Research is more than just the gathering of information, it is a process in which you ask questions to expand the breadth of your knowledge (Goddard and Melville, 2011). The boundary of which is only limited by the questions that you ask. Question after question will open up new avenues of enquiry that will bring depth and clarity to the information collected. During this module the research methods I have been able to use have been quite limited, however in the rest of my education I have used various research methods to gather information. I would have like to have gone out into the world and collect data and experience things first hand however at this time it is not possible.
Unfortunately, the main method of research throughout this module has been through desktop researching. This has entailed looking at websites, online academic journals, and blog posts. Although this has not been a broad scope of methods it has required me to think a lot deeper about my methodology. There is often so much information on the internet for every topic, so it has required me to be a lot more selective with my research. To select texts that are the most appropriate by assessing their quality and their reliability. It has not been uncommon throughout this process that I have found sources that contradict each other. Now it is not my place to decide which is wrong and which is right. However, what I can do is make an informed decision as to which is more reliable. For example, if one comes from an academic journal and the other is a blog post, the journal is going to have more credibility. There are also other elements that have to be considered such as context. I have to consider where and when the information was published, whether information is outdated or if it has come from a location with certain beliefs or influence from a wider context. Although sources may contradict it does not mean that I could not use them both and use them in a comparative manner. A desktop study is one of the easiest research methods you can do as there is such a wide array of information on the internet. It enabled me to explore backgrounds and gather a whole range of information from different sources whether I used it or not is insignificant. By trailing through lots of sources it enabled me to pick out the best ones to inform my blog posts and research.
Another way in which I have conducted research is through experimentation. When I have seen a theory, I have attempted to try it out. For example, in my blog posts for Gestalts Principles and Anthropomorphism, I included sketch work demonstrating how the idea I have written about can be implemented in to design work. By doing this exercise I am confirming the theory of others and proving it for myself. It effectively adds a second layer of assurance to confirm its validity.
When I was researching I would often look to objective research first. To find the facts and data that were related to the topic. I found that this is a good way to build a foundation on which you can build on. I would often compile objective research both qualitative and quantitative, this would help me to develop topics and create a structure for my posts giving me my main talking points. Once these key topics have been found I can delve deeper, asking more in depth questions around the subject. This allows me to find sources that are relevant using online libraries and database searches. Combining this objective research with subjective research would then start to fill out the body of the text combing the factual information research with opinion and experiences. I feel that it is important to combine both of these as the subjectivity in the research almost humanises it. Instead of spouting facts it relates it to real life and opens opportunity for myself to almost debate with this research either supporting it or disagreeing with it.
It is something that I often do in everyday life “playing devil’s advocate”. I like to try and represent an argument or view from two sides even if I disagree with one of these sides. It helps me to understand or explain views from alternate viewpoint. Posing myself questions and giving a rebuttal almost enables me to build a stronger case for either side as I go backwards and forwards. Asking the Who’s, What’s, Where’s, When’s, Why’s and How’s (Mann, 2012). Although I often still have my own view it helps me to empathise and to have some degree of objectivity. I do think that it is important to understand what research is objective and which is subjective as there can be some very convincing cases that are made that are all based on opinion and not backed up by fact. This can sometime be misconstrued as comprehensive factual information. I do think that when writing or researching I will often have previous thoughts or assumption on the topic. This makes it very hard for one to remain objective, but I think that understanding this can be beneficial and put me in a place in which I acknowledge my assumption and delve deeper into different perspectives.
Having done a lot of academic research previously in my education it has become second nature for me to evaluate sources for the quality, validity and reliability of a source. These criteria of assessment can also help to tell the difference between objectivity and convincing subjectivity. My first check would usually be, is it an academic paper? If it is then I look at when and where it was published to check if it is still current. I would often also look to see how many times the paper has been cited by other papers. If it has been cited many times it is often a good sign that it presents some strong base or theory that others have replicated or built upon, showing it is a quality source. I would often look at a few of these other sources that have cited the paper to ensure its reliability. Within these papers I would look to see how long it was and the content that it covered, along with any experiments conducted. This would help me to assess the depth and quality of the publication. If my source was not an academic source, then I would be looking to see who the publisher was. Is it someone with integrity or is a platform on which anyone could post? For example, websites like Dezeen and Archdaily are more credible as they have reputations to uphold and have background in these fields. However, it must still be considered that these articles are written by their writers and will still contain some degree of subjectivity. Once this evaluation has been completed I can use and site the sources.
As I said at the beginning the breadth of our knowledge is only bound by the questions we ask. Once all of the steps of the process are completed to create knew knowledge the information you have collected should present more questions to be answered… and so the process starts again.
In the future I would like to build upon the experimental side of my research to not just confirm but to try and use these theories in a different way that could elevate my design. Throughout this module writing blog posts it has certainly developed the angle of which I approach research. Previously I would often deal with hard facts and data, often using interviews and questionaries to collect human data. This would have been what I classed as my subjective research. However with this module it has helped me to find opinions within the topic and around the academic community that have changed my perspective. I think this has helped me develop a critical approach to my research and my writing. In which things are not taken at face value and are explored in more depth.
References
Goddard, W. and Melville, S., 2011. Research Methodology. Kenwyn, South Africa: Juta & Co.
Mann, S., 2012. Study Skills For Art, Design And Media Students. 1st ed. Harlow, United Kingdom: Pearson Education Limited, pp.151-171.
Images
Slcc.instructure.com. 2021. Research Process Tutorial: Advanced. [online] Available at: <https://slcc.instructure.com/courses/510666> [Accessed 18 January 2021].
Harry Castle 