How to create a ArcGIS Story map

Example of using sporadic conversations as a research method

Great example of how to engage with the target group of your study by sporadic conversations. The original source is an article on Trump victory and the reality of rural areas in US. In it, the political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison  Kathy Cramer speakes about his last book The Politics of Resentment, where she traces the rise of conservative Governor Scott Walker and the political evolution of Wisconsin. What Cramer says she found is that a strong sense of rural identity in the communities she visited has become a key driver of political motivation in Wisconsin. And over time, that sense of rural identity has come to be largely defined as an us vs. them mentality, with the them being people who live in cities.

Here I paste the most relevant parts regarding the methodology applied:

…what I did was to sample a broad array of communities in Wisconsin. And I asked people who lived there, “Where in this community do people go to hang out with one another?”

What’s important to understand is that these were not one-on-one interviews, these were not focus groups of people I assembled. These were groups of people who, for the most part, meet with each other every day, and they’ve been doing so for years. So I was inviting myself into their existing relationships in the places they already meet. I think that’s part of the reason why I was able to get the local texture. It wasn’t like trying to invite them on to the university campus and then trying to glean what I could out of them. Obviously the conversation changed a bit because I was there and asking questions. But these were groups of folks who were really used to talking with one another about politics.

This group was all men, older, some on their way to work and some retirees—so kind of the Trump demographic. I said to them, “What do you hope that Trump changes? Like, five years from now, what differences do you expect to see?” And initially their response was well, nothing. Nothing that presidents do ever affects us here in this place.

 

“What is Qualitative Interviewing?” by Rosalind and Janet (2013)

What is Qualitative Interviewing? is an accessible and comprehensive ‘what is’ and ‘how to’ methods book. It is distinctive in emphasising the importance of good practice in understanding and undertaking qualitative interviews within the framework of a clear philosophical position. Rosalind Edwards and Janet Holland provide clear and succinct explanations of a range of philosophies and theories of how to know about the social world, and a thorough discussion of how to go about researching it using interviews. A series of short chapters explain and illustrate a range of interview types and practices. Drawing on their own and colleagues’ experiences Holland and Edwards provide real research examples as informative illustrations of qualitative interviewing in practice, and the use of a range of creative interview tools. They discuss the use of new technologies as well as tackling enduring issues around asking and listening and power dynamics in research. Written in a clear and accessible style the book concludes with a useful annotated bibliography of key texts and journals in the field. What is Qualitative Interviewing? provides a vital resource for both new and experienced social science researchers across a range of disciplines.

Blogging as analytical aid for team-based research projects

Research notes have traditionally played an important role in the analysis of data in social science. Apart from transcribing audio-recording, the contextual information serves as a rich source of complementary data. Indeed, various researchers have suggested additional ways of recording supplementary information (Miles and Huberman 1994). These include “interim summaries”, “self-memos”, “and researcher´s diary”. Yet, most of them are usually presented as offline analytical aids and frequently for individual based analysis process. Social media, however, has redimensioned these tools and make them useful for team-based research projects, particularly for multisite and cross-national projects. The fact of publishing your research notes and summaries contribute may encourage both theoretical and methodological discussions during the research process:

  1. Online interim summaries: as the analysis progress, different team members may wish to write an “interim summary” of the progress to date (Saunders, 2011). What you have found so far; what level of confidence you have in your findings and conclusions to date; what you need to do in order to improve the quality of your data and/or to seek to substantive your apparent conclusions, or to seek alternative explanations; how you will seek to achieve the needs identified by the above interim analysis.
  2. Online self-memos. Self memos allow to record ideas that occur to you about any aspect of your research, as you think of them. Where you omit to record any idea as it occurs to you it may well be forgotten. Self memos may vary in length from a few words to one or more pages. They can be written as simple notes and they do not need to be set out formally. The occasions when you are likely to want to write a memo include (Saunders, 2011):
    1. when you are writing up interview or observation notes, or producing a transcript of this event;
    2. when you are constructing a narrative;
    3. when you are categorizing these data;
    4. as you continue to categorize and analyze these data;
    5. when you engage in writing your research project.

Furthermore, the openness of the methodology beyond team members may encourage a more dynamic relationship between research and the general public, which is consistent with the idea of science suggested by Nowotny et al. in the book “Re-thinking science”. In it, the authors argue that changes in society now make such communications both more likely and more numerous, and that this is transforming science not only in its research practices and the institutions that support it but also deep in its epistemological core.

 

Reference

Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Sociology Pr.

Huberman, M., & A AND M MILES, B. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. Handbook of Qualitative Research. N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln London.

Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2001). Re-thinking science: Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty (p. 12). Cambridge: Polity.

Saunders, M. N. (2011). Research methods for business students, 5/e. Pearson Education India.

Top mistakes in conducting an interview (videos)

  1. Taking notes when the interview is being recorded. Taking notes makes sense without recorder, otherwise it may affect the quality of the data. Eyes contact is a top factor to express interest in what the interviewee is saying. It is probably the best way to encourage him or her to keep talking or deepen in certain moments of the interview. The greater the eyes contact, the greater the importance given to what the person is saying. In this interview to the sociologist Saskia Sassen, the interviwer seems to be more focus (in certain moments) on the papers than in what is being said. Also, her body language reflects certain nervousness that might affect the responses and motivation of the respondent.

Nowy obraz (41)

2. Showing nervousness by playing with a pen and alike. In the previous video, the interviewer´s body language is sometimes disconcerting, very jerky head movements or touching her neck as showing tiredness. In this other video, the inteviewer shows better listening skills. However, the person commits a mistake playing constantly with the pen, which may disturb respondent. It must be said that the location is appropiate. The place seems tranquile and with a minimalist design.

3. Choosing a wrong location… (in construction)

4. Inapropiate dressing… (in construction)

Any other coming to your mind?

 

Gentrification of a postsocialist old centre in Gdansk, Poland

Yesterday, walking from industrial area in the surrounding of Gdansk until the historic old center. It was worth photographing the difference in terms of housing in hardly half a kilometer, as well as the contrast between old industrial sites by the river and the new real state that is being raised. The river side is experiencing a growing gentrification process. The ruins of second war, a kind of open air museum of how WWII destroyed the city are becoming debris while the city invest in a huge and modern museum of WWII. Komfort investment firm is building a luxury and privilege view condominium near the river.

DSC_0321DSC_0322DSC_0323DSC_0324DSC_0325DSC_0326DSC_0327DSC_0328DSC_0329DSC_0330DSC_0331DSC_0332DSC_0333DSC_0334DSC_0335DSC_0336DSC_0337DSC_0338DSC_0339DSC_0340DSC_0341DSC_0342

Postsocialism and postindustrialism: how outsourcing and offshoring boom is transforming Gdansk city, Poland

Gdansk city is emerging as the next outsourcing city. As many other mid-size cities in the country in the last decade, as well as the capital Warsaw did since 1990, the city is harbouring a increasing number of multinational corporations that aim to outsoource certain business process. In a preious post I echo a very interesting article on the boom experience in this city due to the arrival of BPO to the city (Business Process Outsourcing). They represent nowadays the 30% of employment. As suggested by the major in that article, the “boom” is “rebranding the city”. This photos, taken at the so called “Oliwa Gate, the district where most of the BPO are being located, try to reflect visually this phenomenon.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.