  26. 26. Analyzing User Feedback02468101214NicePleasantFunActiveNastyUnpleasantSadPassiveSeries1Nice 4.3Pleasant 2.69Fun 2.15Active 3.76Nasty 1.08Unpleasant 5.91Sad 1.61Passive 11.83
  27. 27. http://compling.org/emotion_in_text_cgi/DAL_app/index.php
  28. 28. match tools to your questions• For questions on factualclarification• Use polls and surveys• For questions on opinion• Use surveys, interviews, focusgroups• For questions on experience• Interviews, focus groups,observations, user testing, andethnographies• For questions on concepts• surveys, interviews,ethnographies, and user testing• For questions on emotions• Surveys, interviews, focus groups,and observations
  29. 29. CorrelationsInterview, Questionnaire & Focus Group
  30. 30. References• Bunning, K., Kwiatkowska, G., Weldin, N. (2012) Journalof Assistive Technology, V24 n4 p259-270• May T (1997) Social research: issues, methods, progressBuckingham: OUP• Rugg, D. (1941) Experiments in wording question. IIPublic Opinion Quarterly, 5:91-92.• Silverman D (1997) Qualitative research: theory, method,practice London: Sage• Silverman D (2004) Doing Qualitative Research: APractical Handbook London: Sage

×