I agree with you that the lecture would have been interesting since it would have gone deeper into what a case study is or is not, surely more than the seminar discussion. For my part, I actually wouldn't know how qualitative method is conducted with the help of a focus group – did the discussion help you to clarify this more? I agree with your statement on trends, but there might also lie the difficulty: trends are not always surely generalizable and might just be valid for a short time frame, its period very likely hard to be defined. Your conclusion on the term case study is very well drawn and I feel like you answered the question on where the difference lies between a case study and other types of qualitative studies. Well done!


You gave a great summary of last week's them Qualitative methods and Case study research! Your emphasis on the most important elements really focuses on the term case study itself, which cannot be defined by the method, but constructs the method along the way. I found the seminar also helpful in this regard, really outlining the tenure and explaining how a case study intends to establish a theory where no theory yet existed. Your clear structure and writing style complements your thoughts, and I really enjoyed reading your reflection. In particular, the last quote Ilias told us really questions everything we knew supposedly about research and its definitions. Since there is still an argument between researchers and philosophers alike if this quote by Feyerabend is applicable, I would be interested in your opinion about this. Do you think research can be conducted that uninhibited?


Thank you for a well-written and crisp summary of last week. You mentioned that qualitative research is likely to always involve some kind of social aspect - I think so too! Your also succeeded in explaining clearly what a case study is and recited a good example underlining your words. I agree with you that we would have profited if a case study would have been selected or at least spoken about in the lecture. Since we just had the seminar this week, I feel like we missed out a little bit. Reading your pre-post, it is obvious how much work you put in preparing for a theme, and I also think your definition of a case study you deducted in there is pretty precise already.


Very interesting to read your reflection about theme 6 and to dive into your understanding of a case study! Indeed, a lecture would have been great to verify some issues we might have had about case studies, a topic I for my part have never had to think about so in-depth. I also wondered how it would be possible in research to follow no guideline at all, since argumentatively, can it then still be research? As we also read about the steps in the setup of a case study, I doubt that anything would be acceptable; apparently, you always have to follow at least a basic structure. Anyhow, I like that you emphasize the cycle of case studies and that the latter intend to build rather than test a theory - one of the most defining points. Enjoyed reading your post!


Great reflection on the past week – you were able to really teach me more about the subject – thank your for that! I agree with you about the benefits of a focus group since I would also be the type to talk more in a smaller group size. Your knowledge on longitudinal studies is also very much appreciated. I actually had to think of the brilliant film Boyhood when I read it, which may or may not be defined as "study", but it also paints a picture of growing up by observing a young boy for 12 years of his life. Anyway, it is great that you got me thinking about this more. I also learned about the exponential curve in collecting data for case studies. Very well executed and refreshing reflection!


Thank you for teaching me new things about this topic. Since I was in a different seminar group, it was interesting to read about Auto driving, something I never heard about before. Your emphasis on a case study being iterative is important as its cyclic nature makes a key point in defining it as a case study. Besides, I appreciate you bringing up the example of the paradigm shift as I read about it in regard to the term 'anything goes' by Paul Feyerabend, who wanted to prove that you shouldn't give up in research just because your theory gets proven wrong. I really enjoyed reading your reflection and I totally agree with you in the course having fostered "a small appetite for the philosophies of old". Great job!


Nice and sharp summary of last week's theme! You gave an in-depth explanation on a case study – it seems that the seminar was helpful to give you a better understanding of the term the same way as it did for me. As you emphasized, a case study is better at building theory than testing it. I think you are right, a case study has both its benefits and weaknesses and it is the researcher's choice to choose which type of research fits the topic best. That's also something the statement 'anything goes' underlines: the superior goal should always be to deepen your knowledge. Well-done reflection!


You gave a very nice and crisp reflection stating the main points of last week. I agree with you that the lecture was missed and would have been great to give us a straighter definition of the term case study. Both of your chosen papers of the first post seem interesting, and I found it remarkable that the comparison between your case study paper and the proposed procedure steps came out as accurate. I had a hard time to actually find a real case study with a higher impact factor and then it did not seem to completely agree with the table. Anyhow, I enjoyed reading your reflections!


I really like your style of writing and wording - you have a way getting a reader's attention and keeping it funny with amusing side notes. Chapeau to your technique! Besides that, I like following your thoughts. I also have the problem to judge the quantitative method as the 'better' one, but thinking about it, it also has its perks since I feel even mathematical data is not all that generalizable (which of course shouldn't be the goal of research, I guess). I instinctively followed your way of finding a case study - safe bet, looking for a title that leads the way! And as you said, it's good to explore a subject of your interest, a statement that could be easily transferred to anything in life. Well done, Linnéa!


Reading through your predefinition of the term case study, I think you are already quite right, but referring back to it after the weekly discussion was a very good idea. The seminar seemed to have succeeded in given you a deeper knowledge about case studies and their intentions. You emphasized that one specific case is looked into more deeply due to its specialty. I agree, but would also add that although it definitely is often one case, it could be more than one as well. You give very good advice on how to construct a case study, in particular, reading contradictory sources to strengthen your argument! Great post!

Reflections

The past week dealt with qualitative research, in particular, the use of case studies. Besides the texts we had to read for the pre-theme post, the seminar was, unfortunately, the only source of information this week, so all remaining questions had to be asked there. Still, I feel that I gained more knowledge regarding case studies and their intentions during our discussion.

A case study – next to an e.g. interview, focus group, observation or ethnography – is one type of qualitative research. Since I couldn't really define the term in-depth, the seminar was helpful to clear things up: one passed specific event/scenario/social situation is looked into more deeply (sometimes over a period of time), in order to generalize new knowledge and build a theory where there was no theory before. 
As Ilias pointed out, you create a case study on something where there is no evidence beforehand and no pre-existing theory, because in a case study, you try to set hypotheses or theories, and then go and test them in reality comparing the applicability to other similar events. Moreover, a case study is not defined by its method, since you can either use the qualitative or quantitative methodology.

An interesting sentence was mentioned at the end of the seminar: 'anything goes' in research - which sparked my curiosity for more insights. This term came up in the publication Against Method (1975) by Austrian philosopher Paul Feyerabend, and as you can imagine, this saying has the potential to split philosophers and scientists alike.
Surprisingly, this all leads back to our first theme of reason. In his works, Feyerabend takes a stand on the role of reason and rationality against a form of unification, which according to him leads to the development of certain rules and norms. As I understand it, he promotes reason as something that should allow irrationality in order to promote progress, as every rule and every methodology is always limited. He does not want to eliminate rules, but he does not want rules to be limited by certain content, because that makes research stop in its tracks. It should always depend on the case itself, which method should be used and thus the method should not be defined by a general rule but by suitability. In addition, he rejects the concept of falsifying a theory, since a theory should not be given up upon just because it is not consistent with all relevant facts.
In the context of case studies, I deduct that you can choose any way of research, the most important thing is just to get more knowledge and improve your understanding.


Gerlee, P., 2014. Philip Gerlee's Research: Anything goes [online]. P-gerlee.blogspot.se. Available: http://p-gerlee.blogspot.se/2014/09/anything-goes.html [Accessed at 17 Oct. 2015].

Sukopp, T., 2007. Anything goes? Paul K. Feyerabend als Elefant im Popperschen Porzellanladen [online]. Opus4.kobv.de. Available: https://opus4.kobv.de/opus4-bamberg/frontdoor/index/index/docId/20991 [Accessed at 17 Oct. 2015]. 


1. Blog Comment (Link):

You did a great job writing a crisp and clear reflection. Your structure into the three main conclusions makes it easy to follow your thoughts on the first lecture and summarizes it concisely. Moreover, you succeed in explaining the role of the prototype in design research, even taking the extra step by researching the meaning in more detail. It is clear that you really tried to get behind the week's topic and managed to improve your own understanding with the help of different sources. Your pre-theme posts reflect that as well as show that you have a more than good comprehension of the given research papers. In particular, I also agree with your response to the different values of design in a research project (contribution in knowledge) and design in general (satisfy user's needs).

2. Blog Comment (Link):

Reading through your reflections, it is clear that you worked well with the texts and managed throughout the week to increase your knowledge of design research. I especially liked the example of your own experience of building a prototype and how this was of benefit in validating your idea back in high school. I also agree that math can be one part in selecting an idea. However, I don't think it is the only way to prove if an idea is profitable since an idea nobody has believed in first can also prove to be financially successful anyway. Do you agree? Anyway, your text is structured cleverly and follows a strong line of arguments that perfectly showcases a prototype's role and practice - great job!

3. Blog Comment (Link):

I think you did a great job in deducting messages of value for design research and for prototypes. In particular, you get back to original questions of the pre-theme, for instance, answering where the difference lies between design research and design in general – this also got me thinking about this again. Your steps of thought are easy to understand and establish good arguments throughout your text. Reading through your pre-post on this topic, I find specifically interesting what options of assembly you had mentioned, which reminded me of market research used in advertising or marketing. Really good work!

4. Blog Comment (Link):

Thank you for a good summary of week 5. You provide all the core information we got out of the lectures, I just miss some reflective thoughts of your own. However, since we did not have a seminar this week, some questions stayed probably unanswered. As you mentioned in your text, it can be rather confusing to find a solution to a problem, thus Haibo's approach on defining the actual problem might help to assist in finding a solution. I really appreciate this concept since it was news to me - the 90/10 ratio seems a bit intense though. What do you think?

5. Blog Comment (Link):

Your blog posts really show that you put a lot of effort into this week and worked on understanding the topics in-depth. The structure of the text, particularly the first lecture, really helps to frame the idea process. Moreover, you really succeed in bringing me closer to the subject of our second lecture, explaining the content in a very understandable manner while pouring in your own thoughts.

6. Blog Comment (Link):

You have written an interesting reflection by including the main elements of the first lecture and spicing it up with your own thoughts! I like your statement on how you can communicate your idea the best: by being a mixture of a salesperson, an entrepreneur and a researcher - this really captures the challenges of success. When the idea itself is validated and likely profitable, you still need to unify your skills and create opportunities, in order for your idea to make it in reality. Besides, I agree with your answers on the last questions, which summarizes the other arguments in your text. Well done!

7. Blog Comment (Link):

You indisputably did great in structuring the elements in your text containing spot-on conclusions drawn from this week's theme. Your text really captured the essence of the lectures and your own thoughts are worked in skilfully. Especially your comment on the professor's idea selection and validation method proves that you have reflected in detail on the topic. I share your idealist perspective, hoping that a balance of all influencing factors determines the success of an idea. Moreover, I really like your analysis on design research and its ability to question the idea constantly and checking on its relevance. Enjoyed your text!

8. Blog Comment (Link):

Indeed, a very well written and nicely structured reflection. The missing seminar did not seem to limit you in your understanding of the texts. I especially like your statement about how selling your idea is an essential part of being a successful researcher. If it's getting the job, selling your invention, or growing your business, it all revolves around getting other people on board, and for this you just have to be able to sell it - communication is key.
Your arguments distinguishing between the two types of prototypes are truly comprehensive, so any misconceptions about these research fields I might have had vanished. Spot-on!

9. Blog Comment (Link):

Your text is well written, interesting to read and structured in an understandable manner. You focus on one very noteworthy pre-theme question successfully distinguishing between design and design research. I think that your visual samples make your point, and clearly illustrate your thoughts on this; I like that you put the topic in context to your field of study as I see that as one of the course's intentions! Reading through your two posts for this week, I really value your style of writing, since it is of high quality and conveys the messages of the texts together with your own considerations. Spot-on!

10. Blog Comment (Link):

Great reflection in which you put the context in perspective to passed lectures. Enhancing the text with visualizations makes it very easy to understand and succeeds in revising the lectures. I think you successfully summarized the week's messages and did a great job structuring them and putting them into words. Interesting quote of Don Norman! I think it's hard to not measure everything around us in regard to our own perception of it, especially when you develop an idea and are dependent on the opinions of others. Well done!

Reflections

This week was all about design research and the use of prototypes. The intension of the two lectures was to give an idea on how design technologies, prototypes and artifacts can contribute to research. In particular, it was stressed how important the idea creation and the use of prototypes is, especially for a technical driven research. Therefore, the week was helpful for me to get to know the process of designing research and developing prototypes, topics I have not had knowledge about before.

The questions we had to ask ourselves are how we actually have to come up with ideas, how we then filter and validate them, and how we communicate ideas in the end. The most important step in coming up with a high-value idea is to focus on the problem. In particular, there is a difference between a problem and the real problem of a situation. Our teacher exemplified this by setting two people in the woods, when suddenly a bear comes into the scene. Since the bear conveniently is hungry and certainly a faster runner, the two have a problem now. As the lecturer pointed out though, the real problem is not who can run faster, but who can outrun the other person.
Transferred to the design process, it is more important to define the actual problem than to follow the first thought of solution that comes into your mind. Ninety per cent of our time should therefore be taken to find the real problem while ten per cent of the time should be focused on finding a solution.

What I deducted from this particularly is the connection between the real problem and the idea. A great idea actually works, because it complements the real problem with or without knowing it.
So, how do you come up with a potentially great idea? You have to find a real pain point first, meaning a real problem that needs solving. If the market and the timing is right in addition, you have to check if the idea is able too stand strong when further pursued. I compared these criteria on inventions, which we clearly still benefit of today and which were designed out of genius ideas: the TV remote control (1955), the Microwave oven (1955), the Jet Airliner (1958), the Industrial Robot (1961), the Communications Satellite (1962) or the LED (1962), just to name a few (Hutchinson, 2005). Although market situations tend to change quickly, it is apparent that these inventions are still profitable and the products used on a daily basis.

In order to prove that an idea or certain method works, you have to demonstrate its feasibility with the proof of concept, which mostly includes the development of a prototype. As I have already formulated the roles of prototypes in my first theme post, I will just shortly focus on their most important qualities: prototypes are a "first, typical or preliminary model of something, especially a machine, from which other forms are developed or copied" (Oxford Dictionaries, 2015). They typically present different stages during a design development, always representing the current perspective of the designer. Since prototypes continuously question the design decisions, they provoke to gain more knowledge and with that are able to direct the research process.


Hutchinson, A., 2005. The Top 50 Inventions of the Past 50 Years [online]. Popular Mechanics. Available: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/a341/2078467/ [Accessed at 11 Oct. 2015].

Oxford Dictionaries, 2015. prototype: Definition von prototype im Oxford Dictionary (Amerikanisches Englisch) [online]. Available: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/de/definition/englisch_usa/prototype [Accessed at 11 Oct. 2015]. 


1. Blog Comment (Link):

As always I enjoyed reading your blog posts since you sincerely recap on what you have learnt throughout the week and structure your thoughts in an easy and clear manner. We probably all have gone through qualitative and quantitative methods throughout our school or university life, still, you highlighted two important aspects I haven't thought about anymore. In our seminar we started to discuss our bachelor theses, which also shows how different bachelor programs produce diverse methods in approach. Reading through your pre theme post, it is obvious that you analyzed the research paper on FoodLog in-depth, in order to detect its strengths and weaknesses. Great job!

2. Blog Comment (Link):

You did a great job reflecting on the past week by extracting the most important things you have learnt. In my blog post I also put together the key elements when setting up a questionnaire, that's why I found your inside information on this particularly interesting. I share the opinion that even seemingly unimportant things like the layout or the number of questions can already influence the data results. Therefore, questionnaires are one very defining part in the design research of quantitative research studies and strongly shape the quality and magnitude of the outcome.

3. Blog Comment (Link):

Thank you for your reflections on this week's theme Quantitative Methods. I agree with you that this topic neither gave away a lot of new information nor provided much room for a discussion similar to our first themes. However, it is very interesting to read about your group discussion and in particular about the categorization procedure of a questionnaire. Moreover, your clear structure succeeds in guiding the reader through the text and communicates your knowledge well. Well done!

4. Blog Comment (Link):

It was interesting to read about your thoughts and experiences during the past theme. Each week we have passed, it gets harder to remember what we had actually read for the week, so I agree with you and admit to always re-read my own postings as well! In our seminar, we ended up discussing the methods of our bachelor theses, but in the end that just proved how diverse quantitative methods could be. Reading your pre-bog post, I think your revision of methodology is very helpful. Also the division into the areas of design, sampling, data collection and data analysis was a great way to answer the given questions enhanced by the clear structure. You did a great job preparing and reflecting on this week and I enjoyed reading your postings!

5. Blog Comment (Link): 

I really enjoyed reading about the research paper chosen in your pre-post and the insight scoop on its chosen variables and the outcome of the study. In your reflections you also demonstrate your knowledge about the qualitative and quantitative methods while detecting their benefits and limitations. I was particularly interesting to read about your bachelor thesis topic! Great job!

6. Blog Comment (Link):

Thank you for your well-rounded reflections on this week's theme quantitative research. It feels like you have a deep knowledge of the subject and can appoint easily when this method should be used. In addition, your explanation on its benefits by using your research paper achieves to emphasize the accuracy and scope of this method. Furthermore, I think you're text is very well written and nicely structured. I especially appreciate the text highlights since they really emphasize the most important messages.

7. Blog Comment (Link):

You did a great job reflecting on what you and your seminar group have learnt and discussed this week. I especially appreciate your comment on the gender perspective of the article Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality, since I haven't thought about this before. You also summarized perfectly how categorization in quantitative research can also influence the quality of the outcome by its limited response scale. However, there's probably no perfect solution since one is dependent on classification with a growing data extent, but when using a more individual method of gathering data, the research is very likely smaller and not generalizable at all.

8. Blog Comment (Link):

You really demonstrate an usual and distinct approach in your reflections, which made it very interesting to read! I haven't though about the levels of subjectivity and objectivity in quantitative method in-depth like you did, but now with your structure, well-written thoughts and examples you really explained the difference and the underlying problems perfectly.
"Although abuse of data is much less found in research papers than in magazines, newspapers, polls and TV, it is important to realize that statistics is not always “objective” or reliable." How often do we hear 'based on the study of...', 'following new numbers of...' in nowadays media. Your statement here really zones in on the problem of quantitative methods: that the word study might actually have a bad connotation since it is misused in our everyday life and that we are actually confronted with a lot of wrong data on a daily basis!

9. Blog Comment (Link):

Your reflection really summarizes all the important messages of this week's theme quantitative methods. It is clear that you already had a good understanding of these techniques before, but I still appreciate your concise discussion of their benefits and limitations. I especially like that you put your own thoughts in this and tried to get more out of the topic, although you were very familiar with it. You found a good example to explain the combined use of qualitative and quantitative methods - this really visualizes how research can increase in value by blending both together. Enjoyed reading your posts!

10. Blog Comment (Link):

Thank you for your well-written and crisp reflection! You succeed in guiding the reader through your text making it easy to follow your thoughts. It is interesting that the lecture and seminar could change your perspective on objectivity and how we are often judging before assessing. Your explained the connection between the design of the study and the researcher's perception in a very understandable manner. The visualization with candy really helps to clarify your point in favor of a combination of the two methods: "this would shed light on our perception of quantity" – Well said!


Qualitative and case study research

1. Select a media technology research paper that is using qualitative methods. The paper should have been published in a high quality journal, with an “impact factor” of 1.0 or above. The following are examples of questions to discuss in your blog posting:

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

Following the given instructions, I chose a high quality research paper called Cultural Similarities and Differences in the Design of University Web sites by Ewa Callahan, which was published in the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (Impact factor: 3.117). It "examines cultural differences and similarities in design of university Web sites using Hofstede’s model of cultural dimensions" (Callahan, 2005: 239).

Graphical elements on the university websites in eight different countries were compared to each other using the content analysis method. In particular, there was a focus on the visual content, differencing between the criteria of organization and graphical design of the homepage. On the other hand, the method is beneficial since it enables the establishment of individual categories applied on the websites and can fully adept to the researcher's considerations without any restrictions. On the other hand, there is a big chance that not all possible graphical elements on each site are considered. In addition, the study is limited to the genre of university homepages, which means for instance, that the pictures used are very likely to show a higher quantity of younger than older people. Since qualitative methods usually have to compromise between individuality and data size, this study also was limited within the selection of countries.

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

The study shines light on a university's opportunity to adapt to future students and possibly how to rise its attraction level. Although the qualitative method proves to be very extensive and tries to include various categorizations, I learned that it can never really attest to reality or include all possibilities. Especially, cultural differences are hard to compare specifically, but still, it is interesting to see how to undertake a qualitative design process by using Hofstede's cultural model, how his indexes correlated with the abstracted data and how this is further on interpreted. Additionally, the study method succeeded in detecting cultural markers typical of specific cultures.

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

One methodological problem might be that the graphical design is not just influenced by the culture in the country of the university, but also depends on the intension, background and motivations of the designer. Often the homepage of one specific country is replicating the organizational structure of homepages in other countries and are therefore visualizing more than one cultural perspective. Another issue is that cultural aspects are strongly influenced by the language and discourse styles, which were not analysed in this study. Therefore, the method could have been improved by including language as a variable. It would have also been interesting to see, if cultural differences in web design influences the usability or attraction level for different types of students. Moreover, since just a few universities in a country were tested, it should be considered to extend the scale of research data in terms of the number of universities in a country or the number of countries tested itself.

Callahan, E., 2005. Cultural Similarities and Differences in the Design of University Web sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 11, No. 1, p. 239-273.


2. Read the following article:

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.

Select a media technology research paper that is using the case study research method. The paper should have been published in a high quality journal, with an “impact factor” of 1.0 or above. Your tasks are the following:

Briefly explain to a first year university student what a case study is.

By using single or multiple cases on various levels of analysis, a case study tries to understand the dynamics present within single settings. They typically use different data collection methods that can be qualitative or quantitative (e.g. archives, interviews, questionnaires, observations). The intension of case studies is to postulate explanations, and test or generate theories.

Use the "Process of Building Theory from Case Study Research" (Eisenhardt, summarized in Table 1) to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of your selected paper.

In the following, I will analyze the paper with the help of Eisenhardt's table summary as a roadmap for how to execute this kind of research. The paper in question deals with Revealing the Vulnerability of People in Places: A Case Study of Georgetown County, South Carolina, published in the Annals of the Association of American Geographers (2014 Impact Factor: 2.291).

Getting Started
The paper successfully defines the research question after explaining beforehand the necessity of the research itself. By using a conceptual model of vulnerability that implements both biophysical and social indicators to assess hazards, the design is trying to understand the complexities of vulnerability and its attributes and effects in a real-world setting.

Selecting Cases
There were no theories and hypotheses brought up, but the study examined a specific population in Georgetown County, South Carolina. The location was chosen since the researchers were familiar with the area, the area experiences a lot of different hazards and has a broad sociodemographic profile.

Crafting Instruments and Protocols
The research uses qualitative and quantitative data, in order to investigate the study area. For instance, the data of hazard events and the rate of occurrence had to be collected by using historical data. Further, the hazard zones had to be detected and spatial impact areas were defined. The research uses for instance the model of the National Hurricane Center for likely affected areas.

Entering the Field
Going through various studies and research data that investigated natural hazards, the researchers describe the context of the case study and the underlying social and biophysical elements in-depth.

Analysing Data
The extensive data was analysed by putting the different data layers into a geographic information system. To extract the information, all layers were combined into a single composite of intersecting polygons that had different biophysical hazard scores assigned. That way, the geography of individual hazard zone as well as 'vulnerable' areas could be examined.

Shaping Hypotheses
The research logically derives evidence from the researched data and explains extensively the causes and in-between relationships. Wile the factors are very hard to define, terms like social vulnerability or the vulnerability of places were assessed in detail.

Enfolding Literature
Throughout the research article, literature is compared to the study and the provided information, especially at the beginning to cover the ground of geography as human ecology. However, there is not a specific chapter in the closing parts, which would enfold literature.

Reaching Closure
The case study presents a template for future integrated place-based hazard studies. The public policy ground still leaves a lot of space uncovered, and this research proves that researchers can significantly contribute.


Cutter, S., Mitchell, J. and Scott, M., 2000. Revealing the Vulnerability of People and Places: A Case Study of Georgetown County, South Carolina. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 90, No. 4, p. 713-737.

Eisenhardt, K., 1989, Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 4, p. 532-550.