Interpreting The Online Phenomenological Experience 1.0 11 Sept 06


Published on

IPA Conference 2006 (Brighton, September, 2006)

Published in: Education, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Interpreting The Online Phenomenological Experience 1.0 11 Sept 06

  1. 1. Interpreting the online phenomenological experience Aleks Krotoski SPERI University of Surrey IPA Conference 2006 University of Sussex, 12 September
  2. 2. The Internet as an experiential phenomenon • The Internet and online community – Disproximate grouping – Belongingness – Openness and honesty • The Internet and identity: Anonymity – Self-presentation – Mutability/Multiplicity – Self-efficacy • Norms?
  3. 3. Internet Methods • Advantages – Access – Phenomenon-relevant • Semi-structured interviews – Synchronous modes (Stromer-Galley, 2003; Mann & Stewart, 2000; Chase, 2000) – Saves transcription time – Quality, not quantity?
  4. 4. Online methods • Disadvantages – Lack of non-verbal cues “Online, I can’t see the other person’s face, hear their tone of voice, or get any sense of who they are beyond the words I see scrolling up my own screen. This does not mean the interview is less interesting. Through their words and through my interaction with them. I could sense joy, anger, passion, bitterness, happiness. In fact, I was surprised and impressed by the intensity of conversations.” (p. 71, Markham, 1998) • Role of emotional shortcuts? – Deception – Research interferences – Sampling: knowing where to look
  5. 5. An example -the context • Online games • Identity
  6. 6. Participants • 10 female players • 5 wheelchair users • Research Question: elicitation of Possible Selves through online interaction? • Collection: online and telephone interviews
  7. 7. Comparison I • Telephone Interview: “I suppose just thinking that I can do things, yeah. You know, you start to be able to play a game and you think, well I can play that as well as someone else can. So, yeah, that, that does help. A positive attitude, I suppose, it does make you feel more positive in general, definitely.” (Marcus)
  8. 8. Comparison II • Online interview: “I've been imagining myself being able to walk, fly, pilot a starship for a long time. Being in a virtual world, able to walk or fly, isn't too new a concept for me. I'd say, for me, my experience in a wheelchair probably makes it as difficult to reorient my view of walking as it is for someone who does walk -- I'd like to think I have an edge in the "no preconceived mindsets to work in strange, difficult environments." (Aaron)
  9. 9. Comparison III • Online interview: “It did give me huge satisfaction to be better than others who I know dont [sic] have my problems in R[eal] L[ife].” (Peter) “From an interest... standpoint, it has definately solidifed [sic] what my true interests lie in. Unlike the usual game...player, I want to understand more about the craft, how games are made, and how they do...bring people together.” (Mandy)
  10. 10. Conclusion • Lack of tangents • Stratification between participant and researcher • Active construction (self-presentation) • Themes closely related to the interview questions
  11. 11. Thank you Aleks Krotoski SPERI University of Surrey IPA Conference 2006 University of Sussex, 12 September