Multimodal Semiotics and Collaborative Design

within each consequent case study, returned to the field for more empirical observations, and
integrated the findings with theoretical framework to fill the gaps by re-working the codes. My
primary intention – primarily in reference to the aforementioned constructivist approach - is to
avoid forcing the findings into pre-conceived categories and stay in touch with the socio-technical
context in flux 8 .
6.4. A reflexive account of methodology, limitations and contributions
It has been often claimed that, in production of scientific knowledge, researchers’ own beliefs,
values, opportunities, relationships and methods play a significant role in development of their
analytical frameworks (Liewrouw 2006, Stern 2007); mainly because “methods, after all, are not
neutral devices” (Hine 2005). The methodological choices of a research study affect not only the
face-value of its outcomes, but also the integrity and comprehensiveness of its research design
(Deacon et al. 2007). Sánchez-Jankowski (2002) mentions the importance of self-reflection, by
stating that ethnographic work should not be evaluated merely on face-value, and systematic
evaluation and assessment of reliability and methodological integrity is necessary.
When we talk about methodology we are implicitly talking about our identity and the standards
by which we which our work to be judged (Hine 2005).
For Bente Halkier (2003), the ability to generalize based on qualitative data is constructed through
“a range of scientific choices, argumentations and performances” (Halkier 2003: 116). In this view,
reflexivity plays a key role in the scientific process, as it is both “legitimate and important to be able
to analytically categorize the complexities of an empirical field as it is to uphold a stiff kind of
theoretical cogency” (Halkier 2003: 117). While such reflexive generalizations can provide
clarifications on theoretical concepts, they can also be used to map a socio-cultural field of
communication and to explain the dynamic interplay between communication phenomena.
Another important point to keep the reflexive stance is the potentials and limitations of new media
technologies, and obtaining a critical view towards their social meanings. As Danish media and
communications professor Kirsten Drotner (2008: 17) informs, “economic divides and sociocultural
patterns of production and use change at a much slower pace than do technologies” and it
is important to make sure that “the transformations brought about by digital media” are not
overstated. Therefore, another major methodological challenge with emerging technological
paradigms such as SL is the trap of technological determinism and descriptiveness in terms of
analysis. I intend to develop a theoretically and empirically grounded but critically discursive
8
For more methodological insights on the use of qualitative interviews in relation to GTM, Mann and Stewart (2000) and
Kvale and Brinkmann (2009) are helpful resources.
137