Reflections on Theme 2

The discussions on theory also took the same direction as knowledge did. We still don't have a definitive yes or no answer in regards to the topic. When looking at our classes wiki page for 'What is theory?', we have four separate but valid answers. In my groups discussion we talked about theory being the question of why something happens. Also, we thought that a theory must produce replicable results. Other groups mentioned that there are theories out there that cannot be tested or theories whose results have been given different conclusions by different people. Also, some of us had a hard time pinpointing what type of theory was used in the papers we read.

So if we cannot have a definite answer as to exactly what encompasses a theory, how are we supposed to come up with our own? Our group kind of joked around with this thought after discussing another group member's name and if possibly his parents being hippies contributed to it. While we will probably never know that answer it was fun to come up with different predictions and different ways to possibly test this "theory."

I think the readings and the seminar are definitely making it easier for me to analyze papers more effectively. I  now know when I am reading them at least what is not theory but also the different kinds of theory that may be presented.

Theme 2: Theory....or what is it not

Theory, much like the definition of knowledge, is a hard word to precisely define. While reading Staw and Sutton's (1995) take on all of the things theory is not, I did come across one gem that may make it easier for us to understand what theory is. Basically, theory is the answer to the question of "why."

Many things can contribute to answering this question that one might mistake for theory in itself. For instance, references are a helpful tool in explaining a theory by using material that is already out there. References however do not explain the "why" and need to be linked to actual pertinent logic to be useful. Data is also extremely helpful, but a bunch of data is useless without the "why" (theory) to be answered by the "what" (data). Listing variables is also not theory since they need some connection to the "why" they are referring to. Diagrams are valuable tools to theory, but they cannot support themselves. It is important for a theory to be also verbal as well as represented by diagrams. Finally, hypotheses are useful in linking data with theory, yet they are still a "what" is to be expected and do not answer the "why."

The article I choose to read this week was Interactive to me - interactive to you? A study of use and appreciation of interactivity on Swedish newspaper websites found in the journal of New Media and Society with an impact factor of 1.394. This article takes a closer look at what previous research has indicated about the use of online interactive features. They conducted an online survey to track different habits of visitors to popular newspaper websites and if they take advantage of the websites interactivity. The conclusion of the survey pointed towards low participation and appreciation of interactive material by its users. I feel that they used theory type 5, design and action in this article. They had seen previous research dealing with the topic of interactivity and decided to answer those with results and provided suggestions to help in making users more apt to using interactive websites. The article first defined interactivity based on references from other literature, described the method and variables used when gathering the results, and along with the conclusion from the study posed suggestions to improved interactivity to increase users.

I think the benefits of using this type of theory is that it gives an answer to the question being asked as well as data that can be seen to understand why they got the results they did.

References:
Sutton, R. I. & Staw, B. M. (1995). What Theory is Not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371-384.
Gregor, S. (2006). The Nature of Theory in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611-642
Larsson, Anders Olof. "Interactive to Me - Interactive to You? A Study of Use and Appreciation of Interactivity on Swedish Newspaper Websites." New Media & Society 13 (2011): n. pag. Web. 2 Nov. 2012. <http://nms.sagepub.com.focus.lib.kth.se/content/13/7/1180>.

Reflections on Week 44 and Theme 1

It seems that week 44 is coming to a close already which leaves me with the task of reflecting on this past week. In all honesty it has been a bit of a whirlwind of a week with barely enough time to sleep or even breathe. So I guess the best place to start is from the very beginning.

Monday

Monday's seminar focused on the research journals and papers we were tasked with finding earlier in the week. Many students, including myself, were all a bit confused about exactly what the impact factor was for. It seems we were all trying to not only locate high impact journals but we were trying to do the same with the articles. Turns out only journals will have an impact factor given to them. This would have been really helpful information while I was trying to locate an article. Better late than never. The seminar and the new pages for the journals and papers I think will be extremely helpful in the future. My classmates found some really interesting journals and papers with a wide range of topics concerning media and media technology. 

One article I found particularly interesting was one concerning college students and their gain of social capital in regards to facebook. 

(Nicole B. Ellison et al (2007) The Benefits of Facebook “Friends:” Social Capital and College Students’. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. Volume 12, Issue 4, July 2007, Pages: 1143–1168)

Actually I went and looked up the definition of Social Capital on Wikipedia  that states it is "the expected collective or economic benefits derived from the preferential treatment and cooperation between individuals and groups." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_capital) When I look at my list of Facebook friends I really never thought of them in the terms used in Ellison's paper. Taking a closer look I was however able to categorize my "friends" into the different groups she discussed which were bridging or weak ties, strong ties (such as family and close friends), and maintained social capital. 

Tuesday & Wednesday

When I first walked into Leif Dahlberg's lecture on the Theory of Science I was really starting to wonder if I was in the wrong class or not. Being given the question of 'what is knowledge' is not usually a problem you want to deal with especially when you are not studying philosophy. However, I felt a lot better not only about his lecture but Bertand Russell's book as well after discussing it with my classmates. It's comforting to realize that none of us really quite understood the material and we all have different opinions or perhaps perceptions of the questions asked of us. 

Theme 1: Research publications/Theory of science

Research Journal

The Journal of Popular Film and Television takes a closer look at commercial films and television and  how they impact popular culture and influence society. Their issues they publish focus on themes such as "Media Literacy and Education: The Teacher-Scholar in Film and Television" and "Fantastic Voyages: Horror, Fantasy, and Science Fiction/Speculative Cinema."

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/aboutThisJournal?show=aimsScope&journalCode=vjpf20

Article: The adoption of social networking technologies in cinema releases

This article talks about how social media is playing a critical role in cutting marketing costs for the film industry. Marketing is usually a significant part of the budget with commercial advertising being extremely costly. Their analysis proved that internet social networking campaigns have given them a much higher revenue. They utilized internet search engine datasets to track social networking activates and found that there has been an increase in film revenue since social media techniques have been incorporated.

1.    What does Russell mean by "sense data" and why does he introduce this notion?

 Bertrand Russell introduced "sense data" to distinguish between appearances and reality. He introduced this notion to give en explanation to the different things we can perceive through our senses. For example, sense data can be classified as any information we gain through sight, hearing, smells, and touch.

2.    What is the meaning of the terms "proposition" and "statement of fact"? How does propositions and statement of facts differ from other kinds of verbal expressions?

The term proposition when used in terms of philosophy could be used to convey a statement that may be either true or false.  While a statement of fact is seen as truth and not up for debate.

3.    In chapter 5 ("Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge by Description") Russell introduces the notion "definite description". What does this notion mean?

Definite description is categorized by Russell by a statement bearing "the" instead of "a." So instead of an indefinite statement of "a bird", which could mean any bird, "the bird," means we are referring to a particular one.

4.    In chapter 13 ("Knowledge, Error and Probable Opinion") and in chapter 14 ("The Limits of Philosophical Knowledge") Russell attacks traditional problems in theory of knowledge (epistemology). What are the main points in Russell's presentation?

Russell states "a true belief is not knowledge when it is deduced from a false belief."  He is basically saying that even if a notion might be true, if the knowledge is gained through an untrue reasoning process then the knowledge might be false. 

First post for DM2572

• Blog for Theory and Method for Media Technology created - check!