Research in Media and Communication

Research Report – 3000 words – 70%
This assessment has two parts. In part 1, you will critically report on one core reading from the module, and then in part 2 you will design and report on a research project that would extend the research in this reading, in response to a research question that you have created.
The aim in part 1 is to tell us how and why the research in question was carried out.
The aim in part 2 is to tell us how you would design and develop a related project, and why you could take this research further.
In your write up of the report:
Both Part 1 and Part 2 should be given equal weight (e.g. about 1500 words each)
You may find or decide that the approach and methods most appropriate for the research in part 2 are the same ones that were used in part 1. If so, this is fine. What matters is that the approach and methods you chose for part 2 are appropriate and logical and well-justified.
You will need to cite relevant academic literature from the field of media and communications throughout both parts of the report, in addition to the particular core reading that you are discussing.
If your choice of new project is quite distant from the original research you review, you should explain the connections between your research project and the original research, as well as the rationale for your choice of project in Part 2.
Part 1: Critically reporting on existing research
Choose one of the core readings from the module and both describe and explain:
What its research question is, the broad context from which the question emerges (intellectual and/or social), and the broad justifications or motivations that the researchers provide for it (about 300 words)
How the researchers did or approached the research in question: e.g. the methods that they used, the steps that they took, the challenges that they negotiated (about 300 words)
Why the researchers did what they did: the researchers’conceptual, practical and ethical reasons and justifications for taking the particular approach and steps that they did. If the researchers do not explicitly say why they did what they did, do not put words into their mouth but rather tell us why their decisions were logical and appropriate (about 400 words).
How the researchers’ methods and approaches shaped or led to their findings and conclusions. Note here that the emphasis is not on what the findings were or what the researchers argue, but how they got to these findings and arguments (about 250 words)
Gaps and limitations in what the researchers did, and the possible or reported reasons for them; or how the gaps and limitations followed from the steps that the research took (about 250 words)
This first part of your report should not be merely descriptive, and should not just be copied and pasted or paraphrased from what the researchers themselves reported. Instead you will need to reconstruct in your own language and understanding an account of the methodology in the reading, and again part of how you need to do so is by referring to wider academic literature. Note that the ‘how and why’ questions above would be best integrated into one discussion as they go hand in hand.
Note also that, although we are asking you to discuss the limitations and gaps of an existing piece of research, we are not asking you to assess its overall standards or quality. The task is not to make a case for whether the research and methodology are ‘solid’ or ‘weak.’ For the purposes of this assessment, you can assume that the research that we have selected for you to read and discuss is of solid quality (although if you happen to feel strongly that this is not the case you can show and discuss why in your report).
Part 2: Designing a new research project
Report on how you would or could go about researching a new question raised by the piece of research that you discussed in Part 1.
Design and propose a new research question that builds on and furthers the research of your chosen article. Briefly contextualize the new research question by discussing why it is or could be a useful or necessary one to research: e.g. why does the question matter, what can it shed light upon, why might we care about it (about 300 words).
Describe and explain how you would do this new research (about 500 words):
the broad approach that you would take to the research (ie your methodological approach)
what types of sources you would plan to include, from where, and how you would access them, including human sources (i.e. people) if appropriate. If people, how you would find them and how you would invite them to participate in your research.
after deciding on your type of sources, how you would ‘sample’ or make decisions about exactly what, how much, and/or who to include and exclude (e.g. which media texts exactly would you like at, from what time periods, what precise demographic of people might you interview, how many people would you aim to include, etc.)
what you would do with your sample to derive meanings and findings from it, (e.g. what data analysis method you would use; if researching people what you would do with them and how, etc.)
Why you would do the research in the above manner, why these particular approaches and steps (about 400 words)
Ethical and practical considerations you would need to take into account, and any challenges you would anticipate in doing the research (about 300 words
Your research design will necessarily include hypothetical elements because it is a plan, i.e. forward-looking and based on expectations. Your designs and proposals can be ambitious, but overall they should be realistic and reasonable: e.g. you should take into account the likely constraints of time, access, monetary resources, etc. that you would have as an undergraduate researcher; the plan should be based on sources that do actually or could be reasonably expected to exist, and to which you could reasonably expect to have access, etc. In other words, the plan should not be a fantasy, even if it is ambitious or hopeful about what you would be able to do. Note that, as in part 1, the how and why discussion is best integrated into one as they go hand in hand.