Research Methodology, Essay Example

Sharing and exchange information is a relatively new phenomenon in the field of information science. Which the best methods could be applied for data collection and analyzing? Explain your views and support your answer with appropriate relevant literature.

As the digital era has emerged with a wide range of new social networking tools which utilize the internet as a fuel for engagement and the sharing of ideas, there are many tools for electronic communication that are evolving out of this new globalized digital environment. It’s noted that, “since 1999, almost 90% of daily newspapers in the United States have been actively using online technologies to search for articles and most of them also create their own news websites to reach new markets” (Salman, Ibrahim, HjAbdullah, Mustaffa, & Mahbob 2). The following will asses some of the advantages and disadvantages of these new electronic communication tools in business. Instant messaging is also recognized form of interaction as it represents a body of protocols that allow individuals to exchange messages back and forth in real time.  Wood, Haugen and Clare note that,  “this is done by a server which keeps track of who is online and their IP addresses, which are supplied to anyone on a user’s contact list. Communication between the users is then done on a client (peer) to client (peer) basis without the messages passing through the server. With the more centralized approach, the message from a user travels through a server or network of servers to reach the recipient” (Wood, Haugen, Clare, 2003, p.10). The benefits instant messaging brings to information exchange process utilized by business are intangible. The same can also be said of text messaging with mobile devices. The real opportunity all of these outlets represent are viable alternatives to retrieving data to research the impact smart phones have within the context of information sciences.

In their study on (Faulkner & Culwin, 2005) text messaging, specifically in respect how it has grown within the field of communication, Faulkner and Culwin noted that,“SMS or text messaging is an area of growth in the communications field. The studies described below consisted of a questionnaire and a diary study. The questionnaire was designed to examine texting activities in 565 users of the mobile phone” (Faulkner & Culwin, 2005, p.4). They go onto note that their diary study entailed the use of 24 subjects over a 2 week period. Their findings reveal text messaging to be one of the most rapidly growing tools for corporate communication in business (Faulkner, & Culwin,2005). Text messaging is notorious for its lack of intimacy in regards to social interaction, as the users tend to be on their mobile devices and on the go. It has also gained a stigma for being a rude form of interaction within social situations as it has the capacity to undermine conversations in interpersonal settings where the text messengers engage in side conversation alternative to the ones they are physically engaged in at the moment. The added benefit text messaging provides the business world comes in its convenience of application as users are able to keep stakeholders informed of their whereabouts and dealings at any instant of any day while on the move.

There is a variety of research available that supports the notion that the internet, social media and many of the relative mobile device applications and web tools empower scientists in ways never before possible to execute effective research. As Babbie notes, “the ability to elicit open-ended responses and to follow up on those responses using a two-stage questioning methodology allowed us to obtain factors that were not constrained by a priori identification of constructs as in traditional survey research” (Babbie 1990). Here he demonstrates whole hardly that traditional research measures are no longer standard, and this is especially true in respect to information sciences as the core source of information in today’s digital age stems from the internet. Despite this new developing trend, there are still a number of scholars who have not adapted to utilize all of the advantages the internet has to offer in scientific research. As Bik and Goldstein (2013) note, “although a number of guides exist online, many researchers still feel overwhelmed and hesitant toward the virtual world, lacking sufficient information and guidance through formal scientific channels such as peer-reviewed journals” ( Bik & Goldstein, 2013, p.1).

One of the most convenient resources the internet offers scientists is the ability to conduct larger scale qualitative survey studies through the used of e-mail and social networks. Bik and Goldstein touch on this concept noting that, “in the age of the internet, social media tools offer a powerful way for scientists to boost their professional profile and act as a public voice for science. Although the type of online conversations and shared content can vary widely, scientists are increasingly using social media as a way to share journal articles, advertise their thoughts and scientific opinions, post updates from conferences and meetings, and circulate information about professional opportunities and upcoming events”( Bik & Goldstein, 2013, p.1). This provides a substantial avenue for research and scientific development within the field of information science.

That the categorization process should operate in such a manner should come as no real surprise. More than four decades ago, Bruner (1957) and Jones and Thibaut (1958) drew attention to the importance of goal-directed social categorizations. Bullas definies social media as “Social as a blur of  tweets, shares and content. No longer is it just used by the young and the restless. It is global and embedded in every corner of the web” (Bullas, 2014, p. 1). Bateson states something very similar noting that, “the essence and raison d’etre of communication is the creation of redundancy, meaning, pattern, predictability, information, and/or the reduction of the random by “restraint.”(Bateson, 1972, p.141).
When the findings of Reddy and Jansen (2008) are applied to the current state of technological trends in the mobile device sector, the impact of collaborative information behavior on smart phone use is revealed. It is specifically prevalent in the way smart phone applications are developed to expand the functionality of mobile phone usage. As applications are developed in a peer to peer open source environment, information problems that present themselves in the form of programming and web architectural hurdles can be easily resolved through collaborative efforts. Information is acquired and exchanged in an exponentially faster and more efficient way, reducing the size of digital divides across regions.

Part of this expectation stems from the intangible revenue expected to come in from the evolving M-commerce market. In the book “Electronic Commerce: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications, Volume 1” the author S. Ann Becker points out that French mobile communication, is growing in France. She defines this new emerging market as the m-commerce market.  or as she calls it the m-commerce market, is emerging in France. It is her belief that a solid m-commerce strategy can be implemented in synergy with an e-commerce strategy to produce amplified and more forward anticipatory results. There is much room for innovation within the M-Commerce market as it is a growing and expanding space, specifically in international markets. Another key international consideration that also neatly fits in with the concept of M-commerce and the functionality of mobile devices is the act of incorporating international friendly apps. In Donner’s (2006) study on the impact mobile devices are having in Kigali Rwanda on micro-entrepreneurs, the author points out that the mobile phone penetration in Africa is noticeably higher, due to the act that developing regions have higher income areas. Many individuals in lower income areas use mobile devices as their sole web accessible device. The author notes that in 2004, there were an estimated 16 mobile users for ever 1,000 people, which accounted for about 139,000 subscribers.

The above reveals the exponential increase in mobile line use since 1998. As the increase in telecommunication through mobile devices, is hypothesized to supplement economic development through enabling enhanced transport efficiency, more quality market information, and more distributed economic development, income an employment related questions will play a substantial role in the survey.

The above table demonstrates there is simultaneous growth in Rwanda in both non-business, as well as business related ventures, largely attributed to the adoption of mobile phones throughout the region. This data represents a clear increase in communication that can be credited for minimizing the digital divide as it reveals the widespread usage of mobile phones is enhancing socioeconomic engagement throughout the region. To put it in global and international perspective, in his work “The international Gap in Technology,” author Potashnik states that, “at the dawn of the twenty-first century, there was a major gap between industrialized and developing countries in terms of their access to information and communications technology” (Potashnik, 2013, p.1). He goes on to further attribute globalization as the core source of this gap. He says, “this gap has come to be known as the digital divide and is illustrative of the vast differences in development among nations resulting from the process of globalization” (Potashnik 2013.p2). The data presented in Potanik’s work establishes understanding concerning countries and their internet related technologies. The current state of the global digital divide, specifically as it relates to developing nations, entails the process of trying to bridge the gap between nations that are less technologically inclinde those considered to be at the forefront of the tech world. Throughout the world countries with internet access are more informed, and while many people may not be able to afford personal computers,  their own internet connections are empowered socioeconomically and their citizens tend to be more informed. As globalization expands and regions like Africa embrace mobile telecommunication and e-commerce new infrastructure becomes a byproduct of this evolution.

Thanks to mobile smart phone applications, citizens of Africa are growing more connected through the exchange of  information. The technology has also bridged the gap of digital divides that have long inhibited the economic success of the region. Mobile device use in the region is supplementing the rise of small enterprises that in previous decades might not have had access to the affordable technology necessary to expand globally into other regions. The reason for this rise can be attributed to the fact that mobile phone usage, especially through internet access, makes business to business interactions more convenient and affordable. This presents a valuable resource for information research where both qualitative and quantitative studies testing the impact of smart phones in the exchange of information has on economic growth in developing parts of the world, quality of life and global connectivity.

The real question that arises from the Africa data, is  are the same behavioral impacts occurring in developed parts of the world, or is the drastic economic growth, just a filling of the digital divide? As collaborative learning and the educational use of smart phones is one of the focus points of this study, literature related to lecture interaction through smart phones need to be assessed as well as the use of Mobile Mind Map tools for education and collaborative purposes. The pedagogical advantages of mobile smart phone applications, as noted by Cochrane and Bateman (2010), in particular focus on M-Learning tools. According to Cochrane and Bateman, (2010), the possession of smart phones play a significant role in respect to administrative support, portfolio and lecturer feedback, real time event, collaboration, student journal. The authors found that smart phone applications can support collaborative learning as well as self-regulation and organization of group study. However, collaborative smart phone apps are not only suitable to enhance the outcomes of education, but can be used as a key part of this research study Perron et al. (2010) talk about the use of information communication technology in social work, where the sharing and exchange of information has a crucial role in the job. Sharing and exchanging photos, videos, collaborating and exchanging documents through Google Docs can support social workers who need to be mobile and flexible. Cloud computing applications are likely to be used in several fields to improve communication and speed up the exchange of information. Burdette et al. (2008) talk about the diversity of benefits related to information sharing through smart phones within clinical practice.  Dennison et al. (2013) also confirms that there are several potential benefits of smart phone application use related to health interventions and behavior change. As the above review has revealed, there are endless opportunities that lie in the software designed to enable smart phones to share, transmit and exchange information. The study design will reveal current risks, trends, and opportunities related to students’ and educators’ use of these applications.

This study is based on achieving its objectives and answering its questions through the use of descriptive analytical approach structured in the form of social survey of a sample group of smart phone users in the field who exchange and share of information. The ideal study for this field should be based on a data collection questionnaire which consists of several themes reflecting the objectives of the study that tries to answer its questions. samples are intentionally chosen of users of these smart phones in the city of Riyadh and workers in many scientific and research institutions on the side of many of the economic institutions that its nature relies on the exchange and sharing of information through smart phones, in addition to a sample of university students in levels higher education, master’s and doctoral students and staff members of these universities.

Participants

Five hundred participants of the study will be selected from college students in the local university. The randomly selected sample of participants will contain equal amount of males and females, enrolled into undergraduate to doctorate courses. The researchers would select and pre-screen participants based on initial qualifying questions related to their use and ownership of a smart phone. Participants will be asked to record their usage of information sharing and exchanging smart phone applications through the course of one week, 168 hours. Private and education related use will both be considered in the survey.

Design

A multiple choice questionnaire should be designed to acquire the answer  to the following questions related to the study, a. What are the most prominent areas of the use of smart phones’ applications to exchange and share information? b. What are the various factors affecting it? c. What are the challenges facing its optimum investment? d. What are the proposed ways to activate the use of smart phones’ applications in the field of information exchange and share?

Materials

Survey questions will be distributed through email, printed and social media questionnaire forms. The ideal questionnaire should be developed using a free application, like SurveyMonkey. This should include all necessary consent forms and privacy policies, which should be distributed with survey questions. The survey will utilize multiple choice questions, as they relate to the use of different applications. The goal of the survey will be to identify what specific applications and smart phone features are used and what the perceived security risks the respondents have in relation to their phone and data sharing. Further, the security awareness and protection habits of users will be surveyed.

References

Ambriz, R. (2008). Dynamic Scheduling with microsoft office Project 2007. USA: J. Ross Publishing.

Aspray, W. (2011). The history of information science and other traditional information domains: Models for future research. Libraries & the Cultural Record, 46(2), 230-248.

Baruah, T. (2012). Effectiveness of social media as a tool of communication and its potential for technology enabled connections: A micro-level study. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 2(5), Retrieved from http://www.ijsrp.org/research_paper_may2012/ijsrp-may-2012-24.pdf

Bates, M. (1999). “The invisible substrate of information science.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science 50(12): 1043-1050.

Belkin, N. (1976). “Information concepts for information science.” Journ. of Doc.(34): 55-85.

Belkin, N. (1977). A Concept of Information for Information Science. London, University of London. Ph.D.

Bhatt, G. D., Grover, V., & Grover, V. (2005). Types of information technology capabilities and their role in competitive advantage: an empirical study. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22(2), 253-277.

Burch, J. (2008). The domestic intelligence gap: Progress since 9/11?. Homeland Security Affairs Journal, Retrieved from http://www.hsaj.org/?special:fullarticle=0.2.2

Cochrane, T., Bateman, R. (2010) Smartphones give you wings: Pedagogical affordances of mobile Web 2.0. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 2010, 26(1), 1-14

Demeulemeester, E.L & Herroelen, W. (2002). Project scheduling: a research handbook. USA: Springer.

Faulkner, X., & Culwin, F. (2005). When fingers do the talking: a study of text messaging. Interacting with computers, 17(2), 167-185.

Fisher, K. E., Erdelez, S., & McKechnie, L. (Eds.). (2005). Theories of information behavior. Information Today, Inc..

Frohmann, B. (2004). “Documentation Redux: Prolegomenon to (Another) Philosophy of Information.” Library Trends 52(3): 387-407.

Hayashi, Alden M.  (2001). When to trust your gut.  The Harvard Business Review : 169-87. Print.

Iannuzzi. A. (2013) Business Strategy and Management Control Measures for Succes. M&B Company

Ingwersen, P. (1992). “Information and Information Sceince in Context.” Libri 42(2): 99-135.

Ingwersen, P., Ed. (1986). Cognitive analysis and the role of the intermediary in information retrieval. Intelligent Information Systems. Chichester, West Sussex, Horwood.

Karunakaran, A., Reddy, M. C., & Spence, P. R. (2013). Toward a model of collaborative information behavior in organizations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(12), 2437-2451.

Karunakaran, A., Spence, P. R., & Reddy, M. C. (2010). Towards a model of collaborative information behavior. Paper presented at the 2nd International Workshop on Collaborative Information Seeking-ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. ACM. Savannah, GA.

Katz, E. (1959). Mass communication and the study of popular culture: An editorial note on a possible future for this journal. Studies in Public Communication, 2, 1-6.

Kling, R. (1998). “Social Informatics in Information Science: An Introduction.” Journal of the American society for information science 49(12): 1047-1052.

Lee, J. (2001). The impact of knowledge sharing, organizational capacity and partnership quality on IS outsourcing success. Information and Management, 38(5), 323-335.

Littlejohn, S. W., & Foss, K. A. (2008). Theories of Human Communication. Belmont: CA. Thomson.

Logan, R. K. (2012). What is information? Why is it relativistic and what is its relationship to materiality, meaning and organization. Information, 3(1), 68-91.

MacKay, D. M. (1969). Information, mechanism and meaning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Marchionini, G. (1995a). Analytical search strategies. In G. Marchionini (Ed.), Information seeking in electronic environments. (pp. 76-99). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Marchionini, G. (1995b). Information seekers and electronic environment. In G. Marchionini (Ed.), Information seeking in electronic environments. (pp. 11-26). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Mueller, R. (2011, October 6). The state of intelligence reform 10 years after 9/11. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/the-state-of-intelligence-reform-10-years-after-911

Peter Ingwersen, Wormell, L. (1990). Informadonsformidling: Teori og Praksis. Copenhagen, Denmark, Munksgaard.

Porter, A. L., & Rafols, I. (2009). Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time. Scientometrics, 81(3), 719-745.

Potashnik, M. The international gap in technology – The Digital Divide in Education, Education and Technology in the Balance.” Net Industries and its Licensors. 2013

Rayward, W. B. (1996). The history and historiography of information science: some reflections. Information processing & management, 32(1), 3-17.

Reddy, M. C., & Jansen, B. J. (2008). A model for understanding collaborative information behavior in context: A study of two healthcare teams. Information Processing & Management, 44(1), 256-273.

Robinson, L. (2009). Information science: Communication chain and domain analysis. Journal of Documentation, 65(4), 578-591.

Salman, Ali, Faridah Ibrahim, Mohd Y. HjAbdullah, and Normah Mustaffa. (2011). How startup funding works. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal 7th ser. 16.3 : 1-11. Print.

Sarwar, M., Soomro, T. (2013) Impact of smartphone’s on society. European Journal of Scientific Research. Vol. 98 No 2 March, 2013, pp.216-226

Samson, D., & Terziovski, M. (1999). The relationship between total quality management practices and operational performance.  Journal of operations management,  17(4), 393-409.

Saracevic, T. (1999). Information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(12), 1051-1063.

Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27(3), 379-423-623-656.

Shannon, C. E., & Weaver. W. (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana, IL:University of Illinois Press.

Slepian, D. (1974). Key Papers in the Development of Information Theory. New York, NY: IEEE Press.

Small, H. (1981). The relationship of information science to the social sciences: A co-citation analysis. Information Processing & Management, 17(1), 39-50.

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285.

Talja, S. (2002). Information sharing in academic communities: Types and levels of collaboration in information seeking and use. New Review of Information Behavior Research, 3, 143–159.

Wagner, D. G., & Berger, J. (1985). Do sociological theories grow?. American Journal of Sociology, 697-728.

Wood, W., Haugen, S., & Clare, E. Instant Messaging in Business.