Tagged / research methods

Today’s research process seminar: Quantitative content analysis. Tuesday 24th May at 2pm on Zoom.

You are warmly welcomed to this week’s research process seminar. Hosted in FMC but open to all.

This week we have an external speaker, Dr Sarah Van Leuven, who will speak about quantitative content analysis.

Sarah Van Leuven is associate professor at the Department of Communication Studies at Ghent University. She is the head of the research group Center for Journalism Studies (CJS), head of the Journalism Division of NeFCA (Netherlands-Flanders Communication Association), and editorial board member of the SSCI-ranked journal Digital Journalism. Since 2021 she is a member of the Flemish Council for Journalism (Raad voor de Journalistiek).

She has published work on a broad range of topics, including the role of news media in political communication, sourcing practices, international news, journalist profiles and innovation in newsrooms. Together with prof. dr. Karin Raeymaeckers, she coordinates the five-annual survey of Belgian professional journalists, and she is also principal investigator for Belgium in the Journalistic Role Performance Project.

Details of her talk are below. This will be of use to anyone who is interested in methods of analysing media or other texts as part of a research study.

In this session, I will present a step-by-step toolbox to develop a reliable research design for a content analysis. Specifically, I will discuss how theoretical constructs can be translated into manifest content variables, and how research outcomes can be influenced by sampling decisions. The different steps will be illustrated by means of a content analysis study of “global journalism”.

2pm on 24th May. 

https://bournemouth-ac-uk.zoom.us/j/9292103478?pwd=UzJnNTNQWDdTNldXdjNWUnlTR1cxUT09

Meeting ID: 929 210 3478

Passcode: rps!4fmc

Hope to see you there

Dan and Sae

Congratulations to Dr. Rachel Arnold on her latest paper

Congratulations to Dr. Rachel Arnold in the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH) on the publication today of her  paper ‘Why use Appreciative Inquiry? Lessons learned during COVID-19 in a UK maternity service‘ [1].  This methodological paper is co-authored with Dr. Clare Gordon who holds a has joint clinical academic post at UCLan and Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, with a focus on developing clinically focused stroke research, education and improvement. Clare is also a former BU Ph.D. student.  Further co-authors from CMMPH are Professors Sue Way and Edwin van Teijlingen.  The final co-author, Dr. Preeti Mahato, finished her post in CMMPH two days ago to start her Lectureship in Global Health at Royal Holloway (part of the University of London).

The paper highlights that selecting the most appropriate research method is an important decision in any study. It affects the type of study questions that can be answered. In addition, the research method will have an impact on the participants – how much of their time it takes, whether the questions seem important to them and whether there is any benefit in taking part. This is especially important when conducting research with staff in health services. This article is a reflection on the process of using Appreciative Inquiry (AI) in a study that explored staff well-being in a UK maternity unit. The authors  discuss our experience of using AI,the strengths and limitations of this approach, and conclude with points to consider if you are thinking about using AI. Although a study team was actively involved in decisions, this paper is largely based on reflections by dr. Arnold, the researcher conducting the field work in the maternity services.

 

Reference:

Arnold, R., Gordon, C., van Teijlingen, E., Way, S., Mahato, P. (2022). Why use Appreciative Inquiry? Lessons learned during COVID-19 in a UK maternity service. European Journal of Midwifery, 6(May), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.18332/ejm/147444

Participatory Research Workshops

Participatory Research: Doing research inclusively, doing research well
July 11 & 12 1.30-3.30pm

This course comprises two 2-hour workshop sessions for 12-30 people (optimum 20) plus recordings and additional materials. Both sessions will be in person, and we encourage academics from all faculties to sign up for both workshops.

Participants will gain clear insight into the multiple agendas driving participatory research. Together we will develop know-how in addition to know-what needed for participatory research. The group will work collaboratively to develop their own ideas stimulated by shared examples and real life conundrums.

Programme

Day 1: The why of participatory research – Adding value

  • Researching with not on: The changing dynamics of research and rationale behind the democratisation of research
  • Making the most of lived experience to add value to research
  • Participatory research designs and methods – different ways of knowing
  • 5 practical changes we can make and why

Day 2: The how of participatory research – How to enhance research participation and quality

  • Co-producing research proposals and project designs
  • Participatory ways of working – getting ideas from successful projects
  • This is my truth – tell me yours – co-producing findings and outputs
  • 5 steps to doing research inclusively and doing research well.

This training is delivered by Professor Melanie Nind, author of What is Inclusive Research? Melanie is Director of the Centre for Research in Inclusion at University of Southampton, Deputy Director of the South Coast Doctoral Training Partnership and Co-director of the ESRC National Centre for Research Methods. She has expertise in the areas of education, disability studies and methodology and has extensive experience supporting the development of participatory/inclusive research locally and internationally.

Book here now!

Research process seminar today. Rhetorical Analysis in Social Science Research. 2pm on Zoom

You are warmly welcomed to join us for today’s research process seminar. Hosted in FMC but open to all staff and research students.

 

Rhetorical Analysis in Social Science Research by Dr Chris Miles (BU)

This session looks at how rhetorical analysis can be used for analysing data in social science/political science research. Rhetorical analysis provides an alternative approach to thematic analysis, discourse analysis, etc. This session will address what makes rhetorical analysis ‘rhetorical’ and also looks at how it provides some interesting perspectives on how interview and focus group respondents try to persuade the researcher.

Tuesday 17th May at 2pm on Zoom.

https://bournemouth-ac-uk.zoom.us/j/9292103478?pwd=UzJnNTNQWDdTNldXdjNWUnlTR1cxUT09

Meeting ID: 929 210 3478

Passcode: rps!4fmc

Hope to see you there

 

Dan and Sae

Research process seminar today, 19th April. Social media analysis – possibilities and pitfalls. 2pm on Zoom

You are warmly welcomed to today’s research process seminar. Hosted in FMC but open to all.

Today’s speaker is Prof. Anders Olof Larsson

Anders is one of the world’s leading researchers of online political communication. He is also a truly interdisciplinary scholar and has mastered the methods of extracting and analysing social media data from all of the major platforms. His talk will reflect on his 10+ years of working on social media platforms, and how the rules and methods of collecting data have changed.

Bio:

Anders Olof Larsson (PhD, Uppsala University, 2012) is Professor at the Department of Communication, Kristiania University College. Larsson was previously a Postdoctoral Fellow working in the Social media and Agenda-Setting in election campaigns project at the Department of Media and Communication, University of Oslo. During his PhD work, which was funded by The Swedish Research School of Management and Information Technology, Larsson took part in the 2011 Oxford Internet Institute Summer Doctoral Programme. His PhD thesis – “Doing Things in Relation to Machines – Studies on Online Interactivity” (pdf) – was awarded the 2012 Börje Langefors award (for best Swedish thesis within the field of Informatics) and the 2012 FSMK Doctoral Dissertation award (for best Swedish thesis within the field of media and communication studies). Anders Olof Larsson’s research interests include the use of online interactivity and social media by societal institutions and their audiences, journalism studies, political communication and methodology, especially quantitative and computational methods. As of January 2021, Larsson’s work has been cited 4147 times, resulting in an h-index of 33 and an i10-index of 57. In June of 2017, Larsson was ranked as among the top 100 most productive researchers in Norway. In October 2020, Larsson was the only communication & media studies scholar with a Norwegian affiliation ranked among the top 2 % in his field worldwide following a ranking from Stanford University

 

The subject of Anders’ session is: Social media analysis – possibilities and pitfalls 

What types of data can we get from different social media platforms, such as Facebook, Instagram or Twitter? I will present the possibilities we currently have, and I will also touch upon some interesting opportunities for analysis of social media data.

April 19th, 2pm on Zoom.

https://bournemouth-ac-uk.zoom.us/j/9292103478?pwd=UzJnNTNQWDdTNldXdjNWUnlTR1cxUT09

Meeting ID: 929 210 3478

Passcode: rps!4fmc

We hope to see you there!

 

Computational Approaches to Online Uncivil Discourse. Research process seminar. 2pm, Tuesday 5th April on Zoom

You are warmly welcomed to join us for this research process seminar presented by Dr Patrícia Rossini, a Derby Fellow of Communication and Media at University of Liverpool. Again, this talk is highly interdisciplinary and should be of interest to staff and research students from across the university.

Computational Approaches to Online Uncivil Discourse – by Dr Patrícia Rossini

This session will focus on the process of using supervised machine learning to develop algorithms to classify large quantities of data, with a focus on complex concepts such as uncivil and intolerant discourse. We will discuss the challenges of scaling up nuanced content analysis work with machine learning, some best practices in generating high-quality data, and the overall advantages and disadvantages of using computational methods to study complex issues. 

Bio:

Dr Patrícia Rossini is a Derby Fellow in the Department of Communication and Media. Prior to joining the University of Liverpool, Dr. Rossini was a postdoctoral research fellow in the School of Information Studies at Syracuse University (USA). She has a Ph.D. in Communication from the Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Broadly speaking, her research is concentrated on the impact of social media in politics and democracy. Specifically, Patrícia studies informal political talk online, with an emphasis on incivility and intolerance, and provides a conceptual framework to identify the extent to which these behaviors are democratically harmful. She is also interested in computational social sciences and is currently working on developing algorithms to measure strategic communication and political discussion online. Other research interests include political campaigns online, political deliberation, and political participation.

Patrícia is currently (co-) principal investigator in five externally funded projects. She is the lead investigator in a grant awarded by Facebook to investigate perceptions of uncivil and intolerant discourse online in four countries, and on a project to study the use of private messaging apps and social media as sources for political misinformation, funded by WhatsApp. She is co-lead investigator on a project funded by Twitter to investigate conversational dynamics and develop metrics to detect polarization, incivility, and intolerance in discussions around contentious and non-contentious topics, co-lead investigator of a comparative research project funded by Facebook to study visual misinformation on social media in eight countries across five continents, and co-lead investigator on a project analyzing political advertising on Facebook in the 2020 elections in the United States, supported by the Knight Foundation.

Tuesday 5th April at 2pm on Zoom

https://bournemouth-ac-uk.zoom.us/j/9292103478?pwd=UzJnNTNQWDdTNldXdjNWUnlTR1cxUT09

Meeting ID: 929 210 3478

Passcode: rps!4fmc

Research process seminar: Computational Approaches to Online Uncivil Discourse. Tues 15 March at 2pm on Zoom

You are warmly invited to join us for this week’s research process seminar. Hosted by FMC but open to all staff and PGR students.

Computational Approaches to Online Uncivil Discourse by Dr. Patrícia Rossini

This session will focus on the process of using supervised machine learning to develop algorithms to classify large quantities of data, with a focus on complex concepts such as uncivil and intolerant discourse. We will discuss the challenges of scaling up nuanced content analysis work with machine learning, some best practices in generating high-quality data, and the overall advantages and disadvantages of using computational methods to study complex issues.

Bio

Dr Patrícia Rossini is a Derby Fellow in the Department of Communication and Media. Prior to joining the University of Liverpool, Dr. Rossini was a postdoctoral research fellow in the School of Information Studies at Syracuse University (USA). She has a Ph.D. in Communication from the Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Broadly speaking, her research is concentrated on the impact of social media in politics and democracy. Specifically, Patrícia studies informal political talk online, with an emphasis on incivility and intolerance, and provides a conceptual framework to identify the extent to which these behaviors are democratically harmful. She is also interested in computational social sciences and is currently working on developing algorithms to measure strategic communication and political discussion online. Other research interests include political campaigns online, political deliberation, and political participation.

Patrícia is currently (co-) principal investigator in five externally funded projects. She is the lead investigator in a grant awarded by Facebook to investigate perceptions of uncivil and intolerant discourse online in four countries, and on a project to study the use of private messaging apps and social media as sources for political misinformation, funded by WhatsApp. She is co-lead investigator on a project funded by Twitter to investigate conversational dynamics and develop metrics to detect polarization, incivility, and intolerance in discussions around contentious and non-contentious topics, co-lead investigator of a comparative research project funded by Facebook to study visual misinformation on social media in eight countries across five continents, and co-lead investigator on a project analyzing political advertising on Facebook in the 2020 elections in the United States, supported by the Knight Foundation.

Tuesday 15 March at 2pm

https://bournemouth-ac-uk.zoom.us/j/9292103478?pwd=UzJnNTNQWDdTNldXdjNWUnlTR1cxUT09

Meeting ID: 929 210 3478

Passcode: rps!4fmc

RKEDF: Research Methods Training Fund – Applications Open

An unsuccessful grant application can be demoralising so make your next bid successful! Remember, there can be many reasons for the lack of success! Some beyond your control others not!  Funders feedback will help to evaluate why your bid was unsuccessful and along with training via the Research Methods Training Fund you can look forward to future success!  

 The Research Knowledge Exchange Development Framework has announced this fund specifically targeted at academics who have submitted unsuccessful bids!   The aspiration is that by reinvigorate the research methodology via a training workshop successful recipients will aim to resubmit their bid within a 12-month period! 

 

FAQs 

How do I apply?  

MS Form application 

 

When do I need to have booked and paid for the course by?  

By Wednesday 1st June 2022 

 

When is the closing date?  

Friday 22nd April 2022 

 

Who selects the successful applicants?  

DDRP and RDS Panel will offer support to those in scope 

 

Examples of courses that you might choose: 

NCRM research courses  

NCRM training overview 

Oxford Qualitative Courses: Short Courses in Qualitative Research Methods 

Oxford Qualitative Courses – from specialists in qualitative research methods — Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford 

Qualitative Research Methods Courses 

Qualitative Research Methods Courses | University of Oxford (oxforduniversitystores.co.uk) 

 

Examples of methodological support you might choose: 

Residential research retreat 

Research Design Service South West (nihr.ac.uk) 

 

Institutional Learning from Funder Feedback: Research Methods

An insight from Associate Professor – Dr. Ian Jones.

One of the great benefits of acting as a reviewer – whether of funding applications or research papers – is being able to learn what is happening at the ‘cutting edge’ of a field, not only in terms of subject knowledge, but also in terms of methodology. Here, we can learn from both good, and not so good practice. Having recently reviewed a number of applications for the funding scheme associated with my own professional body, It was clear that such a task has clearly had a significant impact upon my own understanding of what makes ‘good’ research, and what makes a ‘good’ application for funding.

Perhaps the key term from the latest round of reviews – to me at least – was that of ‘coherence’, and coherence between various different elements of a proposed methodology. Often within applications there is an understandable focus upon ‘methods’ rather than ‘methodology’. To me, this means a missed opportunity to generate such coherence – and subsequently a missed opportunity to justify the key methodological decisions. As one example we can look at the importance of the ontological and epistemological basis of the work (perhaps more relevant within the social, rather than the natural sciences) which is often overlooked, or only briefly addressed. Often, even a relatively brief acknowledgement of these ideas can help to justify choices in terms of methods, sampling and data analysis. This can be taken further with reference to another – often overlooked – detail, that of the research design. Often, whilst research designs are outlined, their role as a ‘link’ between the epistemology of the study and the data collection and analysis methods is often omitted, where again, it can lead to a real sense of coherence within the methodology. The best bids had not only detail about the broader methodology, but also a real coherence between each element, with a consistent story being told, from the philosophical assumptions of the study, which guided the research design, where each method had a clear link both to the broader epistemological issues, and also the subsequent analysis and interpretation of the data.

Finally, and crucially from a reviewer’s perspective, the idea of coherence between researcher, subject and methodology is essential, often being the first question, a reviewer will be required to address. The research itself is not independent of the researcher, and does the study show coherence in terms of not only researcher-subject coherence (does the researcher have an established record in the area) but also researcher-methodology coherence (what evidence is there that the researcher could undertake this methodology successfully), again focusing not just on methods, but the broader methodology as a whole (for example is there coherence between the choice of research design, and the researcher’s own experiences and attributes (often key, for example, in ethnographic designs).

None of these points are ground breakingly original, but it is interesting to see that there is still great variation in how methodologies are constructed. And assessing such methodologies has proved to be of immense value when think about my own work.

Medical Research Council – Better methods, better research

MRC are opening up a £2,000,000 fund on 6th May for improving the methods used by others in biomedical and health research.

Deadline: 15th June 2022

The full economic cost of your project can be up to £625,000. MRC and NIHR will fund 80% of the full economic cost.

This is an ongoing scheme. Application rounds open twice per year, closing in June and November

More details on the funding opportunity here.

Your local branch of the NIHR RDS (Research Design Service) is based within the BU Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU)

We can help with your application. We advise on all aspects of developing an application and can review application drafts as well as put them to a mock funding panel (run by RDS South West) known as Project Review Committee, which is a fantastic opportunity for researchers to obtain a critical review of a proposed grant application before this is sent to a funding body.

Contact us as early as possible to benefit fully from the advice

Feel free to call us on 01202 961939 or send us an email.

Research process seminar, Tuesday 15th Feb at 2pm on Zoom. Intersectional Methods of Visual Media Analysis

You are warmly welcomed to this week’s research process seminar. Hosted in FMC but welcome to all staff and research students. This week’s talk is truly interdisciplinary, and delivered by a former BU staff member, now at Loughborough University (Emma Pullen).

 

Intersectional Methods of Visual Media Analysis by Dr. Emma Pullen & Dr. Laura Mora  

 

Is intersectionality a method? How can we implement intersectionality in our research? In this talk, Laura Mora and Emma Pullen cover the history and definition of (the nowadays buzzword) intersectionality, followed by a discussion of how its theory can be interpreted on a methodological level. As a tool for analysis, intersectionality makes visible how several systems of oppression (based on people’s identity markers) intersect and should be seen as mutually constitutive in creating power relations. This ensures that we move away from single-issue approaches (race-only or gender-only etc.) in our research, and instead reflect people’s complex realities. We discuss how to embed intersectionality into your sampling and in conducting a visual media analysis, discourse analysis and audience study. We also learn about the importance of intersectionality in positioning oneself as a researcher. Throughout the talk, we refer to our own visual media analysis of Paralympians’ Instagram posts, but there is plenty of room as well to walk through the possibilities of making research within your fields or case studies more intersectional.

 

Tuesday 15th Feb at 2pm on Zoom

https://bournemouth-ac-uk.zoom.us/j/9292103478?pwd=UzJnNTNQWDdTNldXdjNWUnlTR1cxUT09

Meeting ID: 929 210 3478

Passcode: rps!4fmc

FMC Research Process Seminars. Upcoming sessions – all staff and research students welcome

Hi colleagues,

For the last three and a half years, we have been running regular research seminars in the Faculty of Media and Communication. These are 60 min research seminars focussed on the process of doing research – particularly research methods but also including publishing, writing, time management etc. The idea here is that the speaker takes us through the anatomy of the project focussing particularly on the data collection and method – the challenges, the successes, and the failures. For the audience, we walk away with a practical application of a method we may not be familiar with or may not have applied in this way before.

The schedule until the start of June is below, with links to each seminar. Each will be led by an external speaker, who are leading experts in these methods.

If you would like to give a talk on an aspect of method or research process, then drop us a line

Dan Jackson and Sae Oshima, FMC

 

11 May at 2pm

Re-designing focus groups for inclusion – by Filippo Trevisan at American University, Washington, DC

Focus groups provide important opportunities for putting participants’ voices at the center of social research. However, ensuring that every participant has a fair chance of being heard can be difficult. This seminar will discuss strategies to ensure that focus groups are as inclusive as possible, focusing in particular on the challenges faced by participants with communication disabilities and disorders, which account for over 10% of the world’s adult population. Inspired by the principles of universal design, a range of solutions will be discussed that constitutes a flexible framework to empower new voices in research.

Join Zoom Meeting

https://bournemouth-ac-uk.zoom.us/j/87139699000?pwd=TjZKWnBMRnJtc0g3bDdoTEQ2RkNKQT09

Meeting ID: 871 3969 9000

Passcode: F+3iwB@Y


18th May at 2pm

Capturing incivility in online political spaces – by Rosalynd Southern and Emily Harmer at The University of Liverpool

Abstract TBA

Join Zoom Meeting

https://bournemouth-ac-uk.zoom.us/j/89365837916?pwd=bnlua1ZnMWJxOWJwUGxaNld6eks5dz09

Meeting ID: 893 6583 7916

Passcode: Za@D3Csq


25th May at 2pm

Examining the Dirt Under Our Fingernails: Exploring the Role of Ethnographic Mixed-Methods Research in Digital Political Communication – by James Dennis (University of Portsmouth), Amy Smith (BU) and Nikki Soo (Cardiff University)

As political actors diversify into multimedia communication strategies and citizens embrace semi-public and private digital spaces for everyday political talk, research into this realm has become increasingly complex. Effective and accurate investigation into political communication processes, events, and outcomes that occur in hybrid media systems means scholars must employ methodological reflexivity. In this paper, we argue that in particular, ethnography, the close observation of the phenomenon of study, is critical for scholars seeking to connect observations of digital communication with an understanding of the motivations that drive them. Combining insights from three projects analysing MPs, parties, news media organisations, and acRPStivist organisations, we provide advice for scholars looking to draw upon this methodological toolset.

Join Zoom Meeting

https://bournemouth-ac-uk.zoom.us/j/83798048442?pwd=TU56dG82dUpNV0ZUY3IyVFF4OVk1QT09

Meeting ID: 837 9804 8442

Passcode: p6x+Lb6A


1st June at 2pm

Thinking about epistemology – by Richard Thomas at Swansea University

This sort of philosophical thinking is often bypassed as we all dive into our research. But still worth pondering, I think. We will all find some particular approaches to our work are more suitable than others, and more suited to us as people and researchers. This talk sketches out a critical realist approach as particularly suitable to journalism/media research where we find out what the media does, how it does it, but most important of all – WHY they do it that way. Suitable perhaps for researchers, teachers and students.

Join Zoom Meeting

https://bournemouth-ac-uk.zoom.us/j/89956403486?pwd=cC95YnhMV1RGQ1RGQi9zS2RBZ2Z0UT09

Meeting ID: 899 5640 3486

Passcode: 6#tSV+*y

 

RKEDF events next week – spaces available

 

There are spaces available at the following events next week:

Day Date Event and booking link Facilitator
Monday 17th June Ethical Decision making in Practice Dr Helen Kara
Tuesday 18th June Using Creative Research Methods Dr Helen Kara
Thursday 20th June Research Communication Day RDS & M&C

Please follow the links to find out more and to book. The workshops with Dr Helen Kara are now also open to PGRs, who do not need line manager approval to attend.

Book now so that appropriate catering can be arranged.

 

Centre for Qualitative Research presents “Appreciative Inquiry” … in Conversation!

13432167_10154245215569855_4045956637427322389_n-001The Centre for Qualitative Research presents Clare Gordon and Caroline Ellis-Hill

“In Conversation…” about Appreciative Inquiry” next Wednesday at 1 pm in RLH 201.

The two will present the research method as a CONVERSATION…first, between each other, and then with the audience.  We are also asking that no PowerPoint be used in order that it is truly a conversation and NOT a lecture. All are welcome!

The series has been very popular so far, playing to a jam packed room. Come and join in the conversation. Many of us go to Naked next door for coffee following to continue the conversations and network.

Come along and join in the conversation!

Impact, outcome and research methods – HSC PhD student on LSE Impact Blog

With working at a university and the rise of the REF, you would have almost certainly come across the terms ‘impact’ and ‘outcomes’. Whilst there might be a great deal of similarity and overlap in the use of these terms, it is important to discuss the sometime subtle differences between ‘impact’ and ‘outcome’. What consequences might this have for the design of social research?

The health and social care literature uses these terms in a rather haphazard manner. The differences are rarely discussed and it can be suggested that many use the wrong terminology. In this blog post on the LSE Impact of Social Sciences Blog, relating to the field of information and advice on welfare issues, I briefly discuss and propose that there are fundamental differences between what an impact refers to and what an outcome refers to. Furthermore, I suggest that these differences are significant and profound enough to align each to opposing research methodologies.

These thoughts relate to the key areas of my PhD project with Elderly Accommodation Counsel (EAC) in London. EAC coordinates the FirstStop service which provides information and advice to older people (and other stakeholders) on housing and care issues. My research is focused on how older people use information and advice on housing and the wider impact that this has.

If anyone has an interest in this area, do get in touch!