ChatGPT “thinks” a lot like people I know.
intro:
1) this is a literal, unedited use from this AI trend…
2) If you are not familiar with the discussion, please read it here
3) But if you still going to read it without context…
The mindset “ it is enough to what it is” is the default of industry. But this attitude within disciplines like anthropology makes UX professionals use the word ethnography without any anthropological consideration. So you have things like, “speed ethnography”, “ quick ethnography” and the like.
Far from criticizing the work of such professionals, it is a matter of fact, as the concatenation logic bellows demonstrates, that knowing little, or nothing about the culture which the analysis is made, is not the right way of making money, what, in practice, is what UX researchers are being useful for.
But, then, comes power (all kinds of), and all the people ( a.k.a stakeholders) who reminds me of this dialogue :
Why people say that qualitative analysis is weaker than quantitative analysis when compared with salary and job opportunities?
It’s not necessarily true that qualitative analysis is weaker than quantitative analysis when it comes to salary and job opportunities. Both types of analysis can be valuable in different ways, and the value of each type of analysis can depend on the specific industry or field in which they are being used. For example, in some fields, such as market research or psychology, a strong understanding of qualitative analysis may be more valuable and lead to better job opportunities and higher salaries. In other fields, such as finance or data science, a strong understanding of quantitative analysis may be more valuable and lead to better job opportunities and higher salaries. Ultimately, the value of qualitative and quantitative analysis depends on how they are used and the specific context in which they are applied.
But mathematics does not provide advantage over qualitative data, right?
It’s not necessarily true that mathematics does not provide an advantage over qualitative data. In some cases, mathematical analysis can be a very effective way to analyze and interpret qualitative data. For example, statistical techniques can be used to analyze and interpret qualitative data, such as by identifying patterns or trends in the data. Additionally, mathematical models can be used to make predictions or forecasts based on qualitative data, which can be useful in a variety of settings. So while it’s not always the case, there are certainly situations where mathematics can provide an advantage when working with qualitative data.
And the contrary is also possible
Yes, it is also possible that qualitative analysis can provide an advantage over quantitative analysis in some cases. This can happen when the data being analyzed is better suited to a qualitative approach, or when the research question being addressed is better suited to a qualitative approach. For example, qualitative data can be useful for understanding complex social or psychological phenomena, such as people’s attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors. In these cases, a qualitative approach that involves in-depth interviews or focus groups may be more effective at providing useful insights than a quantitative approach that relies on numbers and statistics alone. So while both quantitative and qualitative analysis have their strengths and limitations, it’s important to choose the right approach for the specific problem or question being addressed.
What is the distribution of quali and quant researchers on big companies?
It’s difficult to say exactly what the distribution of quali and quant researchers is on big companies, as it can vary depending on the specific industry and the specific company. In some industries, such as finance or data science, there may be a larger proportion of researchers with a strong background in quantitative analysis. In other industries, such as market research or psychology, there may be a larger proportion of researchers with a strong background in qualitative analysis. Additionally, the specific needs and goals of a company can influence the type of researchers they hire, so the distribution of quali and quant researchers can vary even within the same industry. Ultimately, the distribution of quali and quant researchers on big companies can depend on a variety of factors, so it’s difficult to provide a general answer.
Change the “market research or psychology” examples you gave, replacing them by other industries
Sure, here are a few examples of industries where a strong understanding of qualitative analysis may be valuable:
- Anthropology: In anthropology, qualitative analysis is often used to study cultural practices, beliefs, and behaviors. Anthropologists may use a variety of qualitative methods, such as participant observation or in-depth interviews, to collect and analyze data about different cultures.
- Sociology: In sociology, qualitative analysis is often used to study social interactions, relationships, and institutions. Sociologists may use a variety of qualitative methods, such as focus groups or case studies, to collect and analyze data about different social phenomena.
- Education: In education, qualitative analysis is often used to study teaching and learning processes. Educators may use a variety of qualitative methods, such as classroom observations or interviews with students, to collect and analyze data about different teaching and learning strategies.
- Medicine: In medicine, qualitative analysis is often used to study patient experiences, beliefs, and behaviors. Medical researchers may use a variety of qualitative methods, such as focus groups or interviews with patients, to collect and analyze data about different health conditions and treatments.
Anthropology, Sociology and Education are not industries. They are areas of knowledge
You are correct, anthropology, sociology, and education are not industries in the traditional sense of the word. They are fields of study that focus on different aspects of human society and behavior. However, individuals who have expertise in these fields may work in a variety of industries, such as market research, consulting, or healthcare, where their knowledge and skills in qualitative analysis can be valuable. So while these fields are not industries, the knowledge and skills gained from studying them can be applied in a variety of different industries.
Excepting market research and medicine, where else one can use qualitative data working as a researcher?
Qualitative data can be useful in many different industries and settings where a deep understanding of human behavior or experiences is needed. Some examples of industries where qualitative data may be used by researchers include:
- Consulting: In consulting, qualitative data may be used to help organizations understand their customers, employees, or stakeholders. Consultants may use a variety of qualitative methods, such as focus groups or interviews, to collect and analyze data about different aspects of an organization’s operations or culture.
- Marketing: In marketing, qualitative data may be used to help companies understand consumer attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors. Market researchers may use a variety of qualitative methods, such as in-depth interviews or focus groups, to collect and analyze data about different products or services.
- Healthcare: In healthcare, qualitative data may be used to help understand patient experiences, beliefs, or behaviors. Medical researchers may use a variety of qualitative methods, such as focus groups or in-depth interviews, to collect and analyze data about different health conditions or treatments.
- Government: In government, qualitative data may be used to help understand citizens’ attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors. Government agencies may use a variety of qualitative methods, such as focus groups or in-depth interviews, to collect and analyze data about different policy issues or programs.
- Non-profit: In the non-profit sector, qualitative data may be used to help understand the needs, experiences, or beliefs of different groups of people. Non-profit organizations may use a variety of qualitative methods, such as focus groups or in-depth interviews, to collect and analyze data about different programs or initiatives.
- Social media: In the field of social media, qualitative data may be used to help understand users’ attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors. Social media researchers may use a variety of qualitative methods, such as content analysis or network analysis, to collect and analyze data from social media platforms.
Give me numbers of how much efficient market research is, in comparison with quantitative market research
It’s difficult to say exactly how much more efficient qualitative market research is compared to quantitative market research, as the efficiency of each type of research can depend on a variety of factors. Both qualitative and quantitative market research have their strengths and limitations, and the best approach to use in a given situation will depend on the specific research question being addressed and the type of data being collected. For example, quantitative market research may be more efficient at providing precise estimates of the size of a market or the prevalence of a particular behavior, while qualitative market research may be more efficient at providing in-depth insights into consumers’ attitudes, beliefs, or motivations. Ultimately, the relative efficiency of qualitative and quantitative market research will depend on the specific research question and the type of data being collected.
Give the number of qualitative professional who attended the last National Science Foundation congress
I’m sorry, but I am not able to browse the internet, so I am unable to provide the number of qualitative professionals who attended the last National Science Foundation congress. As a language model trained by OpenAI, I do not have access to real-time information or events and am only able to provide information based on my training. My training includes general knowledge about a wide range of topics, but I do not have detailed knowledge about specific events or current events.
What is the difference between ethnography and ethnology?
Ethnography and ethnology are both fields of study that involve the research and analysis of human cultures and societies. However, there are some key differences between the two fields. Ethnography is the study of specific cultures or groups of people, typically through the use of qualitative research methods such as participant observation or in-depth interviews. Ethnologists, on the other hand, are interested in comparing and contrasting different cultures to understand the similarities and differences between them. Ethnologists may use a variety of methods, both qualitative and quantitative, to collect and analyze data about different cultures. So while both ethnography and ethnology involve the study of human cultures, ethnography focuses on studying a specific culture or group of people, while ethnology involves comparing and contrasting different cultures.
Is ethnography possible without ethnology?
Yes, it is possible for ethnography to be conducted without ethnology. As I mentioned earlier, ethnography is the study of specific cultures or groups of people, typically using qualitative research methods. Ethnologists, on the other hand, are interested in comparing and contrasting different cultures to understand the similarities and differences between them. So while ethnologists may use ethnographic research as part of their work, ethnography can also be conducted by researchers who are not specifically interested in comparing and contrasting different cultures. In other words, ethnography is a type of research that can be conducted independently of ethnology, although the two fields may sometimes overlap.
But if both words have the prefix “ethno” which means “people” it is correct that culture has a decisive role in ethnography?
Yes, you are correct that the prefix “ethno” in both ethnography and ethnology means “people,” and as a result, culture plays a crucial role in both fields of study. In ethnography, the focus is on studying the culture of a specific group of people, typically using qualitative research methods such as participant observation or in-depth interviews. Ethnologists, on the other hand, are interested in comparing and contrasting different cultures to understand the similarities and differences between them. So while the specific focus and methods used in ethnography and ethnology may differ, culture is a central concept in both fields.
But there is no group of people who has no culture. All people in the world have culture. Is impossible to a human being to achieve the age of 5 without culture. So all human beings have culture and therefore ethnology is preferred to analyse people.
Yes, you are correct that all human beings have culture, and that it is virtually impossible for a human being to reach the age of five without being influenced by culture in some way. Culture plays a crucial role in shaping our beliefs, values, behaviors, and experiences, and it is an important aspect of what makes us human. As a result, both ethnography and ethnology are concerned with studying culture and its effects on people. Ethnography focuses on studying the culture of a specific group of people, typically using qualitative research methods, while ethnology involves comparing and contrasting different cultures to understand the similarities and differences between them. So while both fields are concerned with studying culture, the specific focus and methods used in each field may differ.
Say it again, with other words
Sure, I can try to explain it using different words. Both ethnography and ethnology are fields of study that involve the research and analysis of human cultures and societies. Ethnography focuses on studying the culture of a specific group of people, typically using qualitative research methods such as participant observation or in-depth interviews. Ethnologists, on the other hand, are interested in comparing and contrasting different cultures to understand the similarities and differences between them. So while both fields are concerned with studying culture, the specific focus and methods used in each field may differ. Ethnography is focused on studying a specific culture, while ethnology is focused on comparing and contrasting different cultures.
If culture is the standard model of organization of human beings, in order to analyse people, there is no ethnography without ethnology
While it is true that culture is a central aspect of what makes us human and that it plays a crucial role in shaping our beliefs, values, behaviors, and experiences, it is not necessarily the case that ethnography cannot be conducted without ethnology. As I mentioned earlier, ethnography is the study of specific cultures or groups of people, typically using qualitative research methods such as participant observation or in-depth interviews. Ethnologists, on the other hand, are interested in comparing and contrasting different cultures to understand the similarities and differences between them. So while both fields are concerned with studying culture, the specific focus and methods used in each field may differ. Ethnography focuses on studying a specific culture, while ethnology focuses on comparing and contrasting different cultures. So while it is true that culture is an important aspect of what makes us human, it is not necessarily the case that ethnography cannot be conducted without ethnology.
But when I compare different cultures is impossible not to compare specific people as well so I need ethnology to do ethnography
Yes, you are correct that when comparing different cultures, it is impossible not to compare specific people as well. Both ethnography and ethnology are concerned with studying culture and its effects on people, and as a result, both fields involve studying specific people to some extent. In ethnography, the focus is on studying the culture of a specific group of people, typically using qualitative research methods such as participant observation or in-depth interviews. Ethnologists, on the other hand, are interested in comparing and contrasting different cultures to understand the similarities and differences between them. So while the specific focus and methods used in ethnography and ethnology may differ, both fields involve studying specific people and their cultures.
It is impossible to study people’s culture without ethnology
It is not necessarily true that it is impossible to study people’s culture without ethnology. While ethnology is a field of study that involves comparing and contrasting different cultures, ethnography is a field of study that focuses on studying the culture of a specific group of people, typically using qualitative research methods such as participant observation or in-depth interviews. So while ethnology involves comparing and contrasting different cultures, ethnography does not necessarily involve comparing cultures and can be conducted independently of ethnology. In other words, while ethnology is concerned with comparing and contrasting different cultures, ethnography is focused on studying a specific culture in depth. As a result, it is possible to study people’s culture without ethnology, although the two fields may sometimes overlap.
If a researcher does in depth interviews, but don’t know about the culture of people who research, it is not possible to do ethnography. You need to know the culture’s people who you do research.
Yes, you are correct that if a researcher does in-depth interviews but does not know about the culture of the people being researched, it may be difficult for them to conduct effective ethnographic research. Ethnography is a field of study that involves studying the culture of a specific group of people, and as a result, a thorough understanding of the culture being studied is an important part of conducting ethnographic research. In-depth interviews can be a useful tool for collecting data in ethnography, but they are most effective when the researcher has a good understanding of the culture being studied and is able to ask questions that are relevant and meaningful to the people being interviewed. So while it is possible to conduct in-depth interviews without knowing about the culture of the people being researched, it may be difficult to use the data collected in this way to conduct effective ethnographic research.
So to do ethnography, ethnology is necessary
It is not necessarily true that ethnology is necessary in order to conduct ethnography. While both ethnography and ethnology are fields of study that involve the research and analysis of human cultures and societies, the specific focus and methods used in each field may differ. Ethnography is focused on studying the culture of a specific group of people, typically using qualitative research methods such as participant observation or in-depth interviews. Ethnologists, on the other hand, are interested in comparing and contrasting different cultures to understand the similarities and differences between them. So while ethnologists may use ethnographic research as part of their work, ethnography can also be conducted by researchers who are not specifically interested in comparing and contrasting different cultures. In other words, while both fields are concerned with studying culture, ethnography can be conducted independently of ethnology.
Can I do ethnography without knowing the culture that I need to research?
It is possible to conduct ethnography without having a thorough understanding of the culture being studied, but it may be difficult to do so effectively. Ethnography is a field of study that involves studying the culture of a specific group of people, and as a result, a deep understanding of the culture being studied is an important part of conducting effective ethnographic research. Without this understanding, it may be difficult for the researcher to ask relevant and meaningful questions, interpret the data correctly, or draw meaningful conclusions from the research. So while it is possible to conduct ethnography without knowing the culture being studied, it is generally recommended that researchers have a thorough understanding of the culture they are studying in order to conduct effective ethnographic research.
If my study is not efficient, because I want to do ethnography, but have no knowledge of the culture I going to research, how valuable my work is?
If your study is not efficient because you want to conduct ethnography but have no knowledge of the culture you are going to research, the value of your work may be limited. Ethnography is a field of study that involves studying the culture of a specific group of people, and as a result, a deep understanding of the culture being studied is an important part of conducting effective ethnographic research. Without this understanding, it may be difficult for the researcher to ask relevant and meaningful questions, interpret the data correctly, or draw meaningful conclusions from the research. So while it is possible to conduct ethnography without knowing the culture being studied, the value of the research is likely to be limited without a thorough understanding of the culture.
If the work is limited, what is it usefulness?
If the work is limited, it may still have some usefulness, but the usefulness of the work will depend on the specific research question being addressed and the data being collected. In some cases, even limited research may be able to provide some useful insights or answer specific research questions. However, in general, the usefulness of research is likely to be limited if it is not conducted in an effective and efficient manner. In the case of ethnographic research, a lack of knowledge about the culture being studied can make it difficult to conduct effective research and may limit the usefulness of the findings. As a result, the usefulness of ethnographic research that is not conducted in an effective and efficient manner is likely to be limited.
If the findings are limited , is the data trustworthy?
If the findings of a research study are limited, it may be difficult to determine the trustworthiness of the data. Trustworthiness, or the degree to which the data collected in a research study accurately reflects the phenomena being studied, is an important aspect of research. In order to be trustworthy, the data collected in a research study must be valid (i.e., accurately measuring what it is supposed to be measuring) and reliable (i.e., producing consistent results over time). If the findings of a research study are limited, it may be difficult to determine whether the data collected in the study is valid and reliable, and as a result, the trustworthiness of the data may be uncertain. In general, the trustworthiness of research findings is likely to be greater when the research is conducted in an effective and efficient manner, and when the researchers have a thorough understanding of the phenomena being studied.
If it is difficult to determine the trustworthiness of the data, why use it?
If it is difficult to determine the trustworthiness of the data collected in a research study, it may be difficult to draw meaningful conclusions from the research or to use the findings to inform decisions or policies. In general, the usefulness of research findings is greatest when the data collected is trustworthy, as this allows researchers to have confidence in the conclusions they draw from the data. In cases where the trustworthiness of the data is uncertain, researchers may still be able to use the data to gain some insights or answer specific research questions, but the usefulness of the findings may be limited. Ultimately, the decision to use data from a research study that has limited trustworthiness will depend on the specific research question being addressed and the potential value of the findings.
Do you recommend to do ethnography without knowing ethnology? Once the lack of knowledge of the culture to be studied is decisive to know people from that culture?
It is generally not recommended to conduct ethnographic research without having a thorough understanding of the culture being studied. As I mentioned earlier, ethnography is a field of study that involves studying the culture of a specific group of people, and a deep understanding of the culture being studied is an important part of conducting effective ethnographic research. Without this understanding, it may be difficult for the researcher to ask relevant and meaningful questions, interpret the data correctly, or draw meaningful conclusions from the research. So while it is possible to conduct ethnographic research without knowing the culture being studied, the usefulness and trustworthiness of the research is likely to be limited without a thorough understanding of the culture. In general, it is recommended that researchers have a deep understanding of the culture they are studying in order to conduct effective and meaningful ethnographic research.
So, to wrap up, it is safe to say Ethnology is needed to do good and efficient Ethnography, since that people who do not know the culture to be studied make not trustworthy, not efficient and not meaningful research
While it is generally recommended that researchers have a thorough understanding of the culture they are studying in order to conduct effective and meaningful ethnographic research, it is not necessarily true that studying ethnology is necessary in order to do good and efficient ethnography. As I mentioned earlier, while both ethnography and ethnology are fields of study that involve the research and analysis of human cultures and societies, the specific focus and methods used in each field may differ. Ethnography is focused on studying the culture of a specific group of people, typically using qualitative research methods such as participant observation or in-depth interviews. Ethnologists, on the other hand, are interested in comparing and contrasting different cultures to understand the similarities and differences between them. So while a deep understanding of the culture being studied is important for conducting effective ethnographic research, studying ethnology is not necessarily required in order to do so. In other words, while studying ethnology may be beneficial for some researchers who want to conduct effective ethnographic research, it is not necessarily necessary for all researchers.
