Chapter 4: Research Design & Process
4.5. My Approach to Data Analysis
My overall approach to data analysis can be described as rooted in hermeneutics which presents the philosophical underpinning of interpretivism (Myers, 2004). Such an approach is primarily concerned with making sense of text-based data and thus the question becomes “what is the meaning of this text?” (Radnitzky, 1970, p.20; Myers, 2004). Hermeneutics has been described as a circular process involving uncovering various layers of meaning and moving between whole and part meanings and back again (Myers, 2004). In information systems, for example, Myers identifies that “the aim of the hermeneutic analysis becomes one of trying to make sense of the whole, and the relationship between people, the organisation and the information technology” (Myers, 2004). As part of this sense making process I have principally adopted a thematic analysis approach, rooted in searching for all possible meanings attuned additionally to phenomenology (Creswell, 1998; Boyatzis, 1998). Such an approach therefore looks for themes or patterns in the data which are then coded (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Principally I took an inductive approach in that themes mainly emerged through the data and thus can be said to bear some similarities to grounded theory (Braun & Clarke, 2006). All interview transcripts and focus group transcripts were coded by the researcher, through the marking of transcripts and producing rough ‘visual’ representations of the links between data according to research questions and themes emerging and then manually coded using NVivo software. NVivo was used as a storage and organisational tool rather than as a coding tool in itself.
4.5.1 The Role of Theory in Data Collection and Analysis
Eisenhardt (1989) identifies the varying roles of theory in research, not only as a guide to research design and data collection and as a product, but also as part of the iterative process of data collection and analysis. I discuss theory here in relation to how it acts as a guide to data collection and as part of the iterative process of data collection and analysis. My understanding of empowerment, power, disempowerment and community empowerment have of course influenced data collection and analysis. Domestication also orientated my work in terms of data collection and analysis around technology and social change and I drew
on this frame of thinking more and more during the analysis. As I became increasingly familiar with my data, I began to relate it to relevant theories and concepts that had emerged through my literature review, and additionally to theories which came to light through further reading during the course of the research that I deemed useful in both analysing and making sense of my data. I further explain this somewhat complex iterative process within the remainder of this section.
I have outlined my understanding of empowerment as rooted in individual interpretations and of community empowerment as social process of change. I approached my analysis from an understanding of community empowerment as an outcome embedded in a social process of change and rooted in the interpretations of those experiencing the social phenomenon of investigation. As previously identified I also entered the field with the understanding that empowerment can only be understood through the exploration of its social context. I also approached the research and thus the data analysis with the knowledge that power, control and disempowerment are central to understanding what it can mean to be empowered.
Fundamentally, my approach to and analysis of empowerment or what it might mean to be empowered is rooted in the meanings assigned by the research participants, and thus quite simply understood as, “a positive change in people’s lives-as they themselves define such change” (Parks, 2005, p.3). During the data collection and analysis within this frame it emerged that regeneration would be more effectively seen as part of the social context and process rather than an outcome of the process. This opened up issues of power and control within this particular arena. Given that empowerment is concerned with those who may be seen to be disempowered and the regeneration and therefore digital inclusion context of my study, I also brought a lens of social exclusion to the data in terms of illuminating the voices of the people within the study whose stories had the most to say regarding value within this arena. As the study progressed I also found Maslow’s theory of human motivation (1943) useful in illuminating perceptions of empowerment value at the individual level.
I have also drawn on Lukes’ (1977) theory of power with particular regard to the arena of voice. Lukes suggests that absence of conflict does not negate the possibility of manipulation and further that:
cognitions and preferences in such a way as they accept their role in an existing order of things, either because they can see or imagine no alternative to it, or because they value it as divinely ordained and beneficial? (Lukes, 1977, p.24).
The latter he argues “may not express or even be conscious of their interests” (Lukes, 1977, p.25). This informed my thinking around what ‘invisible’ forces of power may lay behind what was being voiced and indeed not being voiced within this specific social context, which thus influenced both data collection and analysis.
In attempting to understand how individual perceptions of change and value relate to the ‘whole’ social process in relation to the question of what constitutes meaningful participation or “what it can mean to be empowered by technology” (Haddon, 2006, p.198), I homed in on specific aspects of domestication and in particular, the relationship between domestication strategies and participation. Applying a framework of domestication strategies to my data was also useful in thinking about arenas of control, power dynamics and politics of participation, particularly within the arena of voice. Viewing data through the window of domestication also brought to light the value of the sociologist Erving Goffman’s (1974) theory of framing for illuminating my findings with regard to meaningful participation. In addition, I found Kurtz’s (2009) categorisation of varying aspects of identity useful in thinking about aspects of identity beyond demographics, which served to reinforce the value of interpretive framing as a way of viewing my data.
As I progressed with my analysis and attempted to make greater sense of the role played by technology amidst the complex interweave of factors shaping value and to apply a critical lens to the data, I turned to the field of discourse surrounding participatory culture. I began to see the notion of ‘co-creative media’ proposed by scholars working within the arena of the creative industries as also useful, with particular regard to my critique of the assumptions surrounding social media technologies. Spurgeon et al., (2009) propose the concept of co- creative media as a way to understand and describe “the ways in which participatory media
are facilitated by people, organizations and technology” offering thus “a corrective alternative
to the tsunami of hype about DIY culture and democratization” (Spurgeon, et al., 2009, p. 284). I have found co-creative media a useful way to think about the analysis of my data and thus presentation of my findings. The conceptual lens of co-creative media lens opens up a view of social media as ‘participatory media’ thus involving a “very broad range of media
practices, in which media consumers can also become producers” (Spurgeon et al., 2009, p. 276). Seeing the Community Reporter Programme as a co-created media practice has been very useful in analysing and making sense of my data and the potential role of technology within such a social practice in social change. The idea of co-creative media also fits in well with the idea of empowerment as a process which can be likened to a “path or a journey” and which occurs in relationships, as highlighted at the close of Chapter 3. Petersen (2008) also proposes a relational view of the technologies associated with the era of social media and as the study progressed this shaped the approach to the analysis of my data and thus the presentation of my findings. Petersen, (2008) also suggests that the differential effects within the realm of social media may be understood by considering that value and significance emerges from the relational characteristics of these technologies or “ensemble of technologies” (Petersen, 2009, sic) and goes on to explain:
One of the most interesting, inspiring and productive aspects of Web 2.0, and at the same time one of the problematic ones when considered critically, is the relational character of these technologies. Relational thinking entails viewing the world as relations instead of objects and subjects. Usually we would ascribe significance or value to objects and subjects as if it came from within. It is evident, when looking at how Web 2.0 creates significance for its users, that it is the relations between the different elements that create significance and value. Why is this important? Because it explains why a specific type of software and practices related to it can be participatory, exploitative and create pleasure for its users at the same time (Petersen, 2009, sic).
Joshua Meyrowitz’s (1985) use of situationist theory to explain how social change relates to changing media forms (Marwick & boyd, 2011) has also been useful in exploring the role of technology within the particular social practice of study. When thinking about voice and empowerment I have also drawn on theories of voice when applied to the Internet (Mitra & Watts, 2002) to analyse and present my data.
Given the inherent complexity explored within this section, Figure 4.1 thus seeks to illuminate the array of theories and conceptual tools brought to the process of data collection and analysis.
Figure 4.1: The Role of Theory / Conceptual Tools in Data Collection and Analysis
Community Empowerment Power Domestication
Human Motivation Co-creative Media
Interpretive Framing Identity Social Exclusion Voice Situationism
Having thus set out the essence of my research design and approach, the next two chapters explore the key findings to emerge from this complex process.
DATA COLLECTION &