Saturday, August 10, 2013

The Last But Not Least Participant

After my web conferencing interview, I have completed interviewing three of the six participants who gave me their informed consent.  Two of the remaining three participants have completed two of their three interview sessions, and I believe one will be done by the end of the weekend.  I have not yet begun interviewing the sixth and perhaps last participant for my study because he has been on vacation for the past few weeks, but he should be back soon if not already.

The last participant provides an interesting approach to data collection as he is more of a vlogger than a blogger.  (A vlogger is a video blogger.)  Actually three of my participants have or had vlogs on their own YouTube channels, but this participant is the most dedicated towards his videos.  Of the other two participants, one started vlogging but switched to blogging, and that is where most of my document data for him is found.  For the most part, the other participant's videos support her blog, and she doesn't produce as many videos as she used to.

So how dedicated is this last participant to his online videos?  I say very much so as I spent the last few weeks cataloging his videos, which basically means listing all of his videos in chronological order and initially coding them when their titles are directly relevant to my research questions.  Unlike for most other bloggers, I did not date each video because to find the date, I have to play the video, and when I play a video, I lose my place on YouTube where I was cataloging videos.  This isn't usually a problem, but, as of yesterday, I have cataloged 1036 videos!

He has more than 1036 videos because halfway through my cataloging I stopped listing repeated videos, which don't happen often, and a series of videos on sumo wrestling, which do not directly answer my research questions.  If sumo wrestling videos dominated his channel, then I would have considered that they may, but they don't.

With 1036 cataloged videos, I have come to a dilemma.  How can I possibly thoroughly code all these videos?  Coding all these videos requires thoroughly transcribing all of them.  The average length of these videos seems to be around 10 minutes.  There are many that go beyond 15 and 20 minutes, but there are also some that are less than 5.  If the average is truly 10 minutes, then that's 10,360 minutes of video.  That 172 hours and 40 minutes!  Now, when I took courses on qualitative research I had to practice transcribing recorded interviews.  When I wasn't tired, I could transcribe about 20 minutes of raw data in 1 hour.  So to transcribe 10,360 minutes would at least take me over 31,000 hours which is 518 hours.  If I dedicated 8 hours a day to transcribing these videos, it would take me over 2 months straight, and that's if I didn't slow down!  After that, then I could start coding.  I wonder how many pages of text that would be.

Now, if I were rich or well-funded, I would hire an army of people to transcribe and code his videos.  No!

So...I decided to not be as rigorous with analyzing his videos as I am with my other participants, who average about 10 videos each.  This is not a case study, it's a multiple case study, and I want to spend roughly the same amount of time analyzing the data for each participant.  Otherwise, this last participant would definitely dominate my time and perhaps my study.

Fortunately, fortunately, my initial coding turned up only 42 videos of the 1036 that directly answer my research questions.  One of my other participants didn't even blog 42 times.  Anyway, once I transcribe one of these videos, I will check how many pages long it is because nearly all of my bloggers didn't blog more than a page per post.  I think I can handle a rough estimate of 420 minutes (7 hours) of videos to transcribe and code.

And I didn't even get to write about how I will collect and analyze the last participant's interview data.  That's another interesting post for later.

Friday, August 9, 2013

First Web Conferencing Interview

On Sunday, I conducted my first real web conferencing interview for research purposes.  I mention real because I've conducted two online interviews as pilots, however they were through Skype, which my IRB does not approve because Skype calls can be easily intercepted, and therefore I cannot guarantee privacy or confidentiality.  However, with the latest news concerning the US government PRISM surveillance program and corporate compliance, I don't think I can guarantee privacy or confidentiality with any online communication.  The IRB believed that Adobe Connect offered more security than Skype, so I was able to conduct my first web conferencing interview using Adobe Connect.  One reason I chose Adobe Connect was that I had 3 years of experience using the program to assist the Education Policy & Leadership Studies department in the College of Education with their hybrid online courses.

If you're interested in how I did this, I created a meeting on Adobe Connect for this purpose.  When you create a meeting, a link is provided to be shared with guest participants. I shared the link with my research participant who logged in as a guest, and then I helped her set up her webcam and mic.  Before that, however, I let her know the specifications for joining an Adobe Connect meeting.  The only preferred specification that she couldn't meet was avoiding a wireless connection.  Fortunately for us, the wireless connection was strong enough that it was only dropped once during the 2.5-hour interview.

Adobe Connect offers a recording option, but I opted out because I did not want the conference stored in the institution's Adobe Connect account and I did need to capture video.  Instead I captured the audio portion of the interview using Audacity.  Because I was using my Macbook Pro, I could have easily used Garageband as well but I piloted with Audacity, and it demonstrated reliability so there was no reason for me to change.  If I wanted to publish the audio interview, then Garageband would have been easier, but I cannot and will not publish the raw interview.

What did I learn from this type of interview process?
  1. Adobe Connect has a greater broadcasting delay problem than Skype.  I have used Skype to communicate with pilot participants and friends in Japan and Germany, and I experienced little to no delay in the communication.  However, Adobe Connect had a noticeable delay for my communication to South Korea.  I do not believe South Korea is at fault for this delay because no country is more wired than South Korea.
  2. The technical issues doubled my anxiety for the first 30 minutes.  Not only was I nervous because I wanted my first interview to go well, but my concern for having little to no technical issues made it more difficult for me to focus on my participant.  It was during the first 30 minutes that the connection dropped, so I was a little freaked out at that point.
  3. The delay took a while to get used to.  Not only did I have to learn a new way to pace the interview, but I also had to cope with hearing myself delayed on her end.  Every time I asked a question, my echo would repeat that question about 5-10 seconds later.  That echo sometimes helped me figure out when she would start speaking, so I didn't feel uncomfortable with the silent pauses on her end.
  4. Even if you want to plow through a lengthy interview, take a break when you get one.  I purposefully divided my interview into 3 sections.  Although I skipped the first break, I took the second one, and I needed it.  After that break, I was much calmer and more confident about the interview process.  That break also gave Adobe Connect a break in that I noticed the echo issue was toned down in the second half or third third.
  5. An interview script is your friend.  When I piloted my interview face-to-face, it was easier to let it flow into a conversation.  But because of the irregularities of a web conferencing interview, this flow could not be transferred.  Perhaps if I had more practice interviewing with delayed online communication, perhaps I could discover a new conversational flow.  However, I would prefer to avoid this type of delay if I could.  The interview script always kept me focused when a technical issue distracted me.  The interview script worked well on my computer because I could set up the script next to the video of my participant, so I could maintain eye contact much better than a face-to-face interview.  So that's one positive aspect of conducting an interview online.
Last but not least, I was very fortunate to have a flexible and easygoing participant for my first web conferencing interview.  She was completely understanding of the technical issues and did not get upset if I had to ask her to repeat her responses if I couldn't hear her.  She made it a much more manageable and enjoyable experience.