Chris pointed me at a paper by Mayrhauser and Vans "Identification of Dynamic Comprehension Processes During Large Scale Maintenance" that seems fairly relevant, in that they are using methods that align with mine so far. They've used a Think Aloud process and recorded participant actions while performing a maintenance change request. The activity took approx. 2 hours per subject (11 subjects. I think I can do better). Video and audio recordings were transcribed and coded. The authors posit that a) coding should be based on categories defined a priori (before the video/audio is recorded), and that b) Think Aloud does not work out of phase with the change action (thinking aloud after doing the task). This concerns me as a) I don't have a set of codes yet (I could certainly come up with some rather quickly, but they would be without significant justification), and b) I kind of liked the idea of the post-task interview.
These concerns aside, the data analysis in this paper is excellent. The authors code all the transcripts, and derive a set of patterns that the participants take while performing the tasks. These are formulated as finite state machines, in which each state represents a code. This, to me, validates their choice of codes. This may be a good model to follow for at least part of my analysis procedure.
Friday, June 19, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment