Case study is interesting, regarding its construction. This appendix F was conducted on a gunman case, but mostly narrates the reponses.
To conduct the research, it was limited by several factors which were in-campus groups only, context-dependent inquiry, inductive data analysis, time period, and single case.
There were used a range of data collection, such as interview, observation, documents, and visual materials, and added informants' feedback on the researcher's statements and comments at the end.
To interpretate the data, the researcher categorized them into five themes. This helps readers understand the case study result(? or meaning of the case) better.
One thing I'd like to take a note is using similar prior case to have evidence of retrigerring. If there were not certain evidence for the case, I learned that it's acceptable to replace other similar incident. Am I right?
After discussing possible issues and limitation of the research, it can be written epilogue.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi Chanmi, how are you doing? I like your summary of the case study of the gunman incident. It is very fascinating to examine people's response.
ReplyDeleteAs you mention, retriggering can occur if a similar situation is presented to the witnesses.
It kind of brings to mind how complex people's thinking is. For a long time, a person will repress a memory as a survival instinct. They want to be mentally healthy and not ponder something that evokes unpleasant feelings.
But if a psychologist presents a similar situation to them, then they will very likely experience those feelings of despair and helplessness that they had previously buried. It is tough for people to overcome so perhaps they can only just learn to live with some of those unpleasant feelings. See you tonight. Cheers, Chad