That title comes from Edmund Husserl in his initial discussions about Phenomenology, a qualitative research method focused on the authentic, lived experiences of research subjects. The idea of the statement is that any way of going about doing research automatically then also constrains what sorts of conclusions one can find in the data. This is a bit heady to me, but I drew a comparison that resonated for me: lens choice in photography.
I'm in the middle of a web-based augmented reality/virtual experience project for a nature center in the Twin Cities. One piece of this project is the idea to install a QR code station at a certain locations, and when you go to the webpage/site the code directs you to, you are presented with an opportunity to see the surroundings fro you same point of view, but be able to scroll through seasonal changes right there on your mobile device. Cool, hmm?
However, in order to do this in an authentic fashion, there's no way to get around the need for many photographic assets to have on hand to build the environment, and so I've been trying to get there frequently to get shots for us to use on the project. In order to build this right, I'm using everything from ultra wide angle glass (16mm focal equivalent) to telephoto (320mm focal equivalent). As I was reviewing photos today, it occurred to me that:
the nature center area = lived experiences
the lens/camera choice = research framework
the photo that get used in the project = research data
the user's experience of interacting with the online environment = interpreted results, or maybe the meta-interpretation of the data (since the team will have interpreted the images, then the user will do so again in a fashion meaningful for themselves).
I'm still struggling with this analogy a bit, but it was still interesting to have it bloom in my stream of consciousness.
No comments:
Post a Comment