I read the paper “Who’s Watching Whom? A Study of Interactive Technology
and Surveillance” written by Lee Humphreys. The study “explores how
people think about privacy issues and personal information when using new
interactive technologies”
Which
qualitative method or methods are used in the paper? Which are the benefits and
limitations of using these methods?
The qualitative method used in
this study is in-depth interviews. One benefit with using interview as the
qualitative method is that it is easier to ask follow-up questions and gain a
deeper understanding. The method usually provides more complete feedback than qualitative
methods.
There are limitations as well
with this method. One being that analyzing the data is much more time
consuming. Another being that the person making the interview might influence
the answer of the participant.
What did you
learn about qualitative methods from reading the paper?
Since I am right now taking a
course where we actually are having a project were we are conducting a
qualitative observations I did not get any new knowledge from this paper. The method
that the author is using is very common and therefore I am familiar with the
procedure.
Which are the
main methodological problems of the study? How could the use of the qualitative
method or methods have been improved?
I consider that one of the
main methodological problems in the study is the way that the author chose to
conduct the interview. He has conducted interviews in different ways. Some he conducted
face-to-face whiles some were conducted via telephone or internet. This may
have influenced the result and I consider that it would have been better if the
author have tried to conduct all interviews in a similar way.
Briefly explain
to a first year university student what a case study is.
In case studies, as the name
implies, a certain case is examined. This research method aims to obtain a
deeper understanding by using empirical data. You want to get deeper knowledge
and understanding of a specific situation. The studied case can be different
things, for example a group of people or an incident. It is of importance not
to confuse qualitative research, even thou this can be used in a case study. The
case study can be investigating, explanatory or descriptive.
Use the
"Process of Building Theory from Case Study Research" (Eisenhardt,
summarized in Table 1) to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of your selected
paper.
Since Humphreys in the paper “Who’s Watching Whom? A Study of Interactive Technology
and Surveillance” also had conducted a case study, I chose that paper
for both of the assignments. Humphreys has chose to investigate how people are
thinking about privacy issues and personal information when using new
interactive technologies. The research question is clearly defined but when
reading the paper it appears to me that Humphreys does not agree when a lot of
the participants do not consider the privacy issue as an actually issue. This
problem might be because Humphreys consider the privacy issue to be something
else than the participants, and even if he tried to define “privacy issue” in a
good way, he failed. Or it might just be that the participants do not agree
with him.
Another weakness was that Humphreys
was not able to follow all the participants when using the service that he was
evaluated. He only followed some and saw how they used the service. This
resulted in that he had a different amount of information from different participants
and how they use the service.
Even thou I think that he should
have conducted all the interview in a similar way, it appears as if he got a
lot of information that he has presented in a good way.
Hey. Very interesting that your paper used interviews and that they conducted them in different ways, because that was exactly the case with my paper too. In my paper, they interviewed face-to-face, by phone and by chat. Just like you, I also suggested that they should have conducted them all in one way considering the different conditions the different ways have which might influence the results. It's interesting that you also thought so!
SvaraRaderaBecause I was thinking whether it's a good suggestion or not, maybe it doesn't really matter that much? We still (should) have the same opinions even if we are interviewed in a different way. I wouldn't have one opinion if I was interviewed by phone and another opinion if I was interviewed by chat. I guess the difference would be not the opinions but just the way the opinions are expressed, explained, etc? So in the end, you might get the same data but the data would be described differently which could affect the results.
I like your reasoning on how the different interviewing methods effects the results. Based on your personality you said, there would be no difference in your opinion when being interviewd by phone or chat. I think it always depends on the research topic and even for you there would be a difference :D While you might struggle to talk about very contradictory or emotional topics face-to-face you could feel more secure with your anonymity, when answering by phone or chat. Furthermore I think that there is always a huge difference between spoken and written answers. While you most of the times simultaneously speak out what you think, when writing you automatically take more time to rethink and rewrite your answer until you are satisfied, which can lead to a totally different result.
RaderaHi! I like the way you summarized benefits and limitations of in-depth interviews. I agree with you that it is easier to ask follow-up questions and gain a deeper understanding. I also should admit that the person making the interview might influence the answer of the participant. The success of interview largely depends on the professional and personal skills of the interviewer.
SvaraRaderaHola Maria!
SvaraRaderaInteresting to read your thoughts, and after going through your text do I only have one question. You say that the authors conducted the interviews in many different forms, my question to you is if that necessarily have to be bad? Of course will the end results be better if the authors could get everyone face-to-face, but do you think that the quality of the study would be better if they deleted every interview that wasn't face-to-face?
Hi Maria,
SvaraRaderaFirst of all, It is an interesting choice you have made in selecting the article. The option that you made is very up to date and something that is concerning a lot of people today. You mention that Humphrey does not agree with the participants, and also that he tried to define “privacy issue” but failed? In what way does he fail?
Something I immediately think of while reading your post about Theme 6 and the choice of article that you’ve made, is the program Debatt on SVT. Where they recently discussed the tabloid Expressens outing of “anonymous” writers on the racist forum Avpixlat, and in that way reveal identities and scratch the surface on privacy issues. I believe that the choice of participants in the research perhaps would have reacted differently IF they contacted people in, as for example an anonymous forum, and did the interview with these. And by doing this, underlining the fact that no one is anonymous and therefore highlighting the privacy issue.