Theme 4: Quantitative research

I’ve read the paper “Using social media for work: Losing your time or improving your work?” by Ioannis Leftheriotis and Michail N. Giannakos. The paper was published in Computers in Human Behaviour, which has an impact factor of 2.067 (2013) and the articles are being peer-reviewed, confirming the high quality. The main purpose of the study is to see if social media is being used in the workplace and if it’s related to the workers performance? The study contains 1799 people from 33 different companies working in the insurance sector in Greece and the main research questions are:

• RQ1: Do the employees of insurance industry make use of social media for work purposes?
• RQ2: What motivations (values) does someone have for using social media for work purposes?
• RQ3: Does the use of social media for work impact employees' work performance?

(Leftheriotis & Giannakos, 2013)

To answer these questions questionnaires were handed out at the companies (83%) or performed online. The employees had a total of 2-3 days to finish the questionnaire before the researchers returned to pick them up (the online surveys were open for 2 months). The attendance in the study was voluntary and no rewards were handed out to the participants.

The benefits of using questionnaires are the fact that they are easy to hand out, you get a lot of information and they are easy to analyze. Meanwhile, the possibilities for misinterpretation of the questions are higher, than say, during an interview where the participants could ask for explanations to terms they don’t understand (Wikipedia, 2013b). That’s why I like the fact that the term “social media” was presented with examples such as Facebook, Twitter, Blogs and LinedIn in order for the participants to fully understand the term. The questions about perceived motivation was measured on a 5-degree scale from “Strongly disagree” to “Strongly agree” which is an a widely used and accepted instrument in research (Cohen et. al., 2000:253) that makes the analyzing of the answers easier.

In order to be certain that the data they received from the questionnaires are reliable the researchers makes several types of reliability and validity checks. I don’t have to much knowledge about this from before so it was nice to see the amount of work it took for them just to establish the fact that the data was correct (even though they don’t go into the exact methods being used).

The study was conducted almost equally between men (52%) and women (48%), with a variety of age groups and with a large number of people (1799), but there are still some limitations. The authors present a couple at the end of the paper; the study was made only in Greece and only within the insurance sector, which makes it questionable if you can generalize the results further. Another limitation is the fact that the work performance is measured from the employee’s self-assessment, which could make it biased.

But the biggest mistake I think is the fact that they don’t make a clearer distinction between the different social networks. If such a distinction had been made, they would be able to say which social networks are contributing to the performance and which are not. Now they just bunch them all together, and maybe some social networks are far better than others at contributing to the work performance, but sadly we don’t know if that’s the case now, since they never ask a more specific question of which social network(s) the participants are using.

Quantitative methods vs. Qualitative methods

One advantage of using questionnaires is the fact that it’s easy to hand out if you’re using online forms. You also get a higher response rate than if you were to mail them out physically (Fondell et. al., 2010). Another positive way of using the high number of participants as Fondell et. al. did is that it’s easier to draw conclusions and in some way make generalizations about the results. A limitation, as I wrote earlier, is the possibility for misinterpretation from the participants.

If Fondell et. al. would have wanted to get more qualitative data they may used interviews or focus groups instead. While they don’t give as much data, they could be beneficial if you want more specific information on particular cases. Qualitative methods explain the how’s and why’s. They give room for interpretation (Wikipedia 2013a), which could be both positive and negative.

Resources

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education. London: Routledge.

Fondell, E., Lagerros, Y. T., Sundberg, C. J., Lekander, M., Bälter, O., Rothman, K., & Bälter, K. (2010). Physical activity, stress, and self-reported upper respiratory tract infection. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 43(2), 272-279.

Leftheriotis, I., & Giannakos, M. N. (2013). Using social media for work: Losing your time or improving your work? Computers in Human Behavior, 31(0), 134–142. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.016

Wikipedia (2013a). Qualitative research. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualitative_research            (2013-11-29)

Wikipedia (2013b). Questionnaire. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questionnaire                               (2013-11-29)

Theme 3: Research and theory - Reflection

Today we discussed more about theory and research. The task given was to discuss the different theories in our selected papers and further discuss the subject of theory. The traditional way of constructing a research paper like the one we have read was discussed and in general the theory part is somewhere in the middle, after the introduction but before the solution and/or conclusion. I found it quite hard to directly assess what type of theory mine would be described as but after looking into the theory part more (and Googling the Grice’s maxims) we decided that it was mostly about communication. The other theories in the group were about social capital, perceived tele/social-presence. We came to the conclusion to further discuss my paper which were about the theory of communication and more specific the Grice's maxims. The paper didn't explain it to much, just a couple of sentences, so it was nice to discuss it more and get a better understanding as to what it is and how it's applicable to communication both online and offline.

After the discussion in the group we spoke more about the types of theories explained in Gregor’s text and discussed whether my text would be explanatory or both explanatory and predictable. My first thought, just as I wrote in my earlier blogpost, was that the text was plainly explanatory, since it didn’t clearly state any prediction about the Grice’s maxims and the future. I thought that the text should give a clear prediction but after some discussion we said that the paper could be somewhere in between. That’s because the text, even though it doesn’t clearly state it, says something about communication online and what makes it successful. You could, in some way, generalize and say that the text explains what makes communication online successful. We finished this part of the seminar by adding the “Theory of Gricean maxims” to the wiki-page of the course website.  

We further discussed the difference between theories in different fields and the difference between hypothesis contra theory. In the natural science it usually sufficient to refute the theory in one way to kill it and make it unusable, but in the social sciences it’s more a floating kind of relation. A theory can live for a certain time frame, be refuted, continue to be valid and not die off until later. We heard a good example about social media and that young people use it more than older people. This theory can change over time if the younger generation continue to use it, or still be valid if we stop using it when we get older.

Theme 3: Research and theory

Research journal

I have chosen the journal New Media & Society. It is a journal that publishes research from communication, media, cultural studies, sociology, and geography among other topics. The research often explores the relationship between theory, policy and practice and with and impact factor of 1.824 (2013) I think it’s a suitable option for media technology research

Research paper

I have chosen the paper The Masal Bugdov hoax: Football blogging and journalistic authority by Burroughs & Burroughs. It explains the story about the Masal Bugdov hoax and the contrast between old and new media. Masal Bugdov was a fictional character, created solely on blogs stating that he was an up-and-coming football player. Eventually, through the hype of blogs, Wikipedia entries and forum comments he made his way up to the  ‘Football’s Top 50 Rising Stars’ list of 2009 in The Times.  The paper present the rise and fall of the Masal Bugduv hoax by how and where the comments about him originated, they analyze how it was possible for the hoaxer to gain the journalistic authority to be convincing and from that draws conclusions about journalistic authority and the perception of credibility in the blogosphere.

The study was conducted using 847 blog posting, analyzing and cross-referencing, thereby creating a timeline of the events. By listing the chronological events by the hoaxer they identify how the hoax was possible using the Grice’s Maxims (expectations of quality, quantity, relevance and manner). The limitations of this study lie in the inability find the actual hoaxer, thereby only relying on the blog posts. No quantitative study has been conducted and they clearly state that future studies would benefit from in-depth interviews with hoaxers and their victims. Since it is a very particular case, the generalizability must also be questioned.

Theory, benefits and limitations

Rather than stating what theory is, Sutton and Staw first choose to describe that it’s not references, data, variables, diagrams nor hypotheses. Theory could contain all of the above, but individually, they don’t constitute theory. Theory is rather the answers to questions of why (Sutton & Staw 1995:378). Theories should follow some sort of rational thought and are analytical tools to analyze, explain and predict a chosen subject (Gregor 2006:620).

I would say that the main theory that Burroughs & Burroughs uses is the Theory of Explaining (Gregor 2006:624). As Gregor writes this type of theory could be seen as the theory for understanding and that is just what Burroughs & Burroughs does. They give causal explanations as to why the hoax was possible by logically explaining and connecting it to the Grice’s Maxims.

The benefits of using the explanatory theory is that it gives a deep understanding of a particular set of events that occurred. This could be a good foundation for other people to continue from, further explaining the connections between new and old media and its limitations. However, it’s hard to generalize from it and it’s also difficult to make any predictions about the future from this type of theory.

Resources

Burroughs B. & Burroughs J.W. (2011). The Masal Bugdov hoax: Football blogging and journalistic authority. New Media Society published online 13 October 2011. DOI: 10.1177/1461444811420270

Gregor, S. (2006). The Nature of Theory in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611-642

Sutton, R.I. & Staw, B.M. (1995). What Theory is Not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371-384.

Theme 2: Critical media studies - Reflection

I found last week's text by Adorno and Horkheimer to be quite a difficult one and it took me some time to finish. After reading the text I also read summaries from Stanford and The Guardian to get a better understanding of the text and that helped me a lot. At first, I got the feeling that the text would only be about the Enlightenment and its paradoxical connection to myth. Although it made me think about what knowledge really is and how we define it, I think last week's texts and questions had covered that part pretty well. 

Fortunately it got around and I found the part about culture industry a lot more interesting. I follow a couple of TV series now and you often get the feeling, that after a well-produced first season, the following season is just produced as fast as possible, thereby keeping its fan base. The upcoming episodes follow for the most part a template that you get a love-hate relationship with and I can't keep but wondering what types of shows and episodes we would get if money wasn't the number one priority for the companies creating the shows. Sometimes you are almost grateful that a series come to an end so.

After reading other peoples blog posts I got the feeling that they, just as myself, were somewhat frustrated over the mass media society we live in today. Even though you state that it's annoying and you don't like the media climate we got today, what could we, the consumers, really do about it? I, at least, need some sort of passive activity to chill to after a long day in school, and if I want something with a somewhat high quality I'm pretty locked in to the mass media choices, or am I? It's fascinating that a text from the 1940's is so relevant to the situation we live in today. Of course you could say that the Internet has changed a lot, and of course it has, but I get the feeling that we sometimes overrate the ability of the Internet's effect. It certainly has the potential for everyone to be its own broadcaster, reaching out to millions of people, but if you do so, how many do actually listen? And also, everyone doesn't have the high speed, free Internet we have, making more voices unheard.

Theme 2: Critical media studies

Enlightenment

In the classical term, the Enlightenment stands for the cultural and intellectual movement in the 17^th and 18^th century Europe (Wikipedia 2013). Its purpose was overthrow fantasy and myth with knowledge (Horkheimer & Adorno 2002: 1) but the authors question the positivity of the Enlightenment. From what I understood they are not necessarily referring to the cultural movement when they are speaking about the Enlightenment but instead of the demythologization of society. They use a broader term, which prefers objectivity to subjectivity and putting things under well-defined rules.

Myth

When writing about the Enlightenment, the authors say that; “It makes dissimilar things comparable by reducing them to abstract quantities” (Horkheimer & Adorno 2002: 4). Myth is the knowledge we had before the Enlightenment and it tried to explain entities of the nature subjectively. It also tries to understand nature but, in contrast to the Enlightenment, does so by, to some extent, use incalculable variables.

“Humans believe themselves free of fear when there is no longer anything unknown. This has determined the path of demythologization… Enlightenment is mythical fear radicalized”. So, according to Adorno and Horkheimer we are less afraid when we know what we are facing and that is ultimately the function of myth. They argue that myth still can contribute to the Enlightenment and despite what you call it; the thought of a really fundamental change is impossible (Zuidervaart 2011).

“Old” and “new” media

I’m not sure if I understood this part of the text right, but I think that the old media stands for the media produced before the culture industry’s entrance. Nowadays Beethoven or Tolstoys works are being used in order to fit into the expectations of the audience (Horkheimer & Adorno 2002: 96) and by doing so, it converts it to “new” media – media tailored to the public norms.

Culture industry

The culture industry refers to the mass production of culture in order to capitalize on it. Movies, for example, are produced more or less on an assembly line according to a recipe for success. Movies and radio gets standardized for the masses who passively watches/listens “…to the same programs put out by different stations.” (Horkheimer & Adorno 2002: 95). Take for example the classical model for dramaturgy, Disney’s copy-paste-strategy, or the more up to date example of the re-usage of scenes in Transformers 3 and The Island.

Mass media and "mass deception"

The culture industry produces their products in order to meet the public needs because that will yield the highest income. By doing so, the producers manipulate mass society into a passive form of consumption of media. The “deception” being that they think that they got a lot of possibilities to choose from, when in fact, the possible alternatives are very much the same.

Discussion

The thing I found most interesting was under what circumstances the authors wrote the text. You get a whole new perspective of the somewhat negative attitude towards mass media when you know that the authors are of Jewish descent, fleeing their home during the Hitler years and ended up in the commercial United States of the 1940's (Thompson 2013).

From their point of view, everything that the Enlightenment stood for resulted in their exile and two big bombs to end the war. Despite our “enlightened” minds and advancement in technology, we ended up going back to barbarism. And their claim that; “Enlightenment stands in the same relationship to things as the dictator to human beings. He knows them to the extent that he can manipulate them. The man of science knows things to the extent that he can make them.” gets a little bit easier to understand.

Thereby, the concept of domination of the masses through technology gets more comprehensible, for me. Coming from Nazi-Germany and their use of mass media to brainwash its population, maybe it’s not so hard to understand that they look for the same flaws in the American system.

References

Horkheimer, Max, & Adorno, Theodor W. (2002). Dialectic of enlightenment: Philosophical fragments. (E. Jephcott, Trans.).

Thompson, Peter (2013). The Frankfurt school, part 3: Dialectic of Enlightenment.

        http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/apr/08/frankfurt-school-dialectic-of-enlightenment

Zuidervaart, Lambert (2011). "Theodor W. Adorno", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta (ed.),

URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/adorno/>.