I found this week's reading particularly challenging, especially Beaulieu's "Not another case study: A middle-range interrogation of ethnographic case studies in the exploration of e-science. Science, Technology & Human Values." Despite this, I think I can apply the understanding I got from it to my own individual research proposal. This is what I got out of the reading: -Can us case studies to seek out diversity -Case studies as knowledge making -Case studies utilize critical discourse analysis -A unit for comparison has to be constituted, and features for comparison have to be specified, if this approach is to yield interesting insights -Problem of place (may not be transferable to settings that wished to be studied, example e-space is not totally space-less but is problematized by not having concrete setting) -Note difference between bustling lab and historian working in library/archive by him/herself -Need to study cases that are unusual/outside of lab -Case studies may have a role in interdisciplinary studies (connective, multisited ethnography) -Rather than focusing on the space (of a lab) focus on other elements such as the time spent in a lab in ethnographic research -Space of a lab can also be studied by the roles undertaken there, not necessarily the physical space itself -Use boundary of time to know when one is “in the field” rather than physical special boundaries (especially where software and networks are involved) -Although the approach of time may be flawed, “At least it gives us a break from the issues that have already been around for a long time” I can apply this newfound knowledge to my research proposal (study of first ladies) through changing the case study of which first lady I select. Rather than going with the usual, Hillary Clinton or Jackie Kennedy, which can be compared to doing ethnographic research in the space of a laboratory, instead I should select a unique character not overanalyzed. I wanted to choose someone that was interesting and modern so I am now considering Lady Bird Johnson and her “Beautification” program. Lady Bird can be seen as having a modern implication because her beautification program sought to save/promote wildlife and parks, which can be seen as the beginnings of a green movement. I’m still struggling with how I can apply it to information studies though, seems more suited to women’s studies or historical analysis. The two angles I tried in my mock SSHRC proposal (that weren’t overly well received) were segregation of first lady literature from presidential literature (housed separately) or limited access to first lady literature (locked up in presidential/government holdings until a specified period of time has passed). Any other suggestions?
Although I have been exposed to numerous examples of case studies through readings for other courses, I have not yet thought about it as a research method that I could use for my proposal until this week. Yin addresses both the advantages and disadvantages of using this particular research method, and despite the disadvantages, I feel that this is a method that I should explore for my particular research topic.
In my proposed research, I hope to examine the library patron’s perception of the reference librarian in the digital age, when many library materials can be accessed online by the patron from home. Yin’s article has given me some new insights on the different ways in which I can take on this research. For instance, instead of simply using surveys to collect data on user perceptions, I could conduct a case study of a university student’s perceptions of the role of the reference librarian before and after they receive training on using electronic resources. This will put my research in a real-life context. However, as “people are likely to react adversely whenever they are confronted with individualized data, but are likely to be more tolerant when confronted with aggregate data” (Yin, page 64), more than one case study would likely have to be conducted.
The Beaulieu article explores ethnographic practices and some of the challenges one might face when exploring technology from this approach. This article opened my eyes in terms of how ethnographic observation can inform the model-building process or modeling requirements of a certain technology, but at the same time, how ethnographic approach is challenged by this interdisciplinary process and the different ways one can evaluate/understanding simulations. Through this article I have developed a stronger sense of ethnography, what it can do, and its potential limits. She mentions focusing on practices rather than on the technologies themselves. The author is also asking us to rethink ethnographic practices and come up with new forms of representations for ethnographic work (for example: shift from locale to focale (time) as organizing principle), as well as interactivity of ethnography with other areas/other methodologies. I had a hard time understanding what she meant by ‘middle range’ but it is clarified at the end of the article when she suggests that it involves making connections across cases and disciplines.
The Pinch & Bijker article takes a social constructivist approach by exploring the sociology of scientific knowledge. I agree with their insight that knowledge is sociologically constructed; even scientific technological knowledge is embedded within a larger arena of social processes, relations and institutions/structures. On example I can think of is how scientists grow up as part of society and that their experiences shape what they explore (areas of social interest or relevant to society perhaps) and how they explore it (the methods uses). Another factor is the commercial drive to produce technology and the the consideration of consumers and users of these technologies in their production. This article uses early bicycles as a case study. It looks at how came about and how certain social groups experienced their own unique problems with the technology. Some technological adjustments were for aesthetics, demonstrating again how technology is socially impacted. I never thought about it before, but some bicycles today still accommodate those differences (the high bar vs. the low bar between the front wheel and the back wheel). Or even left handed scissors/devices.
I can relate to some of the dilemmas presented in the Yin article and I appreciate the solutions he provides. For one, he mentions that case studies begin with an assumption that everything must be recorded because anything might be relevant. I had this issue with the peer review I conducted! The researcher for my article went on and on about her topic, but didn’t have a good sense of how to narrow things down. She could have done well to pay closer attention to how her note-taking and narrative would find its way into a more concise framework of research and how to separate the more meaningful content from less relevant content.
When I think of case studies, I'm taken back to high school business studies class! Cases show specific ways that phenomena are treated in a specific context, or serve as an example or illustration of human behaviour. Even in INF1230, we just finished writing a 'case' assignment to discuss a managerial principle and various resolutions. I was completely unaware of the prevalence of case studies as a research strategy in the social sciences, and I'm sure that most of the research articles I read do not treat their study in this manner. Reading Yin's systematic account of the case study and its relationship with qualitative research methods. It was his "chain of evidence" critique that I used to criticize the peer review article, because the author's conclusions were not explicitly linked back to specific evidence from the study data, and therefore did not seem valid.
I agree with Beaulieu's assertion that case studies highlight diversity and "push for explanations of these differences, and explanations are sought in cultural, social and institutional elements, rather than in ontological aspects" (2007, p. 675). Perhaps I'm too quick to be critical of knowledge-making in general, and I don't accept that there is only "one right way" of representing or designing knowledge. All knowledge is socially constructed, within power relations, for a hegemonic purpose. The Pinch & Bijker article captures the process which results in an artifact (the bicycle) which we all take for granted after the fact. I would draw a parallel to fashion design in this instance because I am always amazed that every season haute couture designers are able to reinvent simple items like a dress or a pair of trousers in completely innovative and unconventional ways. It was very useful to interrogate case study strategies and better understand how to use them appropriately.
re: Desiree's comment :"She could have done well to pay closer attention to how her note-taking and narrative would find its way into a more concise framework of research and how to separate the more meaningful content from less relevant content" - so true, but so incredibly hard to do! I think that lots of qualitative researchers fall into this trap...in an attempt to be rigorous and clearly illustrate the chain of evidence, we lose track of how to present the work in a way that makes sense (and seems important) to the readers.
I enjoyed the Beaulieu (et al.) article and it’s slightly different take on ethnography and case studies – I guess I wound up thinking that the case study is just a special instance of ethnography… a really focused and indepth look at one phenomenon. To be honest, I can’t see why the authors posit a ‘tension’ around the three roles that case studies can play (ends in themselves, illustrations of concepts, or building blocks for theory). It seems to me that any case study has to be a little of all three, or it isn’t worth doing. The concept “case study” may be universal, but the content of individual case studies isn’t, and it’s that particularity that makes them to valuable. And thanks AMR for reminding me of how useful and insightful the case studies were in INF1230.
I was drawn to the concept of problematization – the point at which new questions are generated. I suppose this is how we should all look at the difficult things that crop up in our planned research studies – a problem is new information trying to get out. So desirable is this process of generating new meanings, that the authors go looking for ways of doing it. I particularly was intrigued by their ‘thought experiment’ (reminds me of Einstein) of looking at their object of study (e-science) through a new lens, specifically in order to problematize it. By considering e-science through the epistemological lens of women’s studies, they force themselves to see and imagine it anew. Cool. But I’m not going to apply this technique to my own research proposal – it’s problematized enough as it is.
About Desiree and Sara's comments earlier ... it must be a difficult balance for a researcher to strike, including enough information that a case study is complete and accurate, reflecting the observed phenomena as accurately as possible, but not so overly detailed that salient points are lost in the deluge of data. I recall Knight talking, some time ago, about the bias in the social sciences in favour of quantitative research, which is ostensibly more factual since it is based on numbers and 'hard science.' By inserting the researcher into the research process, ethnographies and case studies make the research process more transparent. They can eliminate personal pronouns and hide behind 'objective' methods, but quantitative researchers are not omniscient beings, but people, whose research methodology is shaped by their biases. In ethnographies and case studies we have access to the author up front, whether through his or her explicit statements or gleaned from analysis of the assumptions embedded in her or his text. Neither method is really the right fit for what I want to do in my project (evaluate the effectiveness of library self-checkout machines), but I do find these kinds of methods more honest and more exciting than quantitative methods, though both have their place, of course.
Among this week’s readings, the Yin article struck me as particularly worthwhile. I found the author’s use of the Miles article as a basis for framing the discussion useful as a means to better appreciate some of the tensions that exist between researchers inclined toward empirical study versus those who see value in methods intended to support qualitative study – in this discussion, case studies.
Some of the comments that resonated for me…
• The contrast between case studies and experiments; in particular, that the latter involves an explicit and perhaps contrived effort to study observable phenomenon in the absence of “real-life” context (p 59) • In the context of “within-case” based study, the comment that narrative must revolve around “substantive topics” rather than singular experiences such as specific interviews or meetings (p. 60) • That research report readers, no matter the data collection strategy, generally prefer findings supported by aggregate rather than individualized data (p. 64)
This week’s Pinch article I found really interesting! I am really a visual person and Pinch’s suggestion of models and illustrating the relationship between different sets of data (35-37) was great and I know I will be using it as a tool in my research. It was interesting to me to reflect upon my own research topic and visualise responses by the individuals under study. I can already postulate some of the groups that will manifest, the problems and the solutions. However, Pinch’s exploration and use of models also reminds me/ the researcher to be mindful that there will be anomalies that crop up and that not all groups, problems and solutions are evident until you are in the throws of the research! Yin also writes to the notion of variables (p. 59) – which seems to me an overarching trend of this class and the area of research methods– required is a general heightened conscientiousness, and flexibility, towards what we (think) we know about our topic/ method and what we don’t!
The Yin article champions the use of case studies and presents good reasons why the method bears consideration. For whatever reason, I find it comforting that there’s a great method out there for research questions that involve contextually rich environments where the researcher has no control of the variables. One thing I find daunting, however, is the sheer volume of data generated during data collection. I can see this making the process of filtering through and collating field notes lengthy and difficult. The real trick I guess would be negotiating the stage of deciding what data is most deserving of analysis. This leaves me wondering if this doesn’t this make the method slightly better suited to researchers with some experience under their belts, especially when a study deals with phenomena in complex environments, rather than the this-is-how-we-implemented-a-new-program-at-our-library-rah-rah type of case study?
I found this week's reading particularly challenging, especially Beaulieu's "Not another case study: A middle-range interrogation of ethnographic case studies in the exploration of e-science. Science, Technology & Human Values." Despite this, I think I can apply the understanding I got from it to my own individual research proposal.
ReplyDeleteThis is what I got out of the reading:
-Can us case studies to seek out diversity
-Case studies as knowledge making
-Case studies utilize critical discourse analysis
-A unit for comparison has to be constituted, and features for comparison have to be specified, if this approach is to yield interesting insights
-Problem of place (may not be transferable to settings that wished to be studied, example e-space is not totally space-less but is problematized by not having concrete setting)
-Note difference between bustling lab and historian working in library/archive by him/herself
-Need to study cases that are unusual/outside of lab
-Case studies may have a role in interdisciplinary studies (connective, multisited ethnography)
-Rather than focusing on the space (of a lab) focus on other elements such as the time spent in a lab in ethnographic research
-Space of a lab can also be studied by the roles undertaken there, not necessarily the physical space itself
-Use boundary of time to know when one is “in the field” rather than physical special boundaries (especially where software and networks are involved)
-Although the approach of time may be flawed, “At least it gives us a break from the issues that have already been around for a long time”
I can apply this newfound knowledge to my research proposal (study of first ladies) through changing the case study of which first lady I select. Rather than going with the usual, Hillary Clinton or Jackie Kennedy, which can be compared to doing ethnographic research in the space of a laboratory, instead I should select a unique character not overanalyzed. I wanted to choose someone that was interesting and modern so I am now considering Lady Bird Johnson and her “Beautification” program. Lady Bird can be seen as having a modern implication because her beautification program sought to save/promote wildlife and parks, which can be seen as the beginnings of a green movement.
I’m still struggling with how I can apply it to information studies though, seems more suited to women’s studies or historical analysis. The two angles I tried in my mock SSHRC proposal (that weren’t overly well received) were segregation of first lady literature from presidential literature (housed separately) or limited access to first lady literature (locked up in presidential/government holdings until a specified period of time has passed). Any other suggestions?
Case studies
ReplyDeleteAlthough I have been exposed to numerous examples of case studies through readings for other courses, I have not yet thought about it as a research method that I could use for my proposal until this week. Yin addresses both the advantages and disadvantages of using this particular research method, and despite the disadvantages, I feel that this is a method that I should explore for my particular research topic.
In my proposed research, I hope to examine the library patron’s perception of the reference librarian in the digital age, when many library materials can be accessed online by the patron from home. Yin’s article has given me some new insights on the different ways in which I can take on this research. For instance, instead of simply using surveys to collect data on user perceptions, I could conduct a case study of a university student’s perceptions of the role of the reference librarian before and after they receive training on using electronic resources. This will put my research in a real-life context. However, as “people are likely to react adversely whenever they are confronted with individualized data, but are likely to be more tolerant when confronted with aggregate data” (Yin, page 64), more than one case study would likely have to be conducted.
CaSe STuDieS!!!
ReplyDeleteThe Beaulieu article explores ethnographic practices and some of the challenges one might face when exploring technology from this approach. This article opened my eyes in terms of how ethnographic observation can inform the model-building process or modeling requirements of a certain technology, but at the same time, how ethnographic approach is challenged by this interdisciplinary process and the different ways one can evaluate/understanding simulations.
Through this article I have developed a stronger sense of ethnography, what it can do, and its potential limits. She mentions focusing on practices rather than on the technologies themselves. The author is also asking us to rethink ethnographic practices and come up with new forms of representations for ethnographic work (for example: shift from locale to focale (time) as organizing principle), as well as interactivity of ethnography with other areas/other methodologies. I had a hard time understanding what she meant by ‘middle range’ but it is clarified at the end of the article when she suggests that it involves making connections across cases and disciplines.
The Pinch & Bijker article takes a social constructivist approach by exploring the sociology of scientific knowledge. I agree with their insight that knowledge is sociologically constructed; even scientific technological knowledge is embedded within a larger arena of social processes, relations and institutions/structures. On example I can think of is how scientists grow up as part of society and that their experiences shape what they explore (areas of social interest or relevant to society perhaps) and how they explore it (the methods uses). Another factor is the commercial drive to produce technology and the the consideration of consumers and users of these technologies in their production. This article uses early bicycles as a case study. It looks at how came about and how certain social groups experienced their own unique problems with the technology. Some technological adjustments were for aesthetics, demonstrating again how technology is socially impacted. I never thought about it before, but some bicycles today still accommodate those differences (the high bar vs. the low bar between the front wheel and the back wheel). Or even left handed scissors/devices.
I can relate to some of the dilemmas presented in the Yin article and I appreciate the solutions he provides. For one, he mentions that case studies begin with an assumption that everything must be recorded because anything might be relevant. I had this issue with the peer review I conducted! The researcher for my article went on and on about her topic, but didn’t have a good sense of how to narrow things down. She could have done well to pay closer attention to how her note-taking and narrative would find its way into a more concise framework of research and how to separate the more meaningful content from less relevant content.
When I think of case studies, I'm taken back to high school business studies class! Cases show specific ways that phenomena are treated in a specific context, or serve as an example or illustration of human behaviour. Even in INF1230, we just finished writing a 'case' assignment to discuss a managerial principle and various resolutions. I was completely unaware of the prevalence of case studies as a research strategy in the social sciences, and I'm sure that most of the research articles I read do not treat their study in this manner. Reading Yin's systematic account of the case study and its relationship with qualitative research methods. It was his "chain of evidence" critique that I used to criticize the peer review article, because the author's conclusions were not explicitly linked back to specific evidence from the study data, and therefore did not seem valid.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Beaulieu's assertion that case studies highlight diversity and "push for explanations of these differences, and explanations are sought in cultural, social and institutional elements, rather than in ontological aspects" (2007, p. 675). Perhaps I'm too quick to be critical of knowledge-making in general, and I don't accept that there is only "one right way" of representing or designing knowledge. All knowledge is socially constructed, within power relations, for a hegemonic purpose. The Pinch & Bijker article captures the process which results in an artifact (the bicycle) which we all take for granted after the fact. I would draw a parallel to fashion design in this instance because I am always amazed that every season haute couture designers are able to reinvent simple items like a dress or a pair of trousers in completely innovative and unconventional ways. It was very useful to interrogate case study strategies and better understand how to use them appropriately.
re: Desiree's comment :"She could have done well to pay closer attention to how her note-taking and narrative would find its way into a more concise framework of research and how to separate the more meaningful content from less relevant content" - so true, but so incredibly hard to do! I think that lots of qualitative researchers fall into this trap...in an attempt to be rigorous and clearly illustrate the chain of evidence, we lose track of how to present the work in a way that makes sense (and seems important) to the readers.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the Beaulieu (et al.) article and it’s slightly different take on ethnography and case studies – I guess I wound up thinking that the case study is just a special instance of ethnography… a really focused and indepth look at one phenomenon. To be honest, I can’t see why the authors posit a ‘tension’ around the three roles that case studies can play (ends in themselves, illustrations of concepts, or building blocks for theory). It seems to me that any case study has to be a little of all three, or it isn’t worth doing. The concept “case study” may be universal, but the content of individual case studies isn’t, and it’s that particularity that makes them to valuable. And thanks AMR for reminding me of how useful and insightful the case studies were in INF1230.
ReplyDeleteI was drawn to the concept of problematization – the point at which new questions are generated. I suppose this is how we should all look at the difficult things that crop up in our planned research studies – a problem is new information trying to get out. So desirable is this process of generating new meanings, that the authors go looking for ways of doing it. I particularly was intrigued by their ‘thought experiment’ (reminds me of Einstein) of looking at their object of study (e-science) through a new lens, specifically in order to problematize it. By considering e-science through the epistemological lens of women’s studies, they force themselves to see and imagine it anew. Cool. But I’m not going to apply this technique to my own research proposal – it’s problematized enough as it is.
About Desiree and Sara's comments earlier ... it must be a difficult balance for a researcher to strike, including enough information that a case study is complete and accurate, reflecting the observed phenomena as accurately as possible, but not so overly detailed that salient points are lost in the deluge of data. I recall Knight talking, some time ago, about the bias in the social sciences in favour of quantitative research, which is ostensibly more factual since it is based on numbers and 'hard science.' By inserting the researcher into the research process, ethnographies and case studies make the research process more transparent. They can eliminate personal pronouns and hide behind 'objective' methods, but quantitative researchers are not omniscient beings, but people, whose research methodology is shaped by their biases. In ethnographies and case studies we have access to the author up front, whether through his or her explicit statements or gleaned from analysis of the assumptions embedded in her or his text. Neither method is really the right fit for what I want to do in my project (evaluate the effectiveness of library self-checkout machines), but I do find these kinds of methods more honest and more exciting than quantitative methods, though both have their place, of course.
ReplyDeleteAmong this week’s readings, the Yin article struck me as particularly worthwhile. I found the author’s use of the Miles article as a basis for framing the discussion useful as a means to better appreciate some of the tensions that exist between researchers inclined toward empirical study versus those who see value in methods intended to support qualitative study – in this discussion, case studies.
ReplyDeleteSome of the comments that resonated for me…
• The contrast between case studies and experiments; in particular, that the latter involves an explicit and perhaps contrived effort to study observable phenomenon in the absence of “real-life” context (p 59)
• In the context of “within-case” based study, the comment that narrative must revolve around “substantive topics” rather than singular experiences such as specific interviews or meetings (p. 60)
• That research report readers, no matter the data collection strategy, generally prefer findings supported by aggregate rather than individualized data (p. 64)
This week’s Pinch article I found really interesting! I am really a visual person and Pinch’s suggestion of models and illustrating the relationship between different sets of data (35-37) was great and I know I will be using it as a tool in my research. It was interesting to me to reflect upon my own research topic and visualise responses by the individuals under study. I can already postulate some of the groups that will manifest, the problems and the solutions. However, Pinch’s exploration and use of models also reminds me/ the researcher to be mindful that there will be anomalies that crop up and that not all groups, problems and solutions are evident until you are in the throws of the research! Yin also writes to the notion of variables (p. 59) – which seems to me an overarching trend of this class and the area of research methods– required is a general heightened conscientiousness, and flexibility, towards what we (think) we know about our topic/ method and what we don’t!
ReplyDelete- Catherine Richards
The Yin article champions the use of case studies and presents good reasons why the method bears consideration. For whatever reason, I find it comforting that there’s a great method out there for research questions that involve contextually rich environments where the researcher has no control of the variables. One thing I find daunting, however, is the sheer volume of data generated during data collection. I can see this making the process of filtering through and collating field notes lengthy and difficult. The real trick I guess would be negotiating the stage of deciding what data is most deserving of analysis. This leaves me wondering if this doesn’t this make the method slightly better suited to researchers with some experience under their belts, especially when a study deals with phenomena in complex environments, rather than the this-is-how-we-implemented-a-new-program-at-our-library-rah-rah type of case study?
ReplyDelete