Samenvatting

Samenvatting Communicatiewetenschappelijke Onderzoeksdesigns

0 keer verkocht

Instelling
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KU Leuven)

Samenvatting Communicatiewetenschappelijke Onderzoeksdesigns (Master Communicatiewetenschappen, KU Leuven)

[Meer zien]

Voorbeeld 3 van de 29 pagina's

Bekijk voorbeeld

Geupload op 3 juni 2021
Aantal pagina's 29
Geschreven in 2020/2021
Type Samenvatting

dekoninck heleen
schmuck desiree
samenvatting communicatiewetenschappelijke onderzoeksdesigns
samenvatting
kul
ku leuven
katholieke universiteit leuven
communicatiewetenschappelijke onderzoeksdesigns

€7,49

In winkelwagen

Opslaan

100% tevredenheidsgarantie
Direct beschikbaar na je betaling
Lees online óf als PDF
Geen vaste maandelijkse kosten

Communicatiewetenschappelijke onderzoeksdesigns
Introductie:
Doel:
∙ kwalitatieve & kwantitatieve onderzoeksmethoden
∙ volledig onderzoeksontwerp zelfstandig formuleren
∙ empirische communicatiestudies evalueren

Hoe?
a) gemeenschappelijk traject:
∙ introductie
∙ onderzoeksvraag vinden
∙ kwaliteitscriteria empirisch sociaal wetenschappelijk onderzoek
- validiteit
- ethiek
- veralgemening
- causaliteit
- betrouwbaarheid

b) individueel traject:
persoonlijk programma (workshops)

Finding a research question:
research process:

starting point: research problem

theory empirical research

methodology

- theoretical claim to a generalizable vision on the what, how & why of social phenomena
- repeatedly testing 'grip on reality': refinement, adjustment

, (research problem)
(research subject)

Finding a research question:
1. think broadly
∙ brainstorming on relevant research question / sub-questions
∙ different sources:
- observation
- public debate
- personal experience
- open questions in the literature
∙ go through literature & get further inspiration
2. narrow
∙ grouping, distinguishing issues
∙ what = innovative – theoretical, empirical?
3. refine
∙ what (description), how (process, change, effects), why (causes, reasons?)
∙ documenting assumptions, focusing core concepts

research question...:
∙ determines the quality of the research design & its elaboration
∙ has a theoretical basis, without being hindered by it (be innovative)
∙ has direction & is not too broad in scope
∙ = unambiguous, if necessary divided into sub-questions
∙ possibly gives rise to the formulation of concrete hypotheses
-> depending on epistemiological approach
∙ can take different forms:
∙ descriptive question -> how often (prevalence) or what is the course of a trend?
∙ explanatory/causal question -> what is the cause?
∙ prescriptive question -> how can we intervene?

! often concern about originality
˃ conceptual: gap or inconsistency in theories
˃ incidental: new phenomenon that arouses interest

! challenging theories in:
- in a new context (bv. time & space)
- in a new population
- with a new method

! replication = also possible:
added value of frequent repetition research in checking the stability of previous findings

, Refinement through literature study:

- goals of literature study:
∙ context of intellectual development in the field
∙ overview of current status, contradictions, inconsistencies, gaps
∙ positioning of oneself & the research

- 2 types of literature study:
1) narrative literature study: broad, descriptive exploration
2) systematic literature review: highly targeted, comprehensive analysis, driven by close &
concrete hypotheses

- literature review = essential:
∙ provides additional insight to delineate the problem
∙ you rely on what = known in advance, gives inspiration
∙ = open to knowledge based on a multitude of designs
∙ = open to a wide range of research outlets

- critically approaching literature = necessary:
∙ different types of sources, different ways to publish:
- books - book chapters: peer-reviewed? (long time lapse)
- journal articles: ISI, discipline, language, peer-reviewed? (medium time lapse)
- conference contributions: so-called 'proceedings' (short time lapse)
- open access? predatory publishers? internet resources? newspaper articles?

Publication culture:

- publication cycle & double blind peer review (articles, books, conference contributions):
∙ editor as an intermediary: authors & reviewers do not know each other
∙ reviewers as advisers – reject/revise/accept
∙ editor summarizes reviewer comments & makes final decision

- publication bias:
∙ pressure to publish - nuanced story
∙ tendency to non-publication when not 'interesting' or statistically significant
∙ both by rejects from editor/reviewers & by not offering (file drawer phenomenon)

- consequences problematic for science:
∙ published material distorted image?
∙ needless effort & resources? (non-significant findings just disappear in drawer)
∙ relatively recent - fortunately exceptional - cases of fraud

- countermovement: (‘open science’)
∙ pre-registration of design (pre-register hypotheses & research design)
∙ submit data & make it available
∙ initiatives publication 'non-significant' results

Dit zijn jouw voordelen als je samenvattingen koopt bij Stuvia:

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Studenten hebben al meer dan 850.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet jij zeker dat je de beste keuze maakt!

In een paar klikken geregeld

Geen gedoe — betaal gewoon eenmalig met iDeal, Bancontact of creditcard en je bent klaar. Geen abonnement nodig.

Focus op de essentie

Studenten maken samenvattingen voor studenten. Dat betekent: actuele inhoud waar jij écht wat aan hebt. Geen overbodige details!

Veelgestelde vragen

Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?

Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.

Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?

Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.