Vijay Ratna Kumar Blog

Much of early print media research was qualitative. The first volume of Journalism Quarterly, founded in 1928, contained articles on press law, history, international comparisons, and ethics. However, quantitative research soon began to make its appearance in this academic journal. An article published in March 1930 surveyed the research interests of those currently working in the newspaper and magazine fields and found the most prevalent type of study to be the survey of reader interest in newspaper content. The June 1930 issue contained an article by Ralph Nafziger, “A Reader Interest Survey of Madison, Wisconsin,” which served as the prototype for hundreds of future research studies. The 1930s also saw the publication of many studies designed to assess the results of print media advertising.

This led to studies in applied research, and several publications began to sponsor their own readership surveys. Mostly, however, the results of these studies were considered proprietary.

As the techniques of quantitative research became more widely known and adopted, newspaper and magazine research became more empirical. Wilbur Schramm (1957) first recognized this trend in an article in Public Opinion Quarterly that reviewed 20 years of research as reported in Journalism Quarterly. Schramm found that only 10% of the 101 articles published between 1937 and 1941 concerned quantitative analyses; by 1952–1956, nearly half of the 143 articles published were quantitative, a fivefold increase in only 15 years.

The reasons for this trend, according to Schramm, were the growing availability of basic data, the development of more sophisticated research tools, and the increase in institutional support for research. By 1960, newspapers and magazines were competing with television and radio for audience attention and advertiser investment.

This situation greatly spurred the growth of private-sector research. The Bureau of Advertising of the American Newspaper Publishers Association (subsequently called the Newspaper Advertising Bureau) began conducting studies on all aspects of the press and its audience. In the 1970s, it founded the News Research Center, which reports the results of research to editors.

The Magazine Publishers Association also began to sponsor survey research at this time. The continuing interest of academics in print media research led to the creation of the Newspaper Research Journal in 1979, a publication devoted entirely to research that has practical implications for newspaper management. In 1976 the Newspaper Readership Project was instituted to study the problems of declining circulation and sagging readership.

As a major part of the six-year, $5-million study, a news research center was set up at Syracuse University to abstract and synthesize the results of more than 300 private and published studies of newspaper reading habits. The Newspaper Advertising Bureau produced dozens of research reports and conducted extensive focus group studies. In addition, regional workshops were held across the country to explain to editors the uses and limitations of research. By the time the Readership Project ended, most editors had accepted research as a necessary tool of the trade. Bogart (1991) presents a thorough history of the Readership Project.

In 1977 the Newspaper Research Council (NRC), a subgroup of the Newspaper Advertising Bureau, was incorporated with 75 members. This group was involved with the American Society of Newspaper Editors in a circulation retention study and with the International Newspaper Marketing Association on how to convert Sunday-only readers to daily readers. In 1992 the Newspaper Advertising Bureau merged with the American Newspaper Publishers Association to create the Newspaper Association of America (NAA). The NAA continued the efforts of the NRC in the research area by sponsoring a number of studies that looked at such topics as attracting younger readers and how to use advertising to encourage newspaper reading. The most recent effort of the NAA, launched in 1999, was a five year readership initiative study that examines the relationship of newspaper content to its readers. The Readership Institute at the Media Management Center at Northwestern University supervised this initiative.

In 2000 the Readership Institute launched the Impact Study, which gathered information from 37,000 readers and 100 newspapers in an attempt to increase readership. Results from this study were reported at the 2004 Newspaper Advertising Association/ American Society of Newspaper Editors convention.

The declining fortunes of the print media have prompted new research efforts as traditional newspapers and magazines try to assess the competition from the Internet, examine how online versions relate to their traditional paper counterparts, and look for new ways to improve their financial situation.

      The Christian Science Monitor, published for more than 100 years, ended its print edition in 2009 and shifted to the Internet, as did the Seattle Post- Intelligencer. The Detroit News and the Detroit Free Press cut back their home delivery to three days a week and urged subscribers to visit their websites on the other days. Several magazines have dropped or suspended their print versions and exist only online.

   The reason for this shift is primarily economic. Newspaper advertising revenue has declined significantly as websites such as Craigslist and Monster.com have siphoned off classified ad business. The recession that started at the beginning of the 21st century caused advertisers to cut back their budgets.

   Many young people are getting their news and entertainment from online sites and reading the newspaper less and less. As a result, much of today’s research in the publishing business entails finding ways to stay in business.

    Methodologies used to study the print and online media are similar to those used in most areas of research; academic and commercial research organizations often use content analysis, experiments, focus groups, and surveys, among other procedures, to study newspapers and magazines. Now more than ever, print media research tends to be narrowly focused and oriented toward practical application. This articles provides a brief overview of the most common types of studies in newspaper and magazine research, both print and online, with a special emphasis on the research most likely to be conducted by advertiser-supported publications

The term ethnographic research is sometimes used as a synonym for qualitative research (Lindlof, 1991). Ethnography, however, is in fact a special kind of qualitative research. As first practiced by anthropologists and sociologists, ethnography was the process in which researchers spent long periods of time living with and observing other cultures in a natural setting. This immersion in the other culture helped the researcher understand another way of life as seen from the native perspective. Recently, however, the notion of ethnography has been adapted to other areas: political science, education, social work, and communication.

These disciplines have been less interested in describing the way of life of an entire culture and more concerned with analyzing smaller units: subgroups, organizations, institutions, professions, audiences, and so on. To reduce confusion, Berg (2004) suggests referring to the traditional study of entire cultures as macro-ethnography and to the study of smaller units of analysis as micro-ethnography. The latter approach is the one most often used by mass communication researchers.

In addition, Sarantakos (1998) suggests that ethnography can be grouped into two categories: descriptive and critical. Descriptive ethnography is the more conventional approach. In contrast, critical ethnography makes use of the critical paradigm discussed earlier. It examines such factors as power and hegemony and attempts to uncover hidden agendas and unquestioned assumptions.

The goal of critical ethnography is often political and might involve giving a voice to groups who are disempowered in society. For example, a critical ethnographic study of the role of Tamil-language radio in the Tamil community in Srilanka   might reveal that the Tamil minority does not control much of the media content that plays a role in their culture and provide information that would allow Tamils to change the existing situation.

Regardless of its focus or approach, ethnography is characterized by four qualities:

• It puts the researcher in the middle of the topic under study; the researcher goes to the data rather than the other way around.

• It emphasizes studying an issue or topic from the participants’ frame of  reference.

• It involves spending a considerable amount of time in the field.

• It uses a variety of research techniques, including observation, interviewing, diary keeping, analysis of existing documents, photography, videotaping, and so on.

The last item seems to distinguish ethnographic research from other forms of qualitative research; indeed, ethnographic research relies upon an assortment of data collection techniques. Although other qualitative research projects can be conducted adequately using only one method, ethnographic research generally uses several of the four common qualitative techniques discussed in this chapter: field observations, intensive interviewing, focus groups, and case studies.

Conducting Ethnographic Research

LeCompte and Schensul (1999) provide a step-by-step procedure for conducting an ethnographic study. Much of this process is similar to other qualitative methods.

The initial stage is to define the problem or phenomenon to be explored. Questions that are most appropriate to ethnography involve examining how a particular group of people view or perceive a certain phenomenon. The ultimate goal of the ethnographer is to try to understand the world as seen by the group under study.

Closely related to the choice of a research question is the choice of a field site, the actual place or places where data will be gathered. In some instances, the research question will be developed first and then an appropriate field site will be selected. In other instances, a researcher might first find an interesting field site and develop a question appropriate to the site.

No matter how the site is identified, the researcher must next gain access and decide what to examine. As is the case in general with field research, an ethnographic researcher will generally use purposive sampling. This sampling can be refined by using key informants, long-time members of the group under study who have expert knowledge of the group’s routines, activities and communication patterns. Using the knowledge provided by the informants, the researcher determines what behaviours to observe, where and when to observe them, what individuals to single out for intensive interviews, and what key documents might be relevant to analyse.

Once the sampling strategy has been mapped out, the fieldwork begins. Much of the earlier discussion concerning data collection during field observation also applies to ethnographic research. 

Researchers should take copious notes. Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw (1995) suggest constructing four types of field notes:

1. Condensed accounts—short descriptions written or recorded in the field that highlight the most important factors that were observed or brought up during an interview. These descriptions are helpful in highlighting what is to be emphasized in later accounts.

2. Expanded accounts—written after the period of observation or after the interview, filling in details not included in the condensed version. These documents should be as complete and thorough as possible. In ethnographic research it is better to have too much detail than not enough.

3. Fieldwork journal—lists the researcher’s personal reactions, impressions, and reflections about the fieldwork or the interview—primarily personal commentary rather than strict reporting.

4. Analysis and interpretation notes— attempts by the researcher to integrate the observational and interview data into some coherent analysis scheme. These are the researcher’s first attempts at finding order or patterns in the data.

Data analysis in ethnographic research follows the same patterns as in other forms of qualitative research. The researcher searches for patterns and general themes in the data. Eventually, analytic categories will emerge that are checked back against the data to see if they provide consistent explanations.

At the same time, the researcher is interpreting the data and providing some conceptual bases for a more general understanding of the groups’ perceptions and behaviors.

Some qualitative researchers (Daymon & Holloway, 2002) suggest that successful ethnographic research blends together the “outsider” perspective of the researcher with the “insider” perspective of those individuals observed. This approach is sometimes discussed as a blending of the etic and the emic points of view. The etic approach assigns meaning on the basis of general scientific concepts, principles, and theories while the emic approach assigns meaning to cultural traits and patterns on the basis of the informants’ perspective within the internal meaning system of their culture.

As with other forms of qualitative research, the final phase of ethnographic research is the preparation of a written.The report generally starts with a statement of purpose or guiding research question, a description of the method that includes the researcher’s personal feelings about the general topic. This is followed by evidence and examples that illustrate the main themes of the data, the researcher’s interpretation of the data, and implications for theory and future practice. As is the case with qualitative research reports, an ethnography can be a rather lengthy document.

A case study uses as many data sources as possible to systematically investigate individuals, groups, organizations, or events. Case studies are conducted when a researcher needs to understand or explain a phenomenon. They are frequently used in medicine, anthropology, clinical psychology, management science, and history. Sigmund Freud wrote case studies of his patients; economists wrote case studies of the cable TV industry for the FCC; and the list goes on and on.

Case study research includes both single cases and multiple cases. Comparative case study research, frequently used in political science, is an example of the multiple case study technique.

Merriam (1988) lists four essential characteristics of case study research:

1. Particularistic. This means that the case study focuses on a particular situation, event, program, or phenomenon, making it a good method for studying practical, real-life problems.

2. Descriptive. The final product of a case study is a detailed description of the topic under study.

3. Heuristic. A case study helps people to understand what’s being studied. New interpretations, new perspectives, new meaning, and fresh insights are all goals of a case study.

4. Inductive. Most case studies depend on inductive reasoning. Principles and generalizations emerge from an examination of the data. Many case studies attempt to discover new relationships rather than verify existing hypotheses.

Conducting a Case Study

Five distinct stages in carrying out a case study: design, pilot study, data collection, data analysis, and report writing.

In the pattern-matching strategy, an empirically based pattern is compared with one or more predicted patterns. For instance, suppose a newspaper is about to initiate a new management tool: regular meetings between top management and reporters, excluding editors. Based on organizational theory, a researcher might predict certain outcomes—namely, more stress between editors and reporters, increased productivity, and weakened supervisory links. If analysis of the case study data indicates that these results do in fact occur, some conclusions about the management change can be made. If the predicted pattern does not match the actual one, the initial study propositions have to be questioned.

In the analytic strategy of explanation building, the researcher tries to construct an explanation about the case by making statements about the cause or causes of the phenomenon under study. This method can take several forms. Typically, however, an investigator drafts an initial theoretical statement about some process or outcome, compares the findings of an initial case study against the statement, revises the statement, analyzes a second comparable case, and repeats this process as many times as necessary. Note that this technique is similar to the general approach of analytical induction.

For example, to explain why some media websites are failing to generate a profit, a researcher might suggest lack of managerial expertise as an initial proposition. But an investigator who examined the situation might find that lack of management expertise is only part of the problem, that inadequate market research is also a factor. Armed with the revised version of the explanatory statement, the researcher next examines the direct broadcast satellite industry to see whether this explanation needs to be further refined, and so on, until a full and satisfactory answer is achieved.

In time-series analysis, the investigator tries to compare a series of data points to some theoretic trend that was predicted before the research or to some alternative trend. If, for instance, several cities have experienced newspaper strikes, a case study investigator might generate predictions about the changes in information-seeking behaviours of residents in these communities and conduct a case study to see whether these predictions are supported.

In-depth interviews are essentially a hybrid of the one-on-one interview. Intensive interviews are unique for these reasons:

• They generally use smaller samples.

• The respondents give specific answers for reasons with detailed background. Elaborate data are obtained concerning respondents’ opinions, values, motivations, recollections, experiences, and feelings.

• They allow for lengthy observation of respondents’ nonverbal responses.

• They are usually long. Unlike personal interviews used in survey research that may last only a few minutes, an intensive or in-depth interview may last several hours and may take more than one session.

• They can be customized to individual respondents. In a personal interview, all respondents are usually asked the same questions. Intensive interviews allow interviewers to form questions based on each respondent’s answers.

• They can be influenced by the interview climate. To a greater extent than with personal interviews, the success of intensive interviews depends on the rapport established between the interviewers and the respondent.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Intensive Interviews

The most important advantage of the in-depth interview is the wealth of detail that it provides.

Intensive interviewing provides more accurate responses on sensitive issues. The rapport between respondent and interviewer makes it easier to approach certain topics that might be taboo (distasteful) in other approaches.

 On the negative side, intensive interviewing is typically done with a non-random sample. Since interviews are usually non standardized, each respondent may answer a slightly different version of a question.

 Another disadvantage of in-depth interviews is that they are especially sensitive to interviewer bias. In a long interview, it is possible for a respondent to learn a good deal of information about the interviewer. Despite practice and training, some interviewers may inadvertently communicate their attitudes through loaded questions, nonverbal cues, or tone of voice.

The amount of data collected is tremendous, and analysis may take several weeks to several months.

Interviewees may become tired and bored. Interviews must be scheduled several hours apart, which lengthens the data collection effort.

Small samples do not allow for generalization to the target population.

The focus group, or group interviewing, is a research strategy for understanding people’s attitudes and behaviour. From 6 to 12 people are interviewed simultaneously, with a moderator leading the respondents in a relatively unstructured discussion about the topic under investigation.

The focus group technique has four defining characteristics (based on Krueger and Casey, 2000):

Methodology of Focus Groups

Quadrant 1 in the above figure represents overt observation. In this situation, the researcher is identified when the study begins, and those under observation are aware that they are being studied. Furthermore, the researcher’s role is only to observe, refraining from participation in the process under observation.

Quadrant 2 represents overt participation. In this arrangement, those being observed also know the researcher, but unlike the situation represented in Quadrant 1, the researcher goes beyond the observer role and becomes a participant in the situation.

Quadrant 3 represents the situation where the researcher’s role is limited to that of observer, but those under observation are not aware they are being studied.

Quadrant 4 represents a study in which the researcher participates in the process under investigation but is not identified as a researcher.

Field Observation Techniques

There are at least six stages in a typical field observation study: choosing the research site, gaining access, sampling, collecting data, analysing data, and exiting.

Choosing the Research Site: The nature of the research question or area of inquiry usually suggests behaviour or a phenomenon of interest. Once it is identified, the next step is to select a setting where the behaviour or phenomenon occurs with sufficient frequency to make observation worthwhile. The settings also should fit the recording forms and instruments the observer plans to use. For example, video recording usually requires adequate lighting for the camera to operate.

Possible research venues can be identified from personal experience, from talking with other researchers, from interviews with people who frequent the site, or from newspaper and magazine stories.

Qualitative researchers should avoid choosing sites where they are well known or have some involvement in the area. Studying one’s own workplace, for example, is difficult because the researcher’s preconceptions may preclude observations that are more objective. Furthermore, at a site where the researcher is a familiar figure, other individuals may find it difficult to relate to a colleague or friend in the role of researcher.

Gaining Access. Once the site is selected, the next step is to establish contact. Gaining access to settings depends on two factors:

(1) How public the setting is; and

 (2) The willingness of the subjects in the setting to be observed.

The easiest setting to enter is one that is open to the public. The most difficult setting to enter is one where entry is restricted because participants have good reason to keep their activities confidential. Gaining permission to conduct field observation research requires persistence and public relations skills.

After the contact is made, rapport must be established with the subject(s). Bogdan and

Taylor (1998) suggests the following techniques for building rapport:

Establish common interests with the participants;

Start relationships slowly;

If appropriate, participate in common events and activities; and

Do not disrupt participant’s normal routines.

Sampling.  Most field observations use purposive sampling, where observers draw on their knowledge of the subject(s) under study and sample only from the relevant behaviours or events. Sometimes previous experience and study of the activity in question suggest what needs to be examined.

Here are some sampling strategies that might be used (Lindlof, 1995):

• Maximum variation sampling: Settings, activities, events, and informants are chosen purposefully to yield as many different and varied situations as possible.

• Snowball sampling: A participant refers the researcher to another person who can provide information. This person, in turn, mentions another, and so forth.

• Typical case sampling: In contrast to the maximum variation technique, the researcher chooses cases that seem to be most representative of the topic under study.

            Collecting Data: The traditional data collection tools—notebook and pencil, a camera can record more information than an observer. Video cameras and video recordings have become more portable and easier to use. In addition to first hand observation, three other data collection techniques are available to field researchers:

diary keeping,            

unobtrusive measures, and

document analysis.

            With the first technique, an investigator routinely supplements his or her field notes by keeping a research diary. This diary consists of personal feelings, sentiments, occasional reflections, and other private thoughts about the research process itself; the writings augment and help interpret the raw data contained in the field notes. Moreover, the researcher may ask the individuals under study to keep a diary for a specified length of time.

            A second data collection technique available to the field researcher is unobtrusive measurement. This technique helps overcome the problem of reactivity by searching out naturally occurring phenomena relevant to the research task. The people who provide data through unobtrusive measurement are unaware that they are providing information for a research project. Covert observation, as previously mentioned, is obviously a technique of this type.

            Finally, existing documents may represent a fertile source of data for the qualitative researcher. In general terms, two varieties of documents are available for analysis:

Public and

Private.

Public documents include police reports, newspaper stories, transcripts of TV shows, data archives, and so on. Other items may be less recognizable as public documents, however; messages on Internet bulletin boards, blogs, websites, company newsletters, tombstones, posters, graffiti, and bumper stickers can all fit into this category.

Private documents, on the other hand, include personal letters, diaries, memos, faxes, emails, home movies and videos, telephone logs, appointment books, reports, and so on

Analysing Data

Concerning the specific technique of field observation, data analysis primarily consists of filing the information and analysing its content. Constructing a filing system is an important step in observation. The purpose of the filing system is to arrange raw field data in an orderly format that is amenable to systematic retrieval later. The overall goal of data analysis in field observation is to arrive at a general understanding of the phenomenon under study. In this regard, the observer has the advantage of flexibility.

Exiting

A researcher acting as a participant must have a plan for leaving the setting or the group under study. Of course, if everyone knows the participant, exiting is not a problem. Exiting from a setting that participants regularly enter and leave is also not a problem. Exiting can be difficult, however, when participation is covert. In some instances, the group may have become dependent on the researcher in some way, and the departure may have a negative effect on the group as a whole. In other cases, the sudden revelation that a group has been infiltrated or duped by an outsider might be unpleasant or distressing to some. The researcher has an ethical obligation to do everything possible to prevent psychological, emotional, or physical injury to those being studied. Consequently, leaving the scene must be handled with diplomacy and tact.

Advantages of Field Observations

Field observation often helps the researcher define basic background information necessary to frame a hypothesis and to isolate independent and dependent variables.

Field observation may also provide access to groups that would otherwise be difficult to observe or examine.

Field observation is usually inexpensive. In most cases, it requires only writing materials or a small audio or video recorder.

Field observation is that the study takes place in the natural setting of the activity being observed and thus can provide data rich in detail and subtlety

Disadvantages of Field Observations

Validation is difficult partly because the representativeness of the observations made is potentially questionable and partly because of problems in sampling.

Since field observation relies heavily on a researcher’s perceptions and judgments and on preconceived notions about the material under study, experimenter bias may favour specific preconceptions of results, while observations to the contrary are ignored or distorted.

Finally, field observations suffer from the problem of reactivity. The very process of being observed may influence the behaviour under study.