I can assume from the transcript, that Ch is a researcher who is gathering information for an article, but is not looking for anything new, but wants to steer B into giving answers that Ch already has an idea of.
Ch that's literacy - you have the basic tools, the right basic set of assumptions for how to read, understand, interpret a program. And so what I'm looking for is the connection between all the gaming experience you have and your ability to do that with the applications - the academic applications
B well like a lot of games, in the beginning, there's menus. You don't just start playing. There's menus, you get to customize your decal your spray, clothes,
laughing
It's not all playing the game it's a lot of process to prepare for it, there's like box, scripts, you practice it, and you're not playing with other people, you're just like fooling around.
Ch OK so all those things - same kinds of processes, same kinds of moves - so navigating menus is something you learned from games that can carry over - anything else?
You can see in this exchange Ch lays the framework for an answer with little room for B to stray away from the question, allowing Ch to pretty much control the interview.
Not only is Ch forcing B into the direction they want, they reaffirm B's answers in their own words to help the subject along.
Research question I would ask is: Is it important to control the interview and keep your subject on point, or are you skewing results by forcing the answers on them.
No comments:
Post a Comment