Author Archives: Lauren Wolman

Summary of Activity on this Site


Number of Posts: 4
Number of Comments: 6

About Lauren Wolman

NO-CARD

Action Research

According to Koshy et al. (2010), action research is, “a method used for improving practice. It involves action, evaluation, and critical reflection and – based on the evidence gathered – changes in practice are then implemented” (p. 2).

Action research is typically conducted within specific and practical contexts.  Typically, action research focuses on a small sample of either one or a few organizations.  According to Kock (2011), “the researcher uses participant observation and interviews as key data collection approaches. Although typically applying very little, if any, control on the environment being studied, the researcher is expected to apply some form of “positive” intervention. Typically this will be in the form of a service to the client organization” (sec. 33.2.4).

To relate this to my qualitative research, if I had used action research for my mini-study, perhaps I would have found theater publicists who were struggling to attract new clients, or who were struggling to attract media attention for their existing clients.  This could have been identified as the problem.  I then would have spoken with them, observed them, and my “intervention” could have been giving them a copy of the Standard Table of Influence and explaining to them the different strategies they could be using.  Once equipped with this knowledge, I would conduct more interviews and observation to reflect on the changes and to see whether or not they were effective.

Koshy et al. (2010) explain that, “the purpose of action research is to learn through action that then leads to personal or professional development (p.4). While many research methods aim to generate knowledge, action research’s goal is to both generate knowledge and improve the subject of the study (Kock, sec. 33.1).

Bargal (2008, p. 19) goes on to explain that action research is both a methodology and an ideology.  He then presents the eight principles of action research, which are as follows:

1. Action research combines a systematic study, sometimes experimental, of a social problem as well as the endeavors to solve it.

2. Action research includes a spiral process of data collection to determine goals, action to implement goals, and assessment of the results of the intervention.

3. Action research requires feedback of the results of intervention to all parties involved in the research.

4. Action research implies continuous cooperation between researchers and practitioners.

5. Action research relies on the principles of group dynamics and is anchored in its change phases. The phases are unfreezing, moving, and refreezing. Decision making is mutual and is carried out in a public way.

6. Action research takes into account issues of values, objectives, and power needs of the parties involved.

7. Action research serves to create knowledge, to formulate principles of intervention, and to develop instruments for selection, intervention, and training.

8. Within the framework of action research, there is an emphasis on the recruitment, training, and support of the change agents.

 

References

Bargal, D. (2008). Action Research: A Paradigm for Achieving Social Change. Small Group Research, 17-27.

Kock, Ned (2013). Action Research: Its Nature and Relationship to Human-Computer Interaction. In: Soegaard, Mads and Dam, Rikke Friis (eds.), The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd Ed.. Aarhus, Denmark: The Interaction Design Foundation. Available online at http://www.interaction-design.org/encyclopedia/action_research.html

Koshy, et al. (2010).  What is Action Research? Sage Publications.  http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/36584_01_Koshy_et_al_Ch_01.pdf

What Plays from the Standard Table of Influence Do Theater Publicists Use?

For my research I’m exploring the communication practices of New York theater publicists to see if they use the strategies on Alan Kelly’s “Standard Table of Influence,” which he presents as the most basic stratagems used by communicators.

My research question is: “Which types of strategies under the Standard Table of Influence’s “condition” class do the daily practices of two Broadway and off-Broadway theater-publicists fall under?”

I chose one class of strategies to focus on, the “condition” class, because those are the ones used most frequently according to Kelly.  I conducted interviews with two theater publicists from New York and am in the process of matching up their descriptions of their daily practices with the definitions of the condition class strategies on the Standard Table of Influence, to see which ones there is evidence of them using.

The most challenging part of my research is finding information on the field of performing arts publicity.  I really haven’t been able to find much literature related to this field.  I will be using this topic as I write my thesis in the fall, so any resources that would be valuable to writing my literature review would be extremely helpful.  I have access to all of the information I need on the Standard Table of Influence already.

As I move forward and begin to work on my thesis, I need to decide whether or not I will continue to focus on just the condition class, or the entire Standard Table of Influence.  I will also likely change a few questions and add some new ones based on my findings in the mini study.

Maxwell Chapter 6- Validity

In Maxwell’s chapter on validity he uses the definition “the correctness or credibility of a description, conclusion, explanation, interpretation, or other sort of account” (page 122).

One point that he stresses is that validity, “is not a commodity that can be purchased with techniques” (Brinberg and McGrath, 1985) meaning that the validity of your research isn’t based on the methods that you used.  Rather, validity depends on how your conclusions relate to reality- validity is a relative concept.  Simply put, validity is proven through evidence, not methods (page 121).

The purpose of proving validity is to answer the question, “Why should we believe it?” about your research.  Validity doesn’t necessarily prove that your research is the ultimate truth about phenomena, but it gives people reading it a reason to believe that your research is credible (page 122).

Maxwell next explains a key concept for validity- the validity threat which is essentially a way that you might be wrong.  A validity threat is therefore an alternative explanation, interpretation or conclusion than the one you have put forth (a “rival hypothesis”).  For example:
-The people you interviewed aren’t presenting their actual views
-You have ignored data that didn’t fit your interpretation
-There is a different theoretical way of making sense
Validity manes that you are conceptualizing these threats, acknowledging them, using different strategies to discover if they impacted your research, and dealing with them (page 123).

While quantitative researchers can often use manipulations or controls to deal with validity concerns prior to conducting their research, qualitative researchers have to address most of their validity threats after the research has begun (page 123).

It’s important when we’re writing our proposals that we don’t just stick in a bunch of terms relating to validity like “triangulation” and “bracketing” but that we actually demonstrate that we’ve thought these issues through and thoughts about how we will deal with them in regards to our specific research (page 123).

Next Maxwell went into the two types of threats to validity that are most common in qualitative studies: researcher bias and reactivity.

Researcher Bias: Maxwell defines this as “the selection of data that fit the researcher’s existing theory, goals, or preconceptions, and the selection of data that “stand out” to the researcher.” We have already talked about the fact that we can’t completely eliminate our theories, beliefs and perceptual lenses as researchers.  However, in our proposals when we are discussing validity we should explain our possible biases and how we will deal with them during our research (page 124).

Reactivity: Maxwell defines this as “the influence of the researcher on the setting or individuals studied.”  Again, eliminating the actual influence of the researchers is impossible but what’s important is understanding how you are influencing the situation.  An interesting point is that in natural settings an observer isn’t as likely to influence participants’ behavior as in an interview setting (known as reflexivity) (page 125).

Validity Tests: on pages 126-130 Maxwell provides a checklist for some of the most important strategies that can be used to attempt to guarantee validity. Page 126, lists other authors that have compiled more extensive lists on the same subject.

– Intensive, Long-term Involvement
– Rich Data
– Respondent Validation
– Intervention
– Searching for discrepant evidence and negative cases
– traingualation- collecting info from a diverse range of individuals and settings, using a variety of methods.
-Numbers
– Comparison

From pages 130-134 there is a very important table- the Validity Matrix for a study that is a great reference point for any study you will be interested in conducting.

Questioning the research design’s validity is a systemic application process to approach research questions (John Platt, 1973). The researcher should first devise alternative hypotheses and “think about all the ways a given conclusions could be wrong” (p. 135). This is important because it allows the research to infer knowledge from the research and to understand the data from all angles. Next, the researcher should integrate and address validity threats in all aspects of the research design. Finally, to identify strategies for validity threats, the researcher should refer to to Maxwell (2004) Using Qualitative Methods for Casual Explanation and Qualitative Research Design (2005).

It would be an excellent idea to complete Exercise 6.1 (p. 136), a companion to Memo 6.1 and the matrix, Figure 6.1. This exercise will help the researcher to identify and deal with validity threats present in their study. It’s certainly worth a look.

Finally, when discussing validity, generalization must be mentioned (p.136-138). Maxwell directs the reader to Polit & Beck (2010). Generalization “refers to extending research results, conclusions, or other accounts that are based on a study of particular individuals, settings, times, or institutions to other individuals, settings, times, or institutions than those directly studied”. There are two kinds of generalization: internal, and external. An in-depth explanation can be found on p. 137.

It is also important to mention Becker (1991) when discussing generalization of qualitative research. Becker states that “generalizations are … about a process, the same no matter where it occurs, in which variations in conditions create variations in results. Qualitative research also lends itself to “face generalization”, which, according to statistician Judith Singer, means that there is no obvious reason not to believe that the results can be applied more generally.

Lauren Wolman

I am finished taking classes in the Corporate Communication program after this summer session, and then I’ll begin working on my thesis in the fall.  As of now, I hope to speak with public relations, advertising and marketing professionals in the performing arts industry (specifically Broadway and off-Broadway) to classify the strategies they use according to the Playmaker Systems’ Standard Table of Influence.

I’m excited to combine my love of communications with my love of theater!

I really really really LOVE MONKEYS



Comments:

"After reading this chapter summary, I felt a little relieved, because my study has a built in system of coding! However, I know that I am going to have to work on becoming an expert on the different strategies on the Standard Table of Influence so that I can code effectively and accurately and that it’s still going to be difficult taking the data and organizing and interpreting it."
posted on Jun 11, 2013, on the post Chapter 8

"It’s great to be able to put an official term to the type of data collection I’ll be doing- “purposeful sampling” since I will specifically be seeking out individuals who work in a certain field and in certain positions. I also began to think about how I want to collect my data- in person interviews, phone interviews, a focus group, etc. I will definitely be doing some research into what the pros and cons of the different interview types are before deciding which I want to use for my study."
posted on Jun 11, 2013, on the post Chapter 7: Data Collection

"This chapter summary was great at getting me thinking about the specifics of my research, especially the question of why this topic should be researched and what it will accomplish. Going forward, I definitely need to begin forming research questions and other more solid ideas about my study and its importance."
posted on Jun 11, 2013, on the post Chapter 6: Introducing and Focusing the Study

"After reading the examples of each approach, they definitely began to make more sense to me. I even began to consider if my area of research could be fit into a phenomenological study since I will be looking at the way theater industry communicators look at and feel about the concept of “influence.” The more I read about qualitative research and the different approaches, the more I think I need to read Alan Kelly’s book “The Elements of Influence” (which my research is based around) and see what types of theories and frameworks he used while developing the Standard Table of Influence. I think once I do that, I may be more clear on which approach to take."
posted on Jun 11, 2013, on the post Chapter 5

"It seems to me that my area of interest might be carried out best with an ethnographic study. Since I want to look at communicators in the performing arts industry, I think that fits the description of a culture sharing group. The method also seems to fit what I would hope to do for my study, observe participants in their workplace and conduct interviews. However, I would like to look more into the idea of overlapping approaches because I think it would also be interesting to look at specific PR campaigns or marketing campaigns carried out by my participants and this would likely fall under the case-study approach."
posted on Jun 11, 2013, on the post CHAPTER 4: Five Qualitative Approaches to Inquiry

"As someone who is personally so in love with the theater world, and as someone who has worked for a Broadway public relations company, I think the idea that as a researcher, I will be bringing certain beliefs and assumptions to my research is very important. I would like to think that I can be completely objective and unbiased in my research, but this chapter explains that that’s not the case. I will need to look at my beliefs and assumptions and analyze how they affect me as a researcher and these findings will need to be worked into my final write-up. I have always had some trouble understanding theories, so for me, this is a chapter that I’m going to have to go back and read for myself to fully understand the complexities of these different theories and which ones could possibly apply to my area of research."
posted on Jun 11, 2013, on the post Chapter 2