[Air-l] Re: Air-l digest - Number Fetishism

[Pille Vengerfeldt]

Dear all,

Couldn't help but to cheer on Uwe. Enlighten me if you may, is the strong
opposition between qualit-quantit an anglo-american thing?

Why is it that my own (Estonian) beliefs are so similar to Uwe's (or to
those that they used to be)?

And why is it, that we tend to take the worst exaples of anything to build
up a critique? Not only in this case, but (I hope I am not opening a can
of worms here) in case of technologial determinism vs social
constructivism?

Just couldn't hold my fingers here.

Pille Vengerfeldt
PhD student,
Dep of Journalism and Communications
University of Tartu
Estonia

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Uwe Matzat" <u.matzat at tm.tue.nl>
> To: <air-l at aoir.org>
> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 10:37 AM
> Subject: [Air-l] Re: Air-l digest - Number Fetishism
>
>
>> Dear Alex Kuskis, dear colleagues,
>>
>> thank you very much for enlighting us about the difference between
>> quantitative and qualitative research. I always had the impression
>> that both could learn from each other and that the method should
>> be chosen that fits best to the research problem and to what kind
>> of insights one is looking for.
>>
>> Now I know better. I especially like the sentence
>>
>> "There are two main types of user research: quantitative (statistics)
>> and qualitative (insights). Quant has quaint advantages, but
>> qualitative delivers the best results for the least money.
>> Furthermore, quantitative studies are often too narrow to be useful
>> and are sometimes directly misleading. "
>>
>> I think this is a very fair and well-elaborated summary that should
>> finish the whole academic discussion that went on during the last
>> decades. Things can be so easy. ;-)
>>
>> Thank you once more, Alex.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Uwe
>>
>> PS: I wonder whether this is the spirit of the next AIR conference in
>> Sussex? After Toronto, I get more and more a strange feeling. Is
>> this the culture clash between cultural studies against science? I
>> wouldn't like that.
>>
>> On 4 Mar 04, at 12:01, air-l-request at aoir.org wrote:
>> >
>> > Message: 3
>> > From: "Alex Kuskis" <akuskis at ican.net>
>> > To: <air-l at aoir.org>
>> > Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 19:30:24 -0500
>> > Subject: [Air-l] Number Fetishism
>> > Reply-To: air-l at aoir.org
>> >
>> > This is for our friend from Oz who is so keen on quantitative
>> analysis
>> > to the exclusion of all else.........Alex Kuskis Alertbox, March
>> > 1, 2004: Risks of Quantitative Studies Summary: Number fetishism
>> > leads usability studies astray by focusing on statistical analyses
>> > that are often false, biased, misleading, or overly narrow. Better
>> > to emphasize insights and qualitative research. There are two main
>> > types of user research: quantitative (statistics) and qualitative
>> > (insights). Quant has quaint advantages, but qualitative delivers
>> > the best results for the least money. Furthermore, quantitative
>> > studies are often too narrow to be useful and are sometimes
>> > directly misleading.
>> >
>> > http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20040301.html
>>
>> =======================================
>> Uwe Matzat
>> Sociology Section
>> Sub-Department of Technology and Policy
>> Department of Technology Management
>> Eindhoven University of Technology
>> P.O. Box 513, 5600 MB Eindhoven
>> The Netherlands
>> phone: +31 40 247-8392
>> email: u.matzat at tm.tue.nl
>> http://www.tue-tm-soc.nl/~matzat/
>> =======================================
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Air-l mailing list
>> Air-l at aoir.org
>> http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Air-l mailing list
> Air-l at aoir.org
> http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l
>