Senior Center - First Visit

Visit to Liberty Senior Center: Friday, 9/27/2013, 9:40 a.m. – 10:40 a.m.

Notes typed: Friday, 9/27/2013, 5:25

Site notes:

            Entering the facility, there is a large front desk and a small sitting area. Past the desk, the reception area open up into a large, light-filled room with couches, tables, and a television. Tiffany and I ask where the computer room is, and we are led into a small hallway off the south side of the main room. The computer room is the 2^nd and last room on the hallway. The door has a glass window and a sign that lists out the behaviors that will cause someone to lose access to the computer room.

            Inside, there are nine computers set up in a 3x3 formation. The computers are set on long tables—three tables with three computers each—all facing the side of the room with the door. At the front of the room (the direction all of the computers are facing), there is a small desk and several chairs that are facing toward the back of the room. There is also a pull-down screen mounted on the ceiling at the front of the room. Along the west wall, there is a white board. The white board contains a message about the colors of markers allowed to be used on the board and what appears to be a black-and-white Xeroxed sign about safe practices online (how not to get your identity stolen). A written note reminds users to shut down the computer and monitor whenever they are finished. There are two windows in the back of the room, looking outside, and there are two windows at the front of the room looking into the hall. Another sign at the front informs users that Xerox copies are $.10 a piece, though no Xerox machine (or printer) is seen in the room.

            The computer stations provide users with a Dell computer—the monitor sits on top of the table along with two speakers. Most of the speakers appear to be the same model, though one computer at the front of the room has a set of older speakers (probably swapped out at some point due to malfunction). The computer tower is underneath the table, largely unseen. There is a mouse and keyboard on the table for user input. The operating system is Windows, and it appears to be Windows XP, specifically. There is one computer, in the center East position of the classroom, which has a sign taped to it that says it is out of order. I did not think at the time to do an inventory of the installed programs on the computers, but I observed the use of Internet Explorer and Microsoft Word while in the computer room. On the back of the monitors of each computer, there is a sticker that says “Salt Lake Criminal Justice System” accompanied by a bar code.

            The room appears to be set up to be a classroom. Whether this was its purpose before or after the computers were installed cannot be ascertained. The problematic element here, for me, is the pull-down screen at the front of the room. If someone were instructing and wanted to use visual aids, then it would make sense that they might project something on that screen. However, there is no projector mounted in that room, and even if they wanted to use overhead projectors with transparencies, it doesn’t seem like there is enough room at the front to get a good projection.

            It is also clear that the technology in the room has been donated. The stickers on the backs of the monitors show that the computers are from the Salt Lake Criminal Justice System, and they were probably donated when the Criminal Justice System upgraded to newer computers. For donated computers, they appear to be in good condition. There is no obvious wear on them, no apparent damage. They move a little sluggishly, but almost imperceptibly so. Aside from the computer that is marked as out of order, the computers appear to be functioning as well as can be expected.

Interviews: Since Tiffany and I were both hesitant to begin with, we did our first two interviews as a team. We made the choice not to use anything to record the conversations because we didn’t want to affect responses. While we asked questions, we both took notes.

            When we first entered the room, there were four people using computers. Of those, one was wearing headphones, so we didn’t want to disturb him. Another was in the back row against the East wall, with another person occupying the back row aisle seat, so it would have been difficult to get to the man by the wall. Of the two people this left, we chose to talk to the man in the back row on the aisle.

            I approached the man in the back row, and Tiffany and I introduced ourselves. He introduced himself as Jim and explained that he was a bit hard of hearing, but would be happy to talk to us. We began by asking what he usually uses the computers at the senior center for. He said that he was primarily interested in checking stocks (which he used to trade, but doesn’t anymore), sports (he had a page with scores up when we approached him), and music. Jim went on to tell us that he enjoyed looking up music from his youth and early adulthood like Sinatra and Bing Crosby. He offered to play us a song, and we accepted. He searched for audio of Sinatra’s “My Way.” After failing to get a video to load and play, he opened a new browser, did the search again, and found a live recording of the song. He turned up the speakers, and the song could be heard throughout the room.

            After the song finished, Jim told us about how he also likes looking up videos and audio commentary for Joe Lewis, the boxer. Jim had been a fan of Joe Lewis when he was young, but at that time, he could only listen to the fights on the radio. He likes the fact that he can now find video and audio of some of these fights that he couldn’t get when he was young.

            We asked if he found anything frustrating about using the computers at the senior center, and he replied that they are a bit slow and outdated. He also mentioned that, when there is a problem with one of the computers, it often remains unfixed for up to a month. There apparently used to have been a computer in the front corner of the room that he liked to use, but it began to malfunction and was removed. Jim also stated that he would like to learn to use email so that he could communicate with his cousin in Crete who runs a hotel. Currently, he keeps in contact with this cousin solely through the phone and calls him frequently.

            When asked about how he has gone about learning to use the computer, Jim told us that he was entirely self-taught. While the senior center sometimes offers classes on Tuesdays (not every Tuesday, though), he doesn’t attend these. There are only 2, 3, or 4 people who come. Jim believes that one of the biggest problems for seniors trying to learn to use computer technology is that they give up too easily. He has tried to teach others and help them out, but they often just give up when they encounter a problem.

Class Notes 5

Qualitative Methods – 9.24.2013

What is the birthday present – it’s a symbolic present to stand for something that’s being made, like a chair or table. Either that, or he got her a wood plane (thing with which you plane wood, not a plane made of wood, though the tool could have wooden elements, I guess). Our guess should go on the website.

We need to begin engaging the concepts from class, answering the questions that were posed in the beginning of the course.

            Why do we do interpretive research at all? The focus is on the embedded meanings of action, linguistic, and/or symbolic texts. The work begins with surface expressions and moves below to the cultural structures that exist under the surface. Thick description is meant to reveal the meanings and cultural implications that draw out the surface expression. Social construction is what drove the turn to interpretive. In order to use the social constructive perspective, we must consider the requirements of the material practices. This is expressed through whatever is considered appropriate behavior. An example of this would be Julie’s observation of coffee shop behavior and being disciplined through disapproving glances for having a conversation. The truth in this material practice can be seen through latitudes of expression in action, speech, and self-presentation.

            When we look at the move from metric epistemology to interpretive epistemology, there are three defining characteristics. One of these is the security and trustworthiness of preferentiality and representation. As interpretive researchers, we must be willing to truth the answers that our participants give us, but we acknowledge that there may be more or different truths available. The metric researcher must assume that all answers are as valid as their methodology. There are different power relations between the researcher and informant. The informant has most of the power in interpretive work, whereas metric studies tend to give the researcher power over the informant. This can change depending on the particular method being used, however. We can evaluate the power dynamics by asking about the relational contract, who initiates and is responsible for the action, who has agenda control, and who determines value? Finally, the interpretivist tradition has a requirement of interpretation, whereas metric work does not usually need to be interpreted.

            One of the facets of study for interpretive researchers is space. We need to be able to distinguish between static and dynamic space. Space has intentional boundaries for action, and it is an expression of value, power relations, status, past history, appropriateness, cultural location, and other things. Space is a text. Dynamic space is also a text, and it is an action appropriated resource. We need to consider how the action appropriates the space and makes it its own.

            Field notes shouldn’t be connected—they are not the story or report of the observation. They are directed at problems, those you define as part of your research. There is an infinite number of things to focus on, and so we must choose to focus on something. Field notes are not the same as episodic narratives. We are trying to narrow the reach (the amount of things we describe) and thicken the description (get into the cultural implications). Ideally, we should implement a notational system to show time, ellipses, reconstructions (of conversations), intrusions, and commentary.

For next week, we need to go back to observe the place we went to this week. Begin the observation with an analysis of static space, followed by an analysis of dynamic space.

            Administrative improvement studies and classroom activities do not need to go through IRB. There is a protocol for public ethnographies (in public space with people who are not organizationally engaged), which is that they go to Jim and he approves it.

           

Activity: Putting together an interview guide for the Senior Center Project

We are going to take a collaborative-interactive stance at these interviews. We need to think through the potential solutions, and these are topics for the interviews.

Topics: Words/vocabulary; signs & symbols; navigation and instructions; computer/internet; family; expectations; wishes/wants; cell phones, cameras, apps, calculator/basics

We need to determine which of these topics we are able to best process and use. We can only ask about so many things, and we will tend to be more comfortable about some things over others.

We don’t need to systematize our data collection (between individuals at least).

            One of the differences between metric empiricism and interpretive empiricism is that metric is concerned with rates and interpretive is concerned with critical instances. The critical instance is the effective moment (that makes it all sensible) instead of standardized interviews. 

Tracy's Qualitative Research Methods, Ch. 6

Tracy’s Qualitative Research Methods

Ch. 6: Field Roles, Fieldnotes, and Field Focus

Field Roles and Standpoints of Participant Observation

            Whereas once, the idea of “going native” (participating too fully in the scene) was considered a bad thing, modern qualitative researchers believe that this is the only way to fully understand the emotionality of participants. The phrase, which has colonialist undertones, assumes that researchers must remain detached and objective, a perspective that is generally rejected by qualitative scholars.  Instead, we ought to consider our place in the scene to be one gauged by degree of enmeshment and overlapping roles. We must ask which standpoint of participation is appropriate for the project, and what kind of data would best maximize outcomes and minimize limitations?

            When researchers study places or groups to which they are already a member, it is called complete participation. This gives more incentive to the researcher to spend time in the field. The availability of data is far greater than in other contexts, and it allows for greater insight into motivations, meanings, and assumptions. Researchers must remember, however, to pursue others’ interpretations as well as their own. If the researcher assumes the values and ideologies of the studied group, they are called an ardent activist. The challenges that come with this type of participation are the ethical problems and the potential feeling of deception by participants. Deception may be necessary, though, when studying contexts that otherwise would not divulge information, such as studying “up the hierarchy.” Being so heavily enmeshed in a culture may also mean that the researcher has a hard time distinguishing unique values.

            If a researcher enters a new culture and improvises or assumes membership in a temporary way, they are called a play participant. They watch and join in, but do so entirely to gain greater understanding of the culture. When the researcher joins in, but remains skeptical, they are called a controlled skeptic. Being a play participant means that the researcher is able to get close to those on the scene, and they go beyond basic reporting. This can sometimes be uncomfortable for the researcher. It is also easier for the play participant to make data recordings, while the complete participant usually does not have time or ability to do so. It is also easier for play participants to take breaks. One of the biggest challenges is in keeping good standing with the participants and making them feel that the research will not harm them.

            The focused participant observer is a researcher who “enters a scene with an explicit researcher status and a clear agenda of what data to gather in the scene.” This approach can include structured interviews, but without long-term participation. The field work with this type of role is highly structured, and it doesn’t last as long as other types of field work. The benefits of this type of work include the well-defined research plan, the low time commitment, and the ability to avoid recurring negotiations of access. It is, however, limited to the data that participants are willing to reveal about themselves, and it takes a necessary etic approach.

            The complete observer is one that is unobtrusive or on the peripheral. They do not participate in the scene. Participants are not aware that they are being studied. A positive characteristic of this is the ease of access. It also is usually granted exempt IRB status. The risk taken in this kind of research is the observer’s detachment from the scene. There is no questioning of the actors, and so it is difficult to gauge motivations or feelings. It is possible that misinterpretations can arise, fueled by ethnocentrism.

Writing Fieldnotes

            Field notes are narrations of the observations taken in the field. The process begins with raw records—the notes jotted down during the act of observing. It is a good idea not to write about what you are seeing as you see it. In some cases, you can bring along a camera or videocam, but this must be included in the IRB application. Voice recorders can also be particularly useful. The method used should be chosen by considering efficiency, reliability and durability, personal comfort, organizational skills, and the way you personally make sense of data. Even if you are not able to take notes, it is possible to get some fieldnotes out of memory. These can take the form of headnotes—“focused memories of specific events, as well as impressions and evaluations of the unfolding project” (Linklof & Taylor, 2002, p. 159).

            Fieldnotes should be written within a day and a half of having done fieldwork. You should try not to talk to anyone about the experience, because the conversation can color your recollections. The fieldnote should be created in a new file with a significant identifying name. It is helpful to put names to the episodes in the header of the document. The header is also a place for location and source of data. The fieldnote should be written quickly, without concern about enforcing a particular style. There should be some kind of organizational element, whether you start from a high point and work around it or write in a chronological fashion. They can also be organized as sketches or episodes. It is a good idea to end fieldnotes with a to do list. There can also be an ongoing cast of characters file in a separate document that keeps descriptions of certain recurring figures. Good fieldnotes should be clear, vivid, detailed, showing (rather than telling), full of dialogue, and complete with your interpretations.

            Lindhof and Taylor recommend that fieldnotes should take up 10 double-spaced pages for each hour of participant observation. Goffman suggests three to five. Tracy notes that it depends, and length is not always equal to quality. If they are too long, fieldnotes can become cumbersome.

            Fieldnotes should be concerned with showing things so that a reader would come to the same conclusion as the writer without being told what to think. Good fieldnotes also elaborate on tacit knowledge. They include descriptions of concrete, sensory detail. It is important to include nonverbal behavior. When you can include sentences or phrases directly from the scene, these are called in vivo terms.

            Another important thing to attempt in fieldnotes is to make the familiar strange and the strange familiar. They should explain things in a way that renews perception. This can be done by pointing out peculiarities about otherwise ordinary situations or familiarities in otherwise strange ones.

            Fieldnotes should also include analysis, which can come in the form of the researcher’s reactions, doubts, prejudices, frustrations, and interpretations of the scene. These can take the form of analytic reflections, which are commentary from the researcher about these feelings. They can be brief and reflective, more elaborate and focusing on specific issues, or more sustained analyses.

Focusing the Data and Using Heuristic Devices

            When researchers start questioning what kinds of data to collect, they should consider visiting the periphery. This can allow you to compare things like the typical to the extraordinary and the peripheral with the marginal. Data can come in three forms: typical/representational, negative/disconfirming, and exceptional/discrepant. Systematization can be facilitated through heuristic models—“conceptual tool kits that stimulate further investigation, learning, and thinking.” These can include processes like examining rituals or cultural scripts. Tracy advocates looking at the following: Space/scene, frontstage/backstage, objects and artifacts, actors and agents, roles and types, activities, interactions, time, goals/purpose, feelings, power relations, values, communication, and processes. As the researcher decides just which facets of the culture they are interested in, they can begin selective observation. 

Tracy's Qualitative Research Methods, Ch. 5 Notes

Tracy’s Qualitative Research Methods

Chapter 5: Proposal Writing

Getting Started with the Institutional Review

            Research proposals are “detailed plans that lay out the purpose, path, and procedures of the project.” Voluntary informed consent is a necessity, and as a result, we have human subject protections. Review boards are mostly governed by the Belmont Report, which is a statement of principles regarding human subjects. It includes requirements for scientifically valid research designs and that the benefits of the study outweigh the risks. Your university’s IRB website will have a great deal of resources, and sometimes this includes training, workshops, and online certifications.

The IRB Proposal: Rationale, Instruments, Informed Consent, and Confidentiality

            The rationale for a study is a primary component of an IRB application. It should explain things like research questions, duration, scope, recruitment, and data collection methods. For qualitative scholars, when asked to list research instruments, they should cite things like the questions they intend to ask in interviews. In the IRB application, it is also necessary to include the way that you intend for people to give informed consent. The particular requirements for informed consent will differ depending on the institution. When working with vulnerable populations, forms of assent are used instead of consent. Forms of consent are still needed from guardians or trustees in these situations, though. IRB may also ask for a letter of permission from an official or group gatekeeper if the group studied is private. Applications must also contain the procedures used to keep information about participants protected. In some cases, data will have to be modified or omitted in order to minimize the chance of deductive disclosure of a research participant.

Different Levels of IRB Review

            Exempt review – This is the quickest review, and it is used for qualitative studies of public behavior. The study must not collect identifying details of participants. It often requires the researcher to only give out an informational letter rather than a full letter of consent. Letters may not even be needed if observations are done from afar.

            Expedited review – This includes the usual application and turnaround takes several weeks. This type of review is necessary for studies that collect names and identifying details about the subjects. An expedited review is also necessary if the data collected could cause criminal, financial, or occupational harm to the participants.

            Full-board review – This type of review is necessary for projects that work with participants that cannot give their consent. Full-board review can take longer than three months.

The Quirks of IRB

            IRB has been criticized for its involvement with qualitative research because members of the board are frequently unfamiliar with the conventions of qualitative work. Due to the emphasis on generalizability by the IRB, some qualitative researchers choose to skip IRB because they are not concerned with making generalizable statements with their research. Not getting IRB backing can be problematic, particularly if something goes wrong with the project. Review is also advisable for any work that may be presented or published. Getting a project through IRB quickly can be done by making sure the project uses well-known and frequently used practices.

Creating the Scholarly Research Proposal

            The success of scholarly research proposals is in their ability to closely adhere to the standards and guidelines of the professor, institution, or agency. Research proposals almost uniformly include titles, abstracts, key words, rationales, research purposes, goals, reviews of existing knowledge, research questions, plans for data collection, and timeline or budget.

            Titles of research projects should communicate the main topic and invite readers to learn more. The title, abstract, and key words should clearly communicate what the proposal is about, and they should stay away from heavy uses of jargon or overly clever or cute conventions. Key words can include methodological terms, the discipline, context, or theoretical approaches.

Introduction and Rationale

            Purpose statement – Explains the primary purpose and goal of the research; should be obvious and explicit.

            Conceptual cocktail party – This is the identification of the various audiences of the project. It should attempt to create a dialogue by citing four or five major people who are influential or tied to the project through scholarly work or other types of contributions.

            Rationale – The rationale answers the “So what?” question. If the work is phronetic, this is an easy task. If it is a theoretical piece, then rational can explain how the study will build on existing knowledge, how it might fill a gap, or how it might bridge various concepts. Simply pointing out a lack of knowledge is usually not good enough.

            Literature review – This is the longest part of a proposal. It shows how the primary concepts and theories have evolved over time, and it frames the study. This can be easier if you adopt the theories that have guided another project—you can mine their bibliography. The literature review should be organized by topic or issue rather than author.

            Research questions – The research question should be closely related to the title, rationale, and literature review. They include the same language that is used within the rest of the proposal.

            Methods – The methods section includes the number of researcher hours, the number and type of participants, the number of pages of data that might be expected, and the way that such data will be collected. This is also the area for explaining specialized words.

            Budget/timeline – This section is not required in all proposals. It includes a list of all the research tools needed and their costs. It is important not to be too conservative when writing this section.

            Projected outcomes – This section is also not required in every proposal. It needs a discussion of possible conceptual or material outcomes, such as helping resolve a theoretical debate or increasing understanding of a problem. Material outcomes can include class papers, conference papers, grant applications, scholarly articles, white papers, class syllabi, strategic plans, or coordination plans.

Observation

Observation occurred at 7:45 – 8:42 p.m., 9/19/2013; Worlds Games Store

Field Notes written at 11:12 a.m., 9/21/2013

               I should begin by acknowledging that I have a small history with the place I observed. The store I spent time in—Worlds Games—is one I’ve visited many times before. I went with my boyfriend Peter, who had some things he wanted to trade in.  We’re both known in the store; we could be considered regulars. For the past year, I have found myself in the store for one reason or another about once a week and sometimes more than that.

               Worlds Games is a general video game store in Salt Lake City. As an independent shop, they stock old and vintage games, systems, and accessories as well as new titles and systems. They also buy products—anything that is even tangentially related to video games. The store features everything from video and computer games ranging from the 70s to present to card games, cardboard standees, and other licensed merchandise (think statuettes, lunch boxes, plushes, masks, posters, and more). Many things in the store don’t have a price, and it’s clear that the amount of merchandise is testing the capacity of the store. Every wall has shelving, and all of the shelving is full. In the center of the store, there are displays—many of them made simply by stacking merchandise on top of other merchandise until it makes 5- or 6-foot towers.

               I enter the store from the north side of the building. Worlds Games is on the north end of a small, 3-store strip mall. In the middle is a barber (where I’ve only once seen a customer), and at the south end is a print shop. Walking into Worlds Games, you travel through a short hallway made by eye-level bookcases stocked with games and merchandise. Once inside, a counter and a small office is to the left. The counter is essentially a wood and glass display case that has been fit with Christmas lights and filled with old and rare gaming systems. Straight ahead, in the southeast corner of the shop is an area that is walled off with bookcases and plywood. Inside, they have several couches and a projection system set up. The area can be rented out to hold gaming tournaments, but more often than not, one of the many employees of the store is in there watching a movie or playing a game. In the southwest corner of the shop is the area for new(er) games, featuring stock for the Nintendo Wii, WiiU, 3DS, DS, PS3, PS2, and XBOX 360. New and used stock are placed on the shelves together. Often, there will be multiple copies of any title, all at different price points due to new or used status and condition. This trend holds true for the wall of PC games found along the eastern wall of the shop. Here, new games are interspersed with software made as early as the late 80s. One can pick up a copy of Diablo III as well as an unopened copy of Windows NT.

               The people who work in the store seem to be on an ever-revolving basis. The owner of the store is constant, even if he isn’t present all the time. He appears to be in his early 30s, and all of his employees seem to be of early high school age. It’s a running joke with my friends who shop there that you can never go to Worlds Games without seeing a new employee. Frequently, the employees outnumber the customers, and this is why they’re so often hanging out in the projector room. The employees are also predominately male—I only remember seeing a young woman working there once, and it has probably been a year since that happened. Nonetheless, they’re usually very talkative and happy to give their opinions on anything and everything. There is a large flat screen TV set up on the counter, plugged into an XBOX 360. When the employees aren’t talking to customers or in the projector room, they’re messing with the counter system.

               September 19^th, 2013 was a Thursday night, and the store didn’t have many customers. When I came in, there was an older man—thin, tall, with a white/gray beard and glasses—accompanied by two boys, both of whom were probably around 10 or 12. He was talking to the employee currently at the register (one I didn’t recognize) while one of the kids he was with played the 360 on the counter. He was playing a fighting game, something put out by Capcom featuring superheroes beating up other superheroes. The other kid spent the time back in the section of newer games. When the transaction was finished, the older man and the kid who had been playing the 360 went and joined the other kid in the newer games section. One of the boys had picked up a special edition boxed copy of Call of Duty: Black Ops and was talking about how much he loved that game. The older man asked the other kid how he liked Black Ops, and the kid gushed that he “loved it!”

               While the Black Ops conversation was going on, another event was taking place. When I’d first walked into the store, I could hear that someone was using the projector room. Because it isn’t really a room, any sound made by the system in that corner floods the entire store. Someone was in there playing the newest Grand Theft Auto game (GTA V), which came out on Tuesday (9/17/2013). The game series is infamous for its violent, raunchy content, and while the man and the two boys were talking about Black Ops, you could hear the dialogue of the game playing out across the store, a long string of F***s and N*****s, accompanied by what sounded like beating someone to death with a baseball bat. The owner of the store suddenly appeared from the office, and he dashed into the projector room. Immediately, the sounds stopped and the owner went back to the office. Another employee (one I had seen before) emerged from the projector room a few minutes later, looking a bit peeved. He wasn’t made to shut off his game entirely, though. You could still see the game map projected on the wall through the doorway to the room. As long as I was there, though, it didn’t start up again.

               It seemed to me that the owner was trying to keep offensive content to a minimum with young kids in the store, but at the same time, those very kids were professing their love for Call of Duty: Black Ops, a game that consists largely of indiscriminately shooting people to death. Fans of the game would say that it is not indiscriminate—you are given missions to kill people. Nonetheless, it’s a game about killing. However, the cultural taboo that was violated in the store was not the kids that played violent games, but rather the loud broadcasting of certain words. The older man and the two boys didn’t really seem to acknowledge what was going on, and given current gaming culture, I wouldn’t be wholly surprised if one of those kids didn’t already own a copy of GTA V. When the man and kids went to leave, they walked by one of the cases that held older systems. One of the boys pointed to a Virtual Boy that was set up, and the older man had to explain to him that it was a Virtual Boy and it came out before even the Super Nintendo. After this exchange, the man knocked into one of the towers of precariously stacked merchandise, sending a half dozen or so games flying to the floor. Immediately he shouted out, “Nothing’s broke!” The kids scrambled, picking up all of the cases and putting them back onto the stack.

               Another person that had been in the store when I arrived was a young man in his late teens or early twenties who seemed to be alone, drifting through the store picking up items. He wore a black and white shirt with a graphic of a turntable on it and thick-framed glasses. He walked among the stacks and bins of merchandise, picking up things here and there and digging around in the bin of empty game boxes. After about half an hour, he approached the counter. He was holding maybe 8-10 cases, some of them with games and others empty. He started explaining that he was hoping he could get some kind of bulk discount. Because Worlds Games is independent, it is more likely for them to cut deals with customers. For this customer, however, it wasn’t to be. He’d picked up a lot of extremely cheap items, and the owner was called out. He couldn’t justify giving any kind of a discount when his margins on each item were already so low. The customer paid for his items and quickly left.

               The store was empty for a while, save for myself, Peter, and the employees. Eventually, a young man and young woman entered. Both were blond and dressed in unusually formal looking clothes— black button-up shirt, red tie, and black slacks on the man and a short black dress on the woman. They approached the counter immediately, and the woman asked the owner (who had come out to work the counter) if they sold any N64 expansions. The owner asked her if she knew which model of N64 she had, and she responded that she didn’t. She went on to explain that the man’s parents owned a cabin at a lake, and the cabin had an N64. I assume that it was far enough away or so infrequently visited that they didn’t know much about the N64 system. The owner replied to her that he couldn’t really tell her which expansions to buy since he didn’t know the model, but that expansions were fairly rare anyway, so he might not have what she was looking for. The woman took the news well, and went on to look around the store. At one point, she exclaimed “I can’t believe anyplace sells these anymore!” while looking at some Super Nintendo peripherals. At this point, it was clear that the shop was getting ready to close for the night, so I left before the N64 couple had finished browsing.

Tracy Notes, Ch. 4

Tracy, Qualitative Research Methods

Chapter 4: “Fieldwork and fieldplay: Negotiating access and exploring the scene”

A participant observation primer

            Participant observation is a way of generating knowledge through participation within a group, organization, place, or culture. It involves watching, interacting, and asking questions. Tracy advocates the use of the term “fieldplay,” because often there is much to be learned through creativity, curiosity, improvisation, and playfulness. Despite this, research must be systematically planned out, and the researcher must always be mindful. It is important to not only study people, but also to learn from/with people. This comes through looking at three aspects of human experience: what people do/cultural behavior, what people know/cultural knowledge, and what people make and use/cultural artifacts.

Knock, knock, knocking on participants’ doors: negotiating access

            One of the most important parts of qualitative research is finding people who are willing to let you in, and therefore, such people are participants rather than subjects. Researchers study with such people, not conduct research on them. The process of gaining entry is a continual and time-consuming part of the research. One way of getting around this is to study places where you are already a member. Another is to begin by working with someone who has credibility in the group, organization, or culture, who can essentially vouch for you. Researchers can also take advantage of family and friend networks. Tracy advocates making contact information logs so that you can stay on top of who you know and what access they can provide you.

            Getting into a scene often requires the permission of a gatekeeper. There are challenges not only in negotiating entrance with this person, but also in identifying them in the first place. We should be conscious of how we present ourselves and our project, particularly emphasizing beneficial frames. This can be done through an access proposal, a document that pitches the project to the gatekeepers.

            Working in virtual environments presents certain challenges as well. Even if a site is public, that does not mean that one should not announce their presence. It is also considered a poor practice to take up textual harvesting—simply copying others’ words for use in research.

Abandoning the ego, engaging embodiment, embracing liminality

            One does not need to become an expert on a subject before beginning in a study. In fact, Tracy suggests a “mindful state of ignorance.” Researchers must be comfortable abandoning the prestige, language, and ego of being an academic before entering the scene. Field research can be physically, mentally, and emotionally draining, and so researchers must find ways to deal with possible exhaustion. Fieldwork is also notably an embodied experience, which differentiates it from the body-less quantitative methods. We must be reflexive about our bodies, whether we are presenting ourselves as is or dressed to fit the scene. This is where some elements of liminality can enter—the feeling of being between two states. It is an ambiguous place, but it can become normalized for researchers.

Navigating those first few visits

            The first few visits can be plagued with anxiety, but they are also a good opportunity for rich field notes. In the beginning, everything is interesting. Some researchers believe that, once the scene begins to feel natural, it is time to move on. It is important to ask questions, but be tactful at the same time. The way that participants react to you early in the process can also be good data. After all, it is an example of how they deal with outsiders.

            The act of negotiating access is one that is ongoing; even after the initial gatekeeper lets you in, you are still evaluated tacitly by every member of the group that you encounter. One of the best ways to work through a group of people is to begin with those who are marginalized and move up the hierarchical ladder. This, however, leads to the tension of first having to be approved of by those in power and then immediately working with those who don’t have power. This can be mediated by introducing yourself rather than having someone in power introduce you. It is always important to gain informed consent. This is not compulsory in public settings, but it absolutely is in private settings.

Exploratory methods

Briefing interviews and participant information table

            A briefing interview “records information gathered as you informally meet with a series of gatekeepers and other participants, invite questions, and ask advice as you move forward.” A participant information table includes real names of participants, pseudonyms, names of the subgroups a participant is associated with, positions in the group, key demographic characteristics, whether the participant was observed, whether they were interviewed, whether they were involved in other data collection, contact phone number, address, or email, and whether they had been involved in follow-up.

Member diaries

            These are particularly useful when working with a population that isn’t in a specific geographical location. The researcher asks the participants to record specific behaviors.

Public documents/artifacts

            These can include websites, brochures, pamphlets, advertisements, technological equipment, toys, furniture, or artwork. Fieldwork then gives the opportunity to see how these artifacts are used on a daily basis. They can also provide history and information about rules, policies, and requirements.

Maps and narrative tours

            Tours “offer you an opportunity to attune to the surroundings, understand the people who inhabit different spaces, discover the group’s history, and learn how you might best embody your participant observation role.”

Tracy Notes, Ch. 3

From Qualitative Research Methods

Paradigms

            “Paradigms are preferred ways of understanding reality, building knowledge, and gathering information about the world.”  This includes ontology (nature of reality), epistemology (nature of knowledge), axiology (values associated with areas of research and theorizing), and methodology (strategies for gathering, collecting, and analyzing data).

            Tracy identifies four major paradigms: positivist/post-positivist, interpretive, critical, and postmodern. The positivist paradigm believes that there is a single reality, a big-T truth. They “conduct research in order to observe, measure, and predict empirical phenomena,” and they “build tangible, material knowledge.” Positivism turns to post-positivism if the researcher acknowledges that individuals each only have partial understandings of reality. They are aware that there are weaknesses in human methodology, and that knowable truths are always somewhat imperfect. In general, this perspective attempts to minimize or eliminate bias. Using qualitative methods, for them, is a way to triangulate research; it increases certainty by using different types of tools and sources of data.

            The interpretive point of view, which can also be called constructivist/constructionist, espouses the belief that reality is not an externality, but it is “constructed and reproduced through communication, interaction, and practice.” Any attempt at reaching reality or outside knowledge will always be mediated through the interpretation of the researcher. They are concerned with the effect of the participant on the experience, a process termed verstehen. Interpretivists also consider knowledge to be socially constructed. In research, interpretive scholars work with texts, taking a hermeneutic approach and contextualizing/situating all knowledge that comes from those texts.

            Critical scholars conduct research based on the premises “that thought is fundamentally mediated by power relations and that data cannot be separated from ideology.” Critical research tends to fall into positivist or postmodern techniques. The more realist of these tends to draw from the Frankfurt School and Marxism, whereas postmodern critiques are more concerned “with the shifting, fluid, and constructed nature of power relations.” Such work is imbued with the idea that there is an ethical obligation to research to emancipate or deconstruct immoral and unfair situations. A major concept in the paradigm is hegemony—“situations in which people accept, consent to, internalize, and are complicit in reproducing values and norms that are not in their own best interests.”

            While postmodern paradigms are similar to critical paradigms in their interest in power relations, they differ in their approach to knowledge and power. Postmodern scholars see knowledge and power as “dispersed, unstable, and plural.” This paradigm emphasizes the existence of agency (the power to do otherwise). It is concerned with questioning “totalizing truths and certainty, reject[ing] grand theories and master narratives that tidily explain a phenomenon, and resist[ing] the idea that, with just more research, we can better control the world.” Postmodern scholars are also concerned with sedimentation, or the solidifying of problems and situations in society. Part of the postmodern paradigm is the crisis of representation—the problems that occur through meaning being constructed solely in relation to other meanings—and acknowledges the rhizomatic nature of it all (unless you’re not a fan of Deleuze). Other ideas frequented in the postmodern paradigm are pastiche (“the endless appropriation and recycling of older cultural forms to make new but familiar forms”), hyperreality (“many representations or signifiers are constructed and consumed but lack a specific ‘real’ referent”), simulacrum (“a representation that is a copy of something that never actually existed”), and deconstructionism and difference (“methods of data analysis… to dismantle a text and accentuate foundational word oppositions”).

Paradigmatic complexities and intersections

            Choosing one paradigm can restrict the use of other paradigms, a problem known as incommensurability. Despite this, many researchers tend to use concepts and tools from different paradigms at different times in their work.

Theoretical approaches that commonly use qualitative methods

Geertz’s interpretivism and thick description

            Geertz viewed researchers as cultural interpreters; their goals were to provide significant description that included values, beliefs, and action when studying groups, society, or organizations. The major product coming from this type of research is thick description. This takes the description beyond the mere facts to explain the concepts and values behind a set of actions. This is done through immersion in a group or culture. Another important part of this process is interpreting the interpretations of the participants. When done well, interpretivism “analyzes how culture is symbolically constructed and reconstructed.”

Symbolic interaction

            Symbolic interaction is a theory by Herbert Blumer (1969), who was a student of George Herbert Mead. Researchers who use symbolic interactionism “investigate how meaning and identity are co-created through interaction.” Meaning is made on an individual basis, founded on how they interpret situations. This perspective differentiates signs (natural symptoms/indicators or phenomena—smoke to fire) and symbols (abstract indicators—peace sign and peace). People react to situations, and these reactions are mediated through symbols and signs. Symbols are what makes conceptual though possible. This perspective also acknowledges the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which states that “we do not see or understand issues or concepts for which we do not have words.” We come to know ourselves through the interactions we have with people that are near to us, creating a looking-glass self.

Ethnography of communication

            The ethnography of communication (EOC) was originally pioneered by Dell Hymes (1962). EOC is concerned with examining language in use and cultural patterns of communication. Researchers using this theory study units such as the communication event, the communication act, the communication situation, and the speech community. There are 8 major aspects to the EOC approach:

S – setting or scene

P – participants

E – ends, goals, outcomes

A – act sequence

K – keying/spirit or tone

I – instrument used for communication

N – norms, rules, habits

G – genre or category

            There are three major issues that EOC is concerned with: the linguistic rules and resources used by participants, the comparison of messages across different communication media, and the rules and norms of identity, relationships, or culture.

Feminism

            Feminist research always begins with a few key assumptions: the patriarchy exists, it unfairly reduces the role and value of women, and change is preferable to the status quo. There are several types of feminism as well: liberal feminism (“women should be included in the same structures and have the same rights as men”), Marxist feminism (the oppression of women is linked to capitalism), radical feminism (“women are foundationally dissimilar to men and should work toward overthrowing patriarchy”), standpoint feminism (“because women hold a marginalized place, they are able to have a unique and significant view of the world”), transnational/postcolonial feminists (“discourses of gender, race, and citizenship justify and reproduce relationships of dominance within and between nation-states”) and postructuralist feminism (“gender identities are continually reconstructed through societal and organizational discourses of power and hegemony”).

Participatory action research

            Participatory action research (PAR) “is based upon the notion that researchers should work together with research participants to help them address, understand, or improve local issues or dilemmas.” A key difference in this type of research is that the participants are considered to be co-researchers. Problems are solved through the process of “planning change, acting on the change, observing and reflecting on the process and consequences of that change, and then repeating.”

Sensemaking

            Sensemaking was originally proposed by Karl Weick (1979). It is concerned with the processes of meaning making, ambiguity, and identity. The theory states that “people make sense of their environments retrospectively, by taking into account their behaviors, talk, and action.” There are three phases in sensemaking: enactment (what I say), selection (until I see), and retention (what I think). This model highlights the ways meaning is “chosen, interpreted, and retained by participants.”

Structuration

            Structuration theory is primarily concerned with individuals’ relationships with institutions. This theory advances the idea of the duality of structure, which “refers to the idea that rules, policies, and structures are only made ‘valid’ when individuals follow them and make decisions based upon them.” Transformation or change of structures is decided by the dialectic of control, a mechanism similar to hegemony, which “suggests that the power of dominant groups is not just top-down, rather it depends on the action of less powerful people.” 

Class Notes 4

Qualitative Methods

9.17.2013

Tracy Chapters 1-4

            Geertz’s Balinese Cock Fight piece came out in 1973, when academia was slowly turning from fully factual description to thick description. Mead led the movement toward eschewing judgment for understanding.

            In terms of feasibility, participant observation is not particularly good for graduate students. Even for faculty, it is quite possible that it isn’t suitable until after tenure.

            Generally, the smaller the units of data are, the more quantitative it is. The larger the units, the more qualitative it is. The text is produced by the researcher in quantitative work and produced by the subject in qualitative work.

            Behavioral perspectives suggest that behavior is trial and error based on stimulus and response. It is not intrinsically meaningful. Parsons challenged this by saying that it isn’t behavior, but action. Action is a connected scheme of acts that are meaningful in terms of accomplishing a goal in a context according to rules. There is no agency in behaviorism, and it is silent in the Parsons School theory. It wasn’t really engaged until the 80s or 90s.

            Gestalt is the principle of unity out of individuation; we see many pieces as a whole. Bricolage is the acknowledgement of the many pieces that make the whole.

            Any action line of an organization is a co-production of the individuals in the organization, whether they act with complicity or not. We have to be a bit skeptical or Tracy’s discussion of disguising herself because there is no way to know the real self.

            Paradigms must answer the epistemological question, “How do we know what we know?” Our data is thoroughly inhabited by theory, and it helps us understand how we qualify truth.

We ought to challenge Tracy’s work (and all textbooks) because it is, by nature, derivative.

We also need to update our websites earlier—aim for Monday afternoon to be finished.

----

We need to find efficient ways to get our work done. We may not have time to do full participant observation, but we can do things like reconnaissance observation.

This week, we need to go into a public place for an hour to 90 minutes and write up field notes. First, we have to decide how to observe. What performance are we trying to observe? All performance is some kind of a text, after all.

There is a difference between constructed texts and found texts. Constructed texts have ideational elements, which are held together by rules of construction displaying intentionality, competence, and modality. They are assemblages of semiotic potentials with interpretive instructions. These can include genre, form, grammar, syntax, semantics, style, and execution. We cannot assume that any interpretation is viable for any text. The text governs the interpretation. We must answer what the textual warrants are. A text is not free form, and it will always follow certain conventions. Every text is produced by someone, and they leave traces behind. We need to parse out these levels within the text.

Found texts are elements in the world made sensible. It is a post hoc construction, and the text receives intention, competence, and modality through the interpretation. A found text provides the realization of semiotic potential. The interpretation is the text, and only discipline is resonance. We find commonality through aggregation (assembled without purpose or intent).

We can think of a text as a cargo vehicle. The surface of engagement gives us the facts of the text. It answers “What is?” This has clear boundaries and generate the immediacy of meaning and intention. It should demonstrate competence and capacity. The capacity of a text is its ability to carry cultural significance. After this, we should assess the breadth (tropes, figures, references, intertextuality), depth (cultural work, rehearsal, affirmation), and height (value, quality, character/ethical standard of the production) of the text. What tropes, cultural work, and value are within the text?

A text is any connected or connectable set of semiotic elements (anything). Value is set by the research question, and so not all texts are equally worthwhile. Texts are activated in the demands of the interpretation, and not all interpretations are equally plausible. The great reality constructors are action and language. The semiotic system engulfs the entire scene the entire time. Meaningfulness is achieved through action.  Language always appears in action. They construct and exist within hierarchical structures (cultural, sociological, societal, membership, relational, and individual). Every text is an improvisation upon certain tacit rules. Language and action also create and are affected by markers (cultural citizenship, dasein, sociological subjectivity, societal routines, performances, relational enactments, and individual expression). We must also pay attention to supporting casts of acts, reproductions, indexes, symbols, and icons. Furthermore, we have praxeme, pheme, phoneme, and grapheme, which are the individual units of acts, indexes, symbols, and icons. Intentional expressions of action or language are governed by goals, situations, and rules.

All of these things are potentials of a text. We can use this to decide whether we have truly plumbed the depths of the text. While not every research question leads to all of these things, a close reading means you encounter all of them. We are not going to be able to do this very often.

Participant observation is all about encountering action. It takes the form of enactments (specific expression), performance (line of action), procedure (outcome directed performance), routine (any named performance), structuration (self-sufficient routine), process (outcome directed routine), activities (routines of being), and systems (interlocked activities). We tend to engage the middle of this list. The more factual information you can bring out of the observation, the more disciplined your field notes will be. The field note is a narrative, which isn’t technically different from the writing of items in a measurement device.

We need to acknowledge linguistic textual forms. We should distinguish between industrial and personal forms of texts. These can include music, visual text, visual narrative, and audio-visual narrative. As an experiment, we should go on YouTube and try to understand the video without sound. Often the sound drives the narrative.