It begins...

At present, I generally am working on:

• development of a methodology
• developing a state of the art review
• compiling literature sources
• reading/annotating sources

This last week, I spent some time investigating methodologies. Because of time pressures at Dogus*, I wasn't able to spend as much time on thesis development as I wanted. I am hoping this issue resolves itself this week. I did not spend any time investigating new sources; instead I spent my available time looking into research methodology.

Concerns with Grounded Theory

In my meeting with Nigan Hanim last week, she suggested that we consider Grounded Theory as the methodology to use in this thesis. Relating to Grounded Theory I have three concerns. I don't mean to suggest that I think Grounded Theory is the wrong approach, but I am not completely convinced that it is the best approach.

Applicability in thesis work in general

Bob Dick in "Grounded theory: a thumbnail sketch," suggests that some thesis examiners have difficulty with emergent methodologies, including Grounded Theory, because they break with traditional hypothesis/test approaches. Will this be an issue for this thesis?

Level of rigor in this thesis in particular

I believe that it is widely held that of the emergent methodologies, Grounded Theory is the most rigorous. In my original writeup ("A Research Proposal for the Investigation of Gender Differences in Music Reproduction Products" for our Design Research Methods course) I mentioned Grounded Theory as a possible method, but I had my concerns that it may be overly rigorous for this study, and that concern remains. I am concerned that the research may get bogged down in the details regarding proper implementation of Grounded Theory and lose sight of the theory and insight that it intends to develop. While I am not at all against the idea of rigor, I am concerned that a balance needs to be maintained between methodological rigor--too much of which can impede the discovery of ideas--and what I will call "open discoverability".

Sociology vs. design

The above view is compounded by the scope of the study as well, and this is possibly my greatest concern. In short, if we implement a Grounded Theory approach to the role of gender in music equipment, then the research really becomes a thesis in sociology rather than design. I am motivated to make this study more about design and less about sociology.

Possible alternatives to Grounded Theory

In "A Research Proposal ..." I suggested two alternatives to Grounded Theory. Since then I have thought of another. These are discussed below.

Other emergent approaches

James Turner and Barbara Rawlings discuss qualitative emergent approaches (e.g., based on semi-structured interviews) that don't have the level of rigor as Grounded Theory. The methods they discuss lack a distinct names, making them perhaps a little harder to nail down in terms of specific standards. However, the presence of both these sources suggests that there are available methodologies that are emergent without having the potentially paralyzing level of the rigor found in Grounded Theory.

However, like Grounded Theory, since these are still emergent approaches, concerns about appropriateness for thesis work apply here as well.

Desmet's model of emotion in design

One way of pulling the research more toward the direction of design is to base research on Pieter Desmet's model of emotion in design. The idea here would be to attempt to fit men's and women's views of music reproduction equipment into Desmet's model, and then analyze the differences. An additional benefit of this approach is that the research would have a more structured protocol than either Grounded Theory or a more general qualitative approach based on semi-structured interviews.

Fantasy

Brunner, Bennet, and Honey analyzed girls' relationship with technology using a "fantasy study" methodology. They asked groups of boys and girls to sketch their idea of what a future "perfect instrument" would be and analyzed the results. From the references cited in that work, it appears that this techniquemay fall under the category of "constructionist activities." It seems quite possible to do a similar study with music reproduction equipment using adults that fit the target demographic; i.e., ask a target group to sketch their ideal tool for listening to music and analyze the results. (In addition to meeting a desirable demographic, participants in this study would also need basic sketching skills. Designers and design students come immediately to mind as primary candidates--at least for initial work.)

Certainly, research into the applicability of this sort of approach to thesis work is required.

Immediate goals

• Share concerns about methodology with Nigan Hanim reach resolution.
• Continue to develop methodology after one has solidly been decided on, including determination of sample group(s).
• Additional literature review.

*Two RAs quit last week, meaning that the two lab assistants I was previously assigned were given other, more pressing duties. I therefore needed to under short time constraints develop lab methods for two different courses. It's going to be a busy term!

References

Bruner, Cornelia, Dorothy T Bennett, and Margaret Honey. Girl Games and Technological Desire. The Jossey-Bass Reader on Technology and Learning. Ed. unknown. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc., 2000. 168-183.

Desmet, Pieter. “A Multilayered Model of Product Emotions.” The Design Journal, 6.2 (2003): 4-13.

Dick, Bob. “Grounded Theory: a thumbnail sketch.” 2002. Accessed 03 Mar 2006. <http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/grounded.html>.

Rawlings, Barbara. Research Seminar Series: Research Interviewing. Manchester: Institute of Advanced Studies: Manchester Polytechnic, date unknown.

Turner, J. Research Methods. Manchester: Institute of Advanced Studies, Manchester Metropolitan University, 1993.