MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1863088542 · doi:10.47678/cjhe.v43i1.184237

Book review - Visualizing social science research: Maps, methods, and meaning

2013· article· en· W1863088542 sur OpenAlexaffvenue
Tracy L. Durksen, Cheryl Poth

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Journal of Higher Education · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Alberta
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMeaning (existential)VisualizationResource (disambiguation)Process (computing)Meaning-makingSociologyData scienceComputer sciencePsychologyEpistemologyArtificial intelligence

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Wheeldon, J. &Âhlberg, Μ. Κ. (2012). Visualizing Social Science Research: Maps, Methods, and Meaning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Pages: 205. Price: 37·95 CDN (paper). ISBN 978-1-412991-04-9Researchers can benefit from accessing resources that promote their development as purposeful producers and critical consumers of visual displays (Tufte, 2006) and the title of the book Visualizing Social Science Research: Maps, Methods, and Meaning, with its emphasis on visualization, demands the reader's attention. Visualization in research is an important topic because of the for visual displays (e.g., words, numbers, images) to evoke emotion and deepen our understanding beyond textual presentations. The per- spective we offer through this review is based on our interests, experiences, and expecta- tions surrounding the use of visuals within the fields of educational psychology research, program evaluation, and mixed methods. To begin, we offer our own visual representa- tion1 of the book with its existing links as well as (what we believe are) the missing links among the seven chapters (see Figure 1). In this review we discuss three areas of strength as well as highlight where the book does not meet its full potential: intended purpose, audience, and organization.Wheeldon and Âhlberg are to be commended for providing an accessible resource to further the discussion of the innovative topic of visualization within the research process. Research requires visualizing - a critical imaginative process which involves the (trans) formation of a mental image from an abstract idea. The authors explicitly state that the introductory text is aimed at providing a starting place for budding researchers (primar- ily upper-level undergraduate and graduate students) in a range of disciplines within the social sciences.Chapter 1 provides a general overview of the rationale, the research process, and the book. Despite the statement that sometimes the description of a book's organization with- in the preface is not used to its full potential (p. 16), Wheeldon and Âhlberg include orga- nizational details in the preface as well as in Chapter 1. The authors also make an ambitious claim - to provide both an introduction to research in the social sciences while focusing on the use of maps, graphs, and diagrams. In accordance with this claim, we found that the seven chapters can be arranged into two sections (see two shades of components in Figure 1): the research process and the use of maps within methods. While each chapter is of a digestible length and follows a similar layout, the progression assumes a reader will take a cover-to-cover approach. Yet given the proposed supplemental use of the book, it is dif- ficult to assume readers will take a linear approach. We instead expect that students may jump around as needed (according to the inter-connections displayed through Figure 1).Given the assumed purpose of enhancing the use of visuals in social science research, we expected the authors to model Tufte's (2001) graphical excellence through revealing complex ideas with clarity, precision, and efficiency. The authors briefly identify the in- fluence of Tufte on visual representations; yet fail to heed his instruction. We found both simple and cluttered displays that lack substance, progression, and aesthetic appeal. For example, the book includes simple visuals containing information more suited to an in- text list or table (e.g., Seven rules for social science research). The book does include useful examples of concept maps, particularly when related to decision-making in the research process (e.g., Are you interested in a relationship between variables or differ- ences between groups?). Yet we generally found that concept maps, though often used to display a lot of information, can overwhelm a reader if some in-text direction is not pro- vided. Ironically, one cluttered example provides a pictorial overview of the traditional features of concept maps. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,019
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,746
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0190,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,002
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,635
Tête enseignante GPT0,706
Écart entre enseignants0,071 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2013
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Journal of Higher EducationMême sujetParticipatory Visual Research MethodsTravaux en français237 207