WEBVTT Kind: captions; language: en-us NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:00:00.000 --> 00:07:09.450 Message from subtitler: First seven minutes of the video has passed with fixing the sound. You can fast-forward to 07.10. 00:07:09.450 --> 00:07:17.400 Okay, so, welcome everybody and very sorry for the delay, but I just finished a lecture in another 00:07:17.400 --> 00:07:27.700 building. So we had to run here immediately. I feel like a rock star in this audotorium. NOTE Confidence: 85% (HIGH) 00:07:27.700 --> 00:07:42.700 Really, it's a bit too much for me, thank you. Okay, today we start working on the specific 00:07:42.700 --> 00:07:51.200 technique that you are supposed to know to do qualitative research. As usual, NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:07:51.200 --> 00:08:01.400 You had some things to read and... 00:08:01.400 --> 00:08:16.049 *fixing tehnical issue* 00:08:16.049 --> 00:08:26.100 So you had some some homework to do, some things to read and watch. 00:08:26.100 --> 00:08:36.400 I hope you all did. Today, as usual, we will have a first part of the lecture in which I 00:08:36.400 --> 00:08:42.549 will try to answer your questions. Thank you very much, because from your questions I can really see 00:08:42.549 --> 00:08:46.350 that you are really into this toic and that you really NOTE Confidence: 86% (HIGH) 00:08:46.350 --> 00:08:52.300 thinking about what you've been reading. And the questions are always very hard to answer for me, so 00:08:52.300 --> 00:09:03.800 you're giving me a lot of job. But I hope this is useful. The second part, we will do a bit of group 00:09:03.800 --> 00:09:16.250 work, and of course, I hope I have been able to create a work that also people from home on Zoom can join. NOTE Confidence: 83% (HIGH) 00:09:16.250 --> 00:09:25.000 Working in breakout rooms is a bit of a challenge, but hopefully, it will work. 00:09:25.000 --> 00:09:38.800 So let's start with your questions. Well, as usual, I cannot really answer everything. But I tried to 00:09:38.800 --> 00:09:46.400 put together some questions and go beyond NOTE Confidence: 85% (HIGH) 00:09:46.400 --> 00:09:53.200 what you have been reading. First of all, thank you very much because the text 00:09:53.200 --> 00:10:03.300 today was a bit challenging, I know. But it also touches a number of issues that you 00:10:03.300 --> 00:10:11.500 will find over and over again. So the first group of questions, NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:10:11.500 --> 00:10:32.300 *talking with assistant* 00:10:32.300 --> 00:10:37.300 So the first question group of question was about some concepts that are just 00:10:37.300 --> 00:10:42.000 mentioned in the paper already. NOTE Confidence: 84% (HIGH) 00:10:42.000 --> 00:10:51.500 For instance, I can imagine Christian Brando moral or Herrick have 00:10:51.500 --> 00:10:58.700 mentioned these things. So the first is about the concepts of induction, deduction and abduction and 00:10:58.700 --> 00:11:10.100 the idea of generalizing knowledge. The second will be the concepts of distancing and understanding. NOTE Confidence: 67% (MEDIUM) 00:11:10.100 --> 00:11:19.100 I would like you to think about this, starting from the example of art. The whole point of 00:11:19.100 --> 00:11:28.850 the article is that we sometimes have an opposition between art and science, but they are 00:11:28.850 --> 00:11:38.000 both forms of producing knowledge. At the same time, art is not just about creativity or genius 00:11:38.000 --> 00:11:40.300 but art, of course NOTE Confidence: 81% (HIGH) 00:11:40.300 --> 00:11:48.600 is a method, and we are studying methodology. And my point is that we can learn a lot from 00:11:48.600 --> 00:11:57.400 the method of art, and I will tell you why. Than I will make some further explanation about this concept 00:11:57.400 --> 00:12:04.800 of the zone of potential potential exchangement. Actually, a very interesting question about 00:12:04.800 --> 00:12:09.950 the positive and negative encounters, which is very relevant especially for our NOTE Confidence: 83% (HIGH) 00:12:09.950 --> 00:12:20.400 field of special needs education. So, let me start by the idea of induction, deduction and 00:12:20.400 --> 00:12:28.550 abduction. I'll try to be not too technical about this, but there are some things I must mention. 00:12:28.550 --> 00:12:37.900 Of course, please just jump in. Don't be shy with the questions or comments. 00:12:40.600 --> 00:12:48.100 What you probably know is that when we talk about induction, deduction and abduction, we are talking 00:12:48.100 --> 00:13:00.599 about making inferences. So producing some knowledge about something starting from through a process, 00:13:00.599 --> 00:13:07.500 an inferential process, which is basically both what we do in everyday life, but also what we do in 00:13:07.500 --> 00:13:09.650 science and in research. NOTE Confidence: 62% (MEDIUM) 00:13:09.650 --> 00:13:21.200 The difference is, when we do it in science, we do it in a controlled and very very viable way, 00:13:21.200 --> 00:13:30.200 with a certain method. When I talk about deduction, induction and abduction, I talked 00:13:30.200 --> 00:13:39.900 about the three ways we combine to create knowledge. NOTE Confidence: 80% (HIGH) 00:13:40.000 --> 00:13:53.500 In this course of methodology, of course, you become very familiar with the inductive process. 00:13:53.500 --> 00:14:00.500 For instance experimental or quantitative research is basically an inductive process. So what is the 00:14:00.500 --> 00:14:09.750 rule of induction? We collect examples or cases, NOTE Confidence: 78% (HIGH) 00:14:09.750 --> 00:14:18.950 -or ''instances'' is the technical word- from reality and we observe something in these instances. 00:14:18.950 --> 00:14:30.500 Like, I walk in the street and I start to be like ''Oh, one blonde guy. Second blonde guy. Third 00:14:30.500 --> 00:14:39.200 blonde guy, fourth blonde guy... '' From this inductive accumulation of experience, I can draw something, 00:14:39.750 --> 00:14:53.099 some form of knowledge. I can say ''All guys in the street are blond.'' Now if I see one or two guy, NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:14:53.099 --> 00:14:57.300 the conclusion I can draw... NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:14:57.800 --> 00:15:07.100 As some foundation. Okay, so if I see one blonde guy in Oslo, it may be just by coincidence. If I 00:15:07.100 --> 00:15:17.050 see two blond guys in Oslo, also can be a coincidence. If I see three, four, five, oh, 00:15:17.050 --> 00:15:19.500 it's even stronger. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:15:19.500 --> 00:15:30.100 How many blonde guys in streets of Oslo, do I have to see to say something like, 00:15:30.100 --> 00:15:33.700 ''Oh, all people in Oslo are blonde. '' ? NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:15:35.700 --> 00:15:48.400 That's the main point of inductive inferences. Inductive inferences are based on the fact that the 00:15:48.400 --> 00:15:58.400 more instances, the more cases, the more my conclusions are justified. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:15:58.500 --> 00:16:01.099 Deduction; NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:16:01.099 --> 00:16:06.500 Deduction, is about applying the right rule. NOTE Confidence: 88% (HIGH) 00:16:07.100 --> 00:16:12.800 So, no matter how many instances I collect, NOTE Confidence: 77% (HIGH) 00:16:12.800 --> 00:16:16.950 if I don't use the correct rule, NOTE Confidence: 81% (HIGH) 00:16:16.950 --> 00:16:25.900 my conclusion will always be wrong. Okay, so you see that in deduction, it does not 00:16:25.900 --> 00:16:35.100 matter how many blonde guys I see in Oslo. I should have beforehand already have a rule that explains 00:16:35.100 --> 00:16:41.550 me why there are so many blonde guys in Oslo. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:16:41.550 --> 00:16:50.400 These are the most common ways through which we make inferences. Okay, in science, as I said, 00:16:50.400 --> 00:16:57.950 induction and deduction are controlled. So we have some specific rules that we cannot violate. 00:16:57.950 --> 00:17:01.450 Otherwise, our conclusions are wrong. NOTE Confidence: 88% (HIGH) 00:17:01.450 --> 00:17:10.300 But according to a famous philosopher called Charles Peirce; 00:17:10.300 --> 00:17:19.849 He said, we have also a third way of doing inferences. Actually Aristotle already 00:17:19.849 --> 00:17:26.200 said that there is a third way. And this third way is called ''abduction''. NOTE Confidence: 88% (HIGH) 00:17:26.500 --> 00:17:38.600 Abduction is... it's not very clear what abduction means in a certain sense. Peirce makes 00:17:38.600 --> 00:17:49.100 these three examples to try to explain abduction. But when he defines abduction, he puts it in this way: 00:17:49.100 --> 00:17:55.800 An abductive inference is, when I observe the surprising fact NOTE Confidence: 78% (HIGH) 00:17:55.800 --> 00:18:00.449 that something is happening, NOTE Confidence: 90% (HIGH) 00:18:00.449 --> 00:18:07.550 and there is only one explanation, the puts all these strange NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:18:07.550 --> 00:18:10.500 facts together. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:18:11.400 --> 00:18:18.500 So, quite strange way to make inferences. NOTE Confidence: 77% (HIGH) 00:18:20.000 --> 00:18:30.200 With respect to generalization, what we have in the case of deductions, we can generalize only 00:18:30.200 --> 00:18:36.300 if we have the the right rule. In the case of induction, we can generalize only if we have 00:18:36.300 --> 00:18:44.800 enough cases to give power to our generalization. In abduction, NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:18:44.800 --> 00:18:49.050 generalization is from the beginning. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:18:49.050 --> 00:19:00.300 Why? Because we observe an unexpected fact. And from that unexpected fact, we can have only 00:19:00.300 --> 00:19:11.000 one explanation that makes everything work. It's a very strange form of making inferences. But as 00:19:11.000 --> 00:19:15.100 we will see, that it matters a lot for our work. NOTE Confidence: 80% (HIGH) 00:19:18.000 --> 00:19:33.700 *finding slides* 00:19:34.100 --> 00:19:41.700 The second question was about approaching and distancing, and it's really related to what I'm trying 00:19:41.700 --> 00:19:49.800 to share with you, it's about this idea of the method of art. 00:20:01.800 --> 00:20:14.300 I use the example of Caravaggio for one very simple reason. In the history of art, at the 00:20:14.300 --> 00:20:22.000 beginning, Caravaggio was considered the first naturalist or ethnographic painter. NOTE Confidence: 79% (HIGH) 00:20:22.000 --> 00:20:31.100 Before him, all the Saints paintings, God paintings, were very blonde and 00:20:31.100 --> 00:20:40.800 handsome and of course, probably rich people models with their perfect faces, perfect dresses. 00:20:40.800 --> 00:20:49.500 Because the idea was that God is up there, and is perfect. So you cannot paint but perfect NOTE Confidence: 79% (HIGH) 00:20:50.200 --> 00:21:02.200 features. Than Caravaggio came and if you know a bit, if you read a bit of his life, he was 00:21:02.200 --> 00:21:13.800 not exactly a saint. He was a gambler, an alcoholic, he killed a man. Nevertheless, he had very deep 00:21:13.800 --> 00:21:15.800 religious feelings. NOTE Confidence: 85% (HIGH) 00:21:15.800 --> 00:21:20.150 And religion was changing at the time. NOTE Confidence: 84% (HIGH) 00:21:20.150 --> 00:21:31.600 So, he received an order from a church. They asked him to 00:21:31.600 --> 00:21:46.199 paint a painting of Saint John the Bapdist. Probably all the painters would have painted very 00:21:46.199 --> 00:21:49.850 chubby and nice boy NOTE Confidence: 90% (HIGH) 00:21:49.850 --> 00:21:59.100 with the lamp, because chubbiness at the time was expressing wealth. 00:21:59.100 --> 00:22:08.800 So it's a rich boy. He apparently took his models from the street. So he painted 00:22:08.800 --> 00:22:19.900 Saints and Virgin Mary's from prostitutes and gamblers and beggars. 00:22:19.900 --> 00:22:20.750 So, can you imagine NOTE Confidence: 77% (HIGH) 00:22:20.750 --> 00:22:31.449 in the full counter reform, to give the face of a beggar to a saint? NOTE Confidence: 85% (HIGH) 00:22:31.449 --> 00:22:35.600 Actually, the church was quite disappointed with that. NOTE Confidence: 90% (HIGH) 00:22:35.800 --> 00:22:43.700 But, what was the religious message? God is there, is not be among rich people, is among the 00:22:43.700 --> 00:22:54.500 beggars. And this was even worse for the church at that time. 00:22:54.500 --> 00:23:01.200 So, the ethnographic documentation was actually taking something from the reality, providing an 00:23:01.200 --> 00:23:05.500 interpretation of it and giving back to the audience. NOTE Confidence: 89% (HIGH) 00:23:05.500 --> 00:23:13.900 And this gap was exactly the thing creating a strangement, in the case of the church. 00:23:13.900 --> 00:23:21.400 So it was a way to make people reflect. NOTE Confidence: 81% (HIGH) 00:23:21.500 --> 00:23:25.700 This is exactly what we doing in qualitative research. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:23:25.700 --> 00:23:29.000 We don't mirror reality. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:23:29.000 --> 00:23:38.250 Because we know that our instruments, our tools, they are not recorders. We do not 00:23:38.250 --> 00:23:44.950 record reality. We enter into our field of research, NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:23:44.950 --> 00:23:54.100 I would say like artists, with a special educated look and special educated intuition. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:23:54.800 --> 00:24:04.900 We observe something there, we observe very special phenomena, because every human being is special. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:24:04.900 --> 00:24:09.550 Every moment of your life is special and unique. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:24:09.550 --> 00:24:17.699 And from that very special and unique entering, we bring back something. NOTE Confidence: 84% (HIGH) 00:24:17.699 --> 00:24:26.100 We bring back something. We write about it, and we give our interpretation to our audience. NOTE Confidence: 90% (HIGH) 00:24:26.100 --> 00:24:36.500 We goback to the inferences process. It doesn't matter how many people we 00:24:36.500 --> 00:24:46.400 interviewing, 1 or 100 or 1000 people does not give strength or 00:24:46.400 --> 00:24:50.100 generalizability to our knowledge. NOTE Confidence: 86% (HIGH) 00:24:50.200 --> 00:25:01.300 It's exactly our capability to create this gap between what we take and what we give back in our 00:25:01.300 --> 00:25:08.550 interpretation that provides the space for new knowledge to emerge for new areas, new reflection, 00:25:08.550 --> 00:25:15.600 new criticism to emerge. So the idea is that even if NOTE Confidence: 85% (HIGH) 00:25:15.600 --> 00:25:27.200 you go outside with your camera and video recording, it can't be done Norway but let's say if you are 00:25:27.200 --> 00:25:36.700 video recording children, so are you objectively observing children? Now, you're not. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:25:36.700 --> 00:25:40.900 You're building a painting. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:25:40.900 --> 00:25:48.800 You are selecting some aspects, you are interpreting. Just by moving your camera, you are already 00:25:48.800 --> 00:26:01.750 interpreting. And that's not bad, that's not less objective. That's how we are using your educated 00:26:01.750 --> 00:26:11.600 skills, your educated abduction to go in the field and observe something surprising. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:26:11.600 --> 00:26:15.900 Something surprising. That's the point. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:26:17.900 --> 00:26:28.900 The goal of this specific model is to teach you, to make you familiar and unfamiliar. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:26:29.700 --> 00:26:37.600 That's the goal, that's the main skill of any qualitative research. I would say to any researcher, 00:26:37.600 --> 00:26:40.900 don't trust your instruments. NOTE Confidence: 89% (HIGH) 00:26:42.000 --> 00:26:48.900 Everything should be unfamiliar. Everything should be questioned. Okay? NOTE Confidence: 89% (HIGH) 00:26:49.100 --> 00:26:56.250 Do you know this book? First of all, do you know Oliver Sacks? NOTE Confidence: 83% (HIGH) 00:26:56.250 --> 00:26:59.400 Have you ever heard about Oliver Sacks? NOTE Confidence: 85% (HIGH) 00:26:59.400 --> 00:27:10.100 No? Have you ever watched the movie with Robin Williams? 00:27:10.100 --> 00:27:21.250 He made a movie long 00:27:21.250 --> 00:27:23.600 time ago, called Awakenings. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:27:23.600 --> 00:27:31.900 Have you watched Awakenings? Well, Oliver Sacks is the guy who wrote Awakenings. He is the doctor. 00:27:31.900 --> 00:27:40.400 Unfortunately he passed away a couple of years ago. He was a student of Llúria, NOTE Confidence: 78% (HIGH) 00:27:40.400 --> 00:27:53.400 and he was a psychiatrist, psychologist and a great writer. And he has this 00:27:53.400 --> 00:28:01.400 wonderful book called Anthropologist on Mars, which is a collection of case studies about very 00:28:01.400 --> 00:28:03.750 special people. NOTE Confidence: 86% (HIGH) 00:28:03.750 --> 00:28:11.100 He has a chapter... Sorry, I'm starting to get a little bit thirsty because I've been 00:28:11.100 --> 00:28:21.000 speaking a couple of hours. Do you know who is Temple Garden? Have you ever heard about her? NOTE Confidence: 90% (HIGH) 00:28:21.000 --> 00:28:22.900 No? Okay. NOTE Confidence: 89% (HIGH) 00:28:25.700 --> 00:28:33.100 Just a quick background, Temple Garden is a very NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:28:33.100 --> 00:28:45.600 famous person with Asperger. She's one of the first people who 00:28:45.600 --> 00:28:49.750 talked about neuro-diverse pride. NOTE Confidence: 90% (HIGH) 00:28:49.750 --> 00:28:59.400 Well, she's a very interesting person. When she was a child... She's very old now, I think 00:28:59.400 --> 00:29:07.100 she's in her 80's or something like that. So she was a child with autism in the 50's or 60's 00:29:07.100 --> 00:29:15.700 in the United States. Can you imagine how difficult 00:29:15.700 --> 00:29:20.600 United States was in that condition? And she tells this story; NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:29:20.600 --> 00:29:32.200 The only place in which she could find some relief was a farm. Because that farm had a special 00:29:32.200 --> 00:29:42.100 machine that was meant to block the cows for taking the milk. So it was kind of a machine was 00:29:42.100 --> 00:29:46.400 completely hanging and blocking the cows. NOTE Confidence: 86% (HIGH) 00:29:46.400 --> 00:29:54.800 And that's was the only safe place she had. So she used to spend a lot of time in deep into this 00:29:54.800 --> 00:29:56.200 machine. NOTE Confidence: 89% (HIGH) 00:29:56.200 --> 00:30:05.250 She was completely unable 00:30:05.250 --> 00:30:16.600 to emotionally relate with other human beings, but she was able to empathize with cows and their 00:30:16.600 --> 00:30:20.100 suffering in the farm. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:30:20.900 --> 00:30:30.700 When she realized this, she became a designer of farms and factories for cows. NOTE Confidence: 82% (HIGH) 00:30:30.700 --> 00:30:39.400 And she still an expert of the behavior and well-being of these animals. Okay, so it's an amazing 00:30:39.400 --> 00:30:47.600 story. She is also the author of 00:30:47.600 --> 00:30:54.500 a lot of scientific papers on autism. Well, what's my point? My point is that, 00:30:54.500 --> 00:31:01.400 I like very much how she describes her way of NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:31:01.400 --> 00:31:04.600 understanding NOTE Confidence: 86% (HIGH) 00:31:04.800 --> 00:31:17.300 social relationships and I especially like the the metaphor she use. She says '' When I was 00:31:17.300 --> 00:31:21.300 with other people, I felt like an anthropologist on Mars. '' NOTE Confidence: 90% (HIGH) 00:31:21.300 --> 00:31:26.900 I think that this is exactly what a researcher should do. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:31:26.900 --> 00:31:36.250 Always be like an anthropologist on Mars, always questioning and never taking anything for granted, 00:31:36.250 --> 00:31:46.700 always finding unfamiliar and surprising things. Well, actually what she did was, as you can 00:31:46.700 --> 00:31:52.150 see in the the red part, she was basically using an inductive method. NOTE Confidence: 84% (HIGH) 00:31:52.150 --> 00:31:59.550 She was collecting evidence or cases are instances of human behavior NOTE Confidence: 84% (HIGH) 00:31:59.550 --> 00:32:07.450 in order to create, to find patterns, to know how to react and to predict the behavior. 00:32:07.450 --> 00:32:12.300 This is exactly what social scientists and behavioral scientists do. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:32:12.500 --> 00:32:19.100 The point is, to what extent we can actually do it? NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:32:20.000 --> 00:32:24.350 And, to what extent we can generalize? NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:32:24.350 --> 00:32:32.350 The conclusion of Temple Garden was that she could not always generalize it, of course. There was 00:32:32.350 --> 00:32:40.400 always something unexpected and surprising in the reaction of other people. NOTE Confidence: 77% (HIGH) 00:32:40.600 --> 00:32:50.000 What was completely predictable by her was the cause of the behavior of cows. The interesting point 00:32:50.000 --> 00:32:57.000 is that she did not collect inferences about cows. She empathized with cows. NOTE Confidence: 81% (HIGH) 00:32:57.900 --> 00:33:03.550 I think that this is a perfect metaphor of what we are doing here. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:33:03.550 --> 00:33:09.800 So, the other question. Let me see... NOTE Confidence: 90% (HIGH) 00:33:09.800 --> 00:33:17.250 Please, if you have questions or comments just jump in, okay? NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:33:19.449 --> 00:33:25.850 Hmm, this was an interesting question and my interpretation of it NOTE Confidence: 77% (HIGH) 00:33:25.850 --> 00:33:28.700 is a bit strange. NOTE Confidence: 78% (HIGH) 00:33:30.400 --> 00:33:35.100 How did I understand this question? NOTE Confidence: 89% (HIGH) 00:33:36.500 --> 00:33:45.700 Actually, how does inductive inferences work? NOTE Confidence: 89% (HIGH) 00:33:45.900 --> 00:33:54.900 We give more value to positive cases, than negative cases. When we do a research we have a 00:33:54.900 --> 00:34:03.400 hypothesis and we look for things that confirm our hypothesis. If we have negative results, we don't 00:34:03.400 --> 00:34:16.900 publish it usually, or we try to torture our data until they give us the answer we want. NOTE Confidence: 84% (HIGH) 00:34:19.199 --> 00:34:27.199 What I understand from this from question is, can we learn from negative? Can we study what is 00:34:27.199 --> 00:34:32.149 not there? Can we study what is absent? NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:34:32.149 --> 00:34:35.900 Can we study what is not visible? NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:34:37.000 --> 00:34:43.100 For instance, if we use the behavioral approach, NOTE Confidence: 88% (HIGH) 00:34:43.400 --> 00:34:47.199 what we observe is behavior. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:34:47.699 --> 00:34:52.300 But also, when people do not NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:34:52.300 --> 00:34:58.200 act or do not behave, that's actually behavior. NOTE Confidence: 89% (HIGH) 00:34:58.600 --> 00:35:04.050 How can we study not-behavior? NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:35:04.050 --> 00:35:15.500 Absence of behavior? People not doing or not saying something... How can we study silence for instance? NOTE Confidence: 85% (HIGH) 00:35:16.200 --> 00:35:22.600 Usually, we treat these as errors. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:35:22.900 --> 00:35:28.400 There is no statistical way to understand silence. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:35:28.400 --> 00:35:32.300 It's an error. It's a missing answer. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:35:33.100 --> 00:35:41.250 It's meaningless from that point of view. So the way we understand positive and negative, depends on 00:35:41.250 --> 00:35:54.900 the meaning that we give to it. As I said, induction implies the accumulation of cases. 00:35:54.900 --> 00:36:01.700 So if we have no case, we have no induction. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:36:03.900 --> 00:36:16.300 What I am suggesting to you instead is; Well, if abduction is a way of making inferences, beginning from 00:36:16.300 --> 00:36:24.750 unexpected, unfamiliar or surprising cases, maybe 00:36:24.750 --> 00:36:33.800 we have a different approach. So, induction is about collecting regularities, patterns. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:36:33.800 --> 00:36:47.350 Abduction is about looking for meaningful, unique, extreme cases that help us to understand how 00:36:47.350 --> 00:36:50.200 processes work. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:36:51.100 --> 00:36:58.250 A good example is astronomy. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:36:58.250 --> 00:37:07.700 Do you think that astronomy is an experimental, inductive science? Astronomy is definitely a science, right? 00:37:07.700 --> 00:37:12.850 But actually astronomy works on single cases. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:37:12.850 --> 00:37:18.000 You cannot expect a star to explode twice. NOTE Confidence: 88% (HIGH) 00:37:18.000 --> 00:37:27.000 Or a black hole to explode twice. You can observe a black hole probably once in your life and you 00:37:27.000 --> 00:37:32.100 are observing something that happened trillions years ago. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:37:32.100 --> 00:37:37.649 So basically astronomy is a case study science. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:37:37.649 --> 00:37:50.000 Not to mention, for instance some kind of clinical subjects; 00:37:50.900 --> 00:37:58.250 Exactly, the unique configuration of some clinical conditions allows you to study them. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:37:58.250 --> 00:38:03.700 And you can not force clinical condition on people. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:38:04.300 --> 00:38:13.800 It happens. It happens once. So we see how this is not in contrast with the idea of 00:38:13.800 --> 00:38:15.800 empirical science. NOTE Confidence: 79% (HIGH) 00:38:17.600 --> 00:38:28.000 What I'm trying to say here is the exactly how Caravaggio was looking for the outsiders, the marginals, 00:38:28.500 --> 00:38:32.600 the unfamiliar. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:38:35.000 --> 00:38:40.600 We, in qualitative research, can do exactly the same. NOTE Confidence: 88% (HIGH) 00:38:40.900 --> 00:38:53.500 When you do statistical analysis, you actually treat extreme, strange, unfamiliar cases as an expected variance. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:38:53.500 --> 00:38:59.500 And if it's not too much, you are happy because you can just dismiss it. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:38:59.900 --> 00:39:09.000 Instead, we can look at it as, it is exactly why it's there, so we can know something. 00:39:09.000 --> 00:39:13.050 Why? Because it is unexpected and unexplained. So it requires explanation. NOTE Confidence: 82% (HIGH) 00:39:13.050 --> 00:39:20.900 And it can bring us to know something which is not confirmative of our hypotheses, so we can learn 00:39:20.900 --> 00:39:26.800 something that we don't already know. If we want to confirm an hypothesis, it means that you already 00:39:26.800 --> 00:39:40.550 know that, we just need to confirm it. Here comes the last point I want to touch for the moment, 00:39:40.550 --> 00:39:42.900 which is... NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:39:42.900 --> 00:39:53.450 I'm talking about, observing the unexpected, surprising, not visible. How can you do this? NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:39:53.450 --> 00:39:57.700 How can we make it visible somehow? NOTE Confidence: 88% (HIGH) 00:39:58.700 --> 00:40:09.200 Questions? 00:40:09.200 --> 00:40:20.100 *assistant reads the a question from chat* 00:40:20.100 --> 00:40:28.400 That's a very interesting question. Actually, it is a creation... 00:40:28.400 --> 00:40:36.450 *student asks Luca to repeat the questions* 00:40:36.450 --> 00:40:43.750 *luca shares screen* 00:40:43.750 --> 00:40:49.100 Okay, you can all see the question now. Well, that's a good question. Actually, first 00:40:49.100 --> 00:41:00.500 he created this word because he needed a new form. It was not existing before, but of course, 00:41:00.500 --> 00:41:12.000 it overlaps with the English word abduction that means kidnapping or being taken by something. 00:41:12.000 --> 00:41:14.300 And I think that, this is very nice word-playing. NOTE Confidence: 80% (HIGH) 00:41:14.300 --> 00:41:17.300 Because it's exactly what we are talking about. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:41:17.300 --> 00:41:30.000 How can we be abducted by things that we take for granted? How we can have a new look on things that 00:41:30.000 --> 00:41:32.900 we consider familiar? NOTE Confidence: 83% (HIGH) 00:41:33.000 --> 00:41:41.400 And actually, this is much more common that you expect, Piaget based all his work on observing 00:41:41.400 --> 00:41:44.700 his children's development at home. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:41:45.000 --> 00:41:54.100 Basically, he was looking his children with an unfamiliar case, just to have an example. 00:42:02.100 --> 00:42:12.650 Today we start our training to become an anthropologist on Mars, and the first skill of any 00:42:12.650 --> 00:42:19.400 anthropologist, actually of any scientist is the capability to observe. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:42:21.700 --> 00:42:25.200 How many people are in this room? NOTE Confidence: 82% (HIGH) 00:42:28.500 --> 00:42:37.100 Okay, now it's easy. If you count them now, it's easy. How many people are wearing 00:42:37.100 --> 00:42:39.600 a hat in this room? NOTE Confidence: 85% (HIGH) 00:42:41.800 --> 00:42:48.649 Why we don't know it? Because we seem to think it's not relevant. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:42:48.649 --> 00:42:55.350 Right? So we don't observe it. We have it in our perceptual field. NOTE Confidence: 83% (HIGH) 00:42:55.350 --> 00:43:02.200 We could easily know how many people are wearing a hat, or how 00:43:02.200 --> 00:43:09.800 many men and women are here. It's in our perceptual field, but we don't know it. NOTE Confidence: 90% (HIGH) 00:43:10.000 --> 00:43:14.100 Because we think it's not relevant. NOTE Confidence: 83% (HIGH) 00:43:14.100 --> 00:43:24.700 Well, the idea is that, as a researcher we should educate our self to become skilled observer, 00:43:24.700 --> 00:43:29.300 and to notice things that other people will not notice. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:43:30.200 --> 00:43:40.600 Hopefully -also those of you that are going to use assessment tool- you will understand 00:43:40.600 --> 00:43:48.900 soon that is not just about using the tool. You must be a skilled observer because there is a lot of 00:43:48.900 --> 00:43:56.200 going on beyond the assessment tool and you must be able to notice. It is very, very important. 00:43:56.200 --> 00:43:59.900 So no matter what you do, good researcher and NOTE Confidence: 84% (HIGH) 00:43:59.900 --> 00:44:08.100 good professional is a good skilled observer. And it's like training at the gym, the more you 00:44:08.100 --> 00:44:12.150 train, the more you develop your observation muscle. NOTE Confidence: 84% (HIGH) 00:44:12.150 --> 00:44:24.400 Okay. So today we are going to do a small exercise in groups. As usual, I will explain you the 00:44:24.400 --> 00:44:34.100 exercise, than we have a break, and than we come back to do it. And hopefully, 00:44:34.100 --> 00:44:42.350 we can have also a few minutes at the end, to have a briefing, a feedback session about the activity. 00:44:42.350 --> 00:44:51.200 Okay. So are you ready? I can go on and explain it. So, today we do an observation exercise. 00:44:51.200 --> 00:44:59.700 Usually, I would have send you around the campus, but we have some limitations and we 00:44:59.700 --> 00:45:09.700 have people from home. So I tried to adapt it and we will work on a video today. Okay, very short video. 00:45:09.800 --> 00:45:15.400 Okay, so here. How does it work? 00:45:15.400 --> 00:45:31.000 *Luca asks assistant to post the link on Canvas (posted on Announcements) NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:45:31.200 --> 00:45:38.100 So it's very easy. NOTE Confidence: 85% (HIGH) 00:45:38.400 --> 00:45:47.100 As any as any time, I want you to form small groups, can be five, six people, and 00:45:47.100 --> 00:45:57.450 have one speaker for each group. Then I will give you a short video of 1 and a half minute video to watch. 00:45:57.450 --> 00:46:05.900 Okay, if you want we can watch it together for the first time. For first time, I want you to watch 00:46:05.900 --> 00:46:07.950 it individually. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:46:07.950 --> 00:46:14.000 And than together you will discuss your observation. Okay? NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:46:14.000 --> 00:46:16.350 So far, it's easy. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:46:16.350 --> 00:46:25.400 More or less, you can have half an hour for the observation and 15 minutes for the 00:46:25.400 --> 00:46:32.100 discussion. If you need, we can also have only 20 minutes of observation and 15 minutes of 00:46:32.100 --> 00:46:37.700 discussion, and than we have the briefing at the end. 00:47:17.100 --> 00:47:48.600 *making the video ready for displaying* 00:47:48.600 --> 00:47:59.900 So, what I want you to do is very easy. I just want to you to watch and observe. NOTE Confidence: 84% (HIGH) 00:48:00.500 --> 00:48:03.200 First, NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:48:03.400 --> 00:48:08.800 You watch the video once, twice. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:48:08.800 --> 00:48:17.850 You choose one single person or one single aspect and observe carefully the video. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:48:17.850 --> 00:48:24.750 Try to catch as much as possible. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:48:24.750 --> 00:48:32.500 The first time, you will catch something. The second time you watch it, You will catch more. So try to 00:48:32.500 --> 00:48:41.700 do as much as possible. And I want you to do, if you think that you observe something relevant, 00:48:41.700 --> 00:48:47.100 just mark the moment, the minute, the second in which this happens. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:48:47.100 --> 00:48:49.100 Clear? Super! NOTE Confidence: 89% (HIGH) 00:48:50.600 --> 00:49:01.100 What I really want you to do is not to make any inference or deduction or 00:49:01.100 --> 00:49:04.400 hypotheses on what's going on. NOTE Confidence: 81% (HIGH) 00:49:04.700 --> 00:49:13.400 That's basic, I observe you doing something and think ''he's doing this because of this and that''. 00:49:13.400 --> 00:49:18.200 But this is not what I'm observing, I'm observing a person doing something. NOTE Confidence: 85% (HIGH) 00:49:18.200 --> 00:49:25.400 And when I say something, I'm already actually making an hypothesis. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:49:26.400 --> 00:49:32.500 Because what we do, as always already a social meaning. NOTE Confidence: 81% (HIGH) 00:49:36.000 --> 00:49:46.500 Okay, so I observe someone there and I say, ''Oh, she's sitting in the classroom. '' NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:49:47.300 --> 00:49:54.200 Well, that's not an observation. That's already an hypothesis. NOTE Confidence: 85% (HIGH) 00:49:54.700 --> 00:50:04.200 I should first of all describe, where, how she is sitting, what she's doing? 00:50:04.200 --> 00:50:14.200 In what position she is sitting? Okay? So I would like you to try to be as naive as possible. NOTE Confidence: 72% (MEDIUM) 00:50:14.400 --> 00:50:24.800 Okay, so how to observe... 00:50:24.800 --> 00:50:33.600 My suggestion is, keep it simple. Because it's more difficult than it appears. So you 00:50:33.600 --> 00:50:41.400 can choose to observe one or more of these dimensions. So you choose one person, one dimension... 00:50:41.400 --> 00:50:44.300 It's up to you. You can also choose NOTE Confidence: 87% (HIGH) 00:50:44.300 --> 00:50:52.649 to choose to observe one dimension over all the people, but it's very complex. So you can observe 00:50:52.649 --> 00:50:54.800 verbal behavior, NOTE Confidence: 86% (HIGH) 00:50:56.600 --> 00:51:05.900 you can observe procemix, which is the way bodies relate to each other, NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:51:06.000 --> 00:51:12.950 the position of the bodies, the space to each other. You can observe the posture, 00:51:12.950 --> 00:51:21.400 the individual posture of the person. The ways, it means the direction where and when, and how 00:51:21.400 --> 00:51:23.500 I'm looking. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:51:23.500 --> 00:51:31.450 The head movements... Simply only observing the head movements is a lot of data. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:51:31.450 --> 00:51:40.300 The gestures, of course. But you can also choose to observe only the environment, not the people. 00:51:40.300 --> 00:51:50.100 The environment actually is a person in a certain sense, so is part of the system. And again, try to 00:51:50.100 --> 00:51:55.950 observe first, watch over and over again and try to be NOTE Confidence: 77% (HIGH) 00:51:55.950 --> 00:52:02.300 more in detail, more specific every time you watch it. Remember that you are not looking for 00:52:02.300 --> 00:52:12.200 explanations. You are only looking for descriptions. And I tell you that, you will see how 00:52:12.200 --> 00:52:16.900 difficult is to observe without explaining. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:52:17.800 --> 00:52:20.250 Is it clear? NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:52:20.250 --> 00:52:24.900 Any question? Okay... So, break. NOTE Confidence: 81% (HIGH) 00:52:26.000 --> 00:52:36.450 See you in 10 minutes. NOTE Confidence: 91% (HIGH) 00:52:36.450 --> 00:52:40.000 We can stop recording now.