Coye Cheshire & Andrew Fiore June 30, 2015 // Computer-Mediated Communication Qualitative analysis of CMC

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore1 Picking up from Tuesday…

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore2 The difference between design and research seems to be a question of new versus good. Design doesn't have to be new, but it has to be good. Research doesn't have to be good, but it has to be new. I think these two paths converge at the top: the best design surpasses its predecessors by using new ideas, and the best research solves problems that are not only new, but actually worth solving. So ultimately we're aiming for the same destination, just approaching it from different directions. Paul Graham

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore3 Qualitative and Quantitative Research Questions Qualitative— Questions are often under continuous review. Often start with ‘what’ or ‘how’. Quantitative— Questions are usually well-defined in scope; predictive. Often start with ‘why’.

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore4 Justifying Research Problems  Explain what is not known about the problem.  Why does the problem matter?  Provide documentation that this is actually a problem.  Available statistics?  Available literature that shows that this is a needed area of inquiry?  Other real-world evidence that this research or design issue is a problem?

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore5 Justification as Significance of the Study What are the ways that solving this problem will add to the scholarly research/literature in the field? How does solving the problem improve practice? How does solving the problem improve policy? How does solving a design problem improve an interface or system?

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore6 On to today’s readings…

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore7

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore8

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore9

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore10

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore11 Discussion  What are the research questions in both papers, if any?  What methods were used to develop those research questions?  Did you find one paper more credible than the other? Why?  Are their different motivations in these papers? i.e., research? interesting directions for the Lotus product?

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore12 Discussion  Which paper is more useful? (Look at the “practical implications” sections.)  What was the value in their research conclusions?  Was the evaluation methodology sufficient to prove their results?  Could the authors have come to similar or different results through other methods?  Was this the only way that made sense to evaluate these questions?

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore13 Discussion  Trust: Does the number of people interviewed play a role in the data collection methodology?  What are the weakest aspects of each paper?  Discussion of the “recursive” approach to online dating identity: users applying rules for assessment to their own profiles