My Photo

Wardle McLean website

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter
    The Times Cities fit for cycling

    Stats

    • Stats

      View My Stats

    « RESEARCH, INFORMATION AND IDEAS. AND PIES. | Main | HAPPY NOW? »

    March 02, 2007

    TrackBack

    TrackBack URL for this entry:
    http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83452194e69e200d8342cffa953ef

    Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Real Research' or Transformation?:

    Comments

    Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

    Richard

    I like transformation but mainly because I like new language that resolves inadequacy with existing language.

    I should explain that my issue is not with qualitative research though, in a sense it got caught in the cross fire - think of it as polemic collateral damage.

    I had just finished being involved with a pre-test (of packaging rather than advertising as it happens) and I was dismayed that yet again we were seeing a distorted sample since the fieldwork hadn't progressed as planned and percentages on cells with less than 100 - the same old same old. And of course all the questions were quantifying attitude and emotion and reporting on claimed likely behaviour. And we have the temerity to call this research?

    That is my beef with 'sham' quantitative research.

    annette

    I really have to respond to this on my own blog - perhaps Richard should talk about good and bad research and not set up qualitative and quantitative as short hand in the absence of an informed view on both.

    Kevin

    Annette, do link us to your blog.

    annette

    Hi Kevin I forgot the http I think - done!
    www.inter-actions.biz/blog

    The comments to this entry are closed.

    Books We're Reading

    Pages