Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
See Premium Plans
 
1
CCTP-723 Mixed Methods in Cross-Cultural ResearchFALL 2011GEORGETOWN CCTMonday, 6:30 pm - 9:00 pmCar Barn 309Dr. Katy Pearcekep63@georgetown.eduOffice hours before class (4pm-6pm) and by appointment (or Skype/Google chat)
Description
: This course is designed to provide students with exposure to cross-cultural social scientific researchas well as social scientific research which utilizes mixed methods (research in which the investigator collects andanalyzes data, integrates the findings, and draws inferences using both qualitative and quantitative approaches ormethods in a single study or program of inquiry). Students will learn about these lines of research, how to evaluatethem, as well as design cross-cultural mixed-methods studies and evaluate the validity of inferences resulting fromtheir own work.
Goals
: In this course, we will:
 
examine the problems associated with cross-cultural research;
 
discuss the types of inquiries best suited for mixed methods research;
 
introduce students to qualitative and quantitative methods, including data analysis;
 
discuss how to integrate and triangulate methods and findings;
 
critique mixed methods and cross-cultural studies, as well as studies that could be improved with the use of mixed methods; and
 
plan studies for future implementation that fit into students’ own program of study.
Readings
: These will cover methodological issues, with a particular focus on research conducted outside of theUnited States as well as between-country comparative research. Students will also be presented with examples of cross-cultural mixed methods studies.Readings are available in PDF form on Blackboard, but you are welcome to buy the books via Amazon or elsewhereif you want a physical copy.Each week empirical studies that illustrate the course concept will be presented by a member of the class whomwill also lead a short class discussion of the study. Students are encouraged to create a handout with a summary of the article as well as talking points for the discussion. Sign up for 2 readings here:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ak-BcvCnrJVudG9qQnhEVlRtQ051OXhHQnNGLTlucGc&hl=en_US#gid=0
–
 
I’d recommend that you try to spread them
out and try to choose from two different methodological perspectives. (Each presentation/discussion is worth 15%of your final grade.)
 Assignments
: The primary way that you will be evaluated in this course is through three prospectus studyproposals. Between 13-20 pages in length (not including cover page, references, tables, or figures), theseprospectuses will allow you to explore a phenomenon from a quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methodsperspective. You will write an abbreviated literature review and propose a study guided by course materials. Eachprospectus will be workshopped in class. Further, you will hand in a draft to the instructor and your final grade
will reflect the overall work as well as the response to the instructors’ comments on your draft.
(Each miniprospectus is worth 20% of your final grade.)All students are
expected to adhere to GU’s academic integrity and code of conduct policies.
 __
 Accommodations
: S
tudents with disabilities should register with GU’s Academic Resource Center
(arc@georgetown.edu
 
) and meet with the instructor about accommodations.
 
2
Schedule
:
WEEK DATE TOPIC READING1 W 8/31
(no classon M 9/5)
 INTRODUCTIONReiter, S., Stewart, G., & Bruce, C. (2010). Integrating qualitativeand quantitative approaches in cross-cultural research.
16th Americas Conference on Information Systems
(pp. 1-8). Lima, Peru.Baron, N. S. (2010). Introduction to special section: Mobile phonesin cross-cultural context: Sweden, Estonia, the USA and Japan.
New Media & Society 
,
12
(1), 3-11. doi:10.1177/1461444809355109EPISTEMOLOGYShoemaker, P., Tankard, J., & Lasorsa, D. (2004b). Introduction.
How to build social science theories
(pp. 1-10). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.HOW RESEARCH WORKS
Field, A. (2009e). What the hell am I doing here? I don’t belong
here.
Discovering statistics Using SPSS (and sex and drugs and Rock 
“n” Roll)
(pp. 2-6). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Field, A. (2008). Writing lab reports & APA format. Retrieved fromhttp://www.statisticshell.com/writinglabreports.pdf 2 M 9/12 QUANTITATIVEAllen, M., Titsworth, S., & Hunt, S. (2009b). Steps in quantitativeresearch.
Quantitative research in communication
(pp. 14-15).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Field, A. (2009d). Data collection 2: How to measure.
Discoveringstatistics Using SPSS (and sex and 
drugs and Rock “n” Roll)
(pp. 12-15). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CONTENT ANALYSISNeuendorf, K. (2010). Content analysis
—
A methodological primerfor gender research.
Sex Roles
,
64
(3-4), 276-289.doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9893-0
Student-led discussions:
Kopacz, M., & Lee Lawton, B. (2010). The YouTube Indian:Portrayals of Native Americans on a viral video site.
New Media &Society 
,
13
(2), 330-349. doi:10.1177/1461444810373532Esarey, A., & Qiang, X. (2011). Digital communication and politicalchange in China.
International Journal of Communication
,
5 
, 298-319.Trammell, K. D., Tarkowski, A., Hofmokl, J., & Sapp, A. M. (2006).Rzeczpospolita blogów [Republic of Blog]: Examining Polishbloggers through content analysis.
 Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
,
11
(3). Retrieved fromhttp://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol11/issue3/trammell.html3 M 9/19 SURVEY/CORRELATIONALRESEARCHShoemaker, P., Tankard, J., & Lasorsa, D. (2004). Theoreticalconcepts: The building blocks of theory.
How to build social sciencetheories
(pp. 15-35). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Field, A. (2009c). Data collection 1: What to measure.
Discovering
statistics Using SPSS (and sex and drugs and Rock “n” Roll)
(p. 7).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Student-led discussions:
Azam, S. (2007). Internet adoption and usage in Bangladesh.
 Japanese Journal of Administrative Science
,
 20
(1), 43-54.Erdur-Baker, O. (2009). Cyberbullying and its correlation totraditional bullying, gender and frequent and risky usage of internet-mediated communication tools.
New Media & Society 
,
12
,109-125.Rosen, D., Lafontaine, P. R., & Hendrickson, B. (2011).CouchSurfing: Belonging and trust in a globally cooperative onlinesocial network.
New Media & Society 
,
13
, 981-998.Shahar, R., & Lev-
on, A. (2011). Gender, religion, and new media :
 
3
Attitudes and behaviors related to the Internet among ultra-Orthodox women employed in computerized environments.
 Journal of Communication
,
5 
, 875-895.Ghassemzadeh, L., Shahraray, M., & Moradi, A. (2008). Prevalenceof Internet addiction and comparison of Internet addicts and non-addicts in Iranian high schools.
Cyberpsychology & Behavior 
,
11
(6),731-733. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0243MEASUREMENTWilliams, F., & Monge, P. (2001). Levels of measurement.
Reasoningwith statistics
(pp. 23-30). Belmont, CA: Thomas Higher Education.Allen, M., Titsworth, S., & Hunt, S. (2009a). The nature of variablesand data.
Quantitative research in communication
(pp. 9-10).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Field, A. (2009a). Levels of measurement.
Discovering statistics
Using SPSS (and sex and drugs and Rock “n” Roll)
(pp. 8-10).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Field, A. (2003). Designing a questionnaire. Retrieved fromhttp://www.statisticshell.com/designing_questionnaires.pdf VALIDITYField, A. (2009b). Validity and reliability.
Discovering statistics
Using SPSS (and sex and drugs and Rock “n” Roll)
(pp. 11-12).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.4 M 9/26 NITTY GRITTY OF QUANTIATIVEEmber, C., & Ember, M. (2009b). The basics of statistical analysis.
Cross-cultural research methods
(pp. 123-151). Plymouth, UK:AltaMira Press.CORRELATIONWilliams, F., & Monge, P. (2001). Correlation.
Reasoning withstatistics
(pp. 127-141). Belmont, CA: Thomas Higher Education.Field, A. (2000). Relationships between variables. Retrieved fromwww.statisticshell.com/correlation.pdf SAMPLINGEmber, C., & Ember, M. (2009a). Sampling.
Cross-cultural researchmethods
(pp. 89-95). Plymouth, UK: AltaMira Press.Assignment for mini prospectus5 M 10/3
(no classon M 10/10)
 Workshop mini prospectus
Mini prospectus draft due10/7, final mini prospectus due10/19
 6 M 10/17 QUALITATIVELindlof, T., & Taylor, B. (2010a). Planning research projects.
Qualitative communication research methods
(pp. 71-132).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.ETHNOGRAPHYLindlof, T., & Taylor, B. (2010c). Participating, observing, andrecording social action.
Qualitative communication researchmethods
(pp. 133-169). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Student-led discussions:
Takahashi, T. (2010). MySpace or Mixi? Japanese engagement withSNS (social networking sites) in the global age.
New Media &Society 
,
12
(3), 453-475. doi:10.1177/1461444809343462Farnsworth, J., & Austrin, T. (2010). The ethnography of new mediaworlds? Following the case of global poker. New Media & Society,12(7), 1120-1136. doi:10.1177/1461444809355648Garcia, A., Standlee, A., & Bechkoff, J. (2009). Ethnographicapproaches to the Internet and computer-mediatedcommunication.
 Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 
,
38
(1), 52-84. doi:10.1177/0891241607310839Horst, H. A. (2006). The blessings and burdens of communication:Cell phones in Jamaican transnational social fields.
Global Networks
,
6
(2), 143-159. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0374.2006.00138.xKendzior, S. (2011). Digital distrust: Uzbek cynicism and solidarityin the Internet age.
 American Ethnologist 
,
38
(3), 559-575.doi:10.1111/j.1548-1425.2011.01323.x7 M 10/24 INTERVIEWING & FOCUSGROUPSLindlof, T., & Taylor, B. (2010b). Qualitative interviewing.
Qualitative communication research methods
(pp. 170-216).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Search
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.
    • Notes
    Load more